DAC Shootout Starts This Weekend
@verdantaudio I'm curious how you attribute an aspect like soundstage depth to a DAC, in context of the uniqueness of various systems, the rooms these systems are in, the listener positions, and the use / lack of use of room treatment (for the purchasing party)? I'm not challenging...just trying to understand and learn. Thanks. - David.
|
@verdantaudio Your answer is very helpful and furthers my understanding of where you are coming from. Thanks for that! +1 to the extremely pertinent point(s) you shared above....especially this one >>>
|
@jjss49 Thanks for sharing your approach. It's one I have used in the past but am cautious with now. Why the caution? The conundrum(s) posed by optimization... and the resulting false negatives. With an optimized reference system: - if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) outperforms your "reference" DAC...the approach works. however, - if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) under-performs your "reference" DAC...the approach may yield a true negative OR a false negative. For example, had you optimized your reference system around that "rejected" DAC...could you be certain of the outcome in that now optimized system with your current reference DAC. Maybe yes, maybe no. |
@jjss49 +1 A solid perspective, for sure. Thanks for the additional clarification. I should have expressed that last para in my previous post better via: " had one..." instead of ’had you’ which I meant to be universal... Restated:
|
@verdantaudio I’ve been following your thread. Thanks for sharing your findings. A time intensive endeavor, to say the least. I’m curious about your thoughts on the following: With Charles’ Yamamoto DAC, my previous ARC DAC7, etc. ... given the time/provenance when they were developed...do you feel the reference points and focus by the development engineers was different (back then) than it is now? I’m over generalizing here to make the point: Today, many DACs, like the Holo May, deliver / are focused on a different sonic presentation. More theatrics than fidelity to live acoustic performance [again, generalizing to make the point]. Note: I’m not picking on the Holo May...using it for discussion reasons, since it was recently mentioned. |
@verdantaudio Thanks. Temporal reference shift...AND shifts in definitions of "accuracy" by audiophiles are areas I've been reflecting on. I believe this is part and parcel of the human condition, it's growth, and it's engagement with the world at large. One example of many, for illustration purposes: consider the differences in movies from the 1950s to those of today. It's a steady, inexorable creep... mostly unnoticed as the changes are incremental and softened by time. Add Up they do. We are, in my opinion/reflection, at a point where "natural / realistic" [accurate] as "understood" say 40 years ago, would be identified as tilted to experience (using your word) if one were to be transported from that time to today. Of the core brands you mention, I'd expect many to be found in the experience column...based on the above hypothetical. I think that the core brands mentioned here, Chord, Rockna/Audiobyte, Bricasti, Weiss and I would add in MSB, dCS & Playback Designs are committed to delivery of an accurate listening experience. Bringing this up since you've spent a significant amount of time understanding differences in this component type within your system chains. Perhaps you and others from the industry can comment? Having a relative, flexible and general understanding of what's natural, realistic, accurate would be helpful. For the many, versus the one. Wishful hope? : ) |
So, a case of: Accuracy is Dead, Long Live Accuracy! : ) i suppose in the end, which version is most accurate becomes unimportant So, as with (most) current mainstream music a move from mastery of musical elements to purely entertainment values (?) what matters is what pleases a particular user in their system, their room Subjective (dystopian) reductionism to 'n' as absolute 1 (?) I (have faith) expect that there is an emergent, higher ordered structure that we can have relative agreement on/around. Otherwise, the OP's efforts lack purpose for anyone other than himself. |
@jjss49 My posts are not to challenge what you and verdantaudio are doing. I’m supportive of your efforts and find them valuable. This thread has been healthy and and productive. I don’t want to detract from that. The points in the two posts (I tried to make) are probably better served in a thread dedicated to tackling the chimera of accuracy v. the ascendancy of experience. "Chimera: a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve : ) |
