As far as actually getting true 140dB performance, the only DAC that even claims this is the new $15,000 Boulder (no, I've not heard it). The DAC's in question have NOT tested to 140dB, in any test I've seen. You have to keep in mind that the analog circuit after the DAC would have to be RADICALLY quiet, and there are hardly any in the world that are, especially anything in the $1000 price range, and MOST especially anything that must operate within, or near, digital circuitry (like a DAC). |
I've not analized a lot of them, or taken them apart. I only know that you should look at the analog line level output section seriously, and that a compromised one usually bespeaks a philosophy based on compromise. |
With upsampling, the digital audio is actually re-sampled, and has nothing to do with the filters in the DAC. The data is sample rate converted to a HIGHER resolution digital format (while in the digital domain), before it even gets to the DAC. The first units of this type used two separate chassis. One was a "sample rate converter", or "digital-to-digital" converter. The data was then sent to a DAC in another chassis. Lately, all-in-one-box units of all types are popping up. |
It's a shame that Wadia might feel negatively towards upsampling, because their slow roll off filter in their DAC would greatly benefit if it were rolled off way above the audible frequency range, instead of WITHIN the audible range. I had assumed they were moving towards upsampling. Perhaps they'll eventually catch up to the rest... |
I'm trying to tell you, I don't know how else to put it. Oversampling still sends the same data to the DAC. Upsampling sends the DAC data that has been sample rate converted to a much higher resolution format, while still in the digital domain. Oversampling means we are still talking about a DAC that converts 16 bit/44.1 PCM code, to analog. An upsampled data stream is sent to a DAC that (depending on what bit rate/sample rate that data is) is converted to analog with a DAC that could be 24/96, 24/192, 24/706, or 24/768........I thought all of this was common knowledge, and can't understand why you are confused. Certainly any manufacturer will be frustrated by these questions, it seems to me. |
I certainly know how to enjoy listening to recorded music, and it seems to me that you are the one that doesn't know how to do that. Perhaps it's true with all musicians, but it seems that they're never happy listening, only playing. That's fine with me, and also a good thing; otherwise they wouldn't be playing what gets recorded, or playing live. But don't presume to tell me that I'm not having fun, just because I listen to recorded music. And regarding marketing hype, it's very easy for anyone in the world to just sit back, and spout that things that others have experienced THAT THEY THEMSELVES HAVE NOT, and are enthusiastic about, is all just "hype". I too think that there's a lot of "hype" in the world, and I really don't care if you think upsampling is "hype" or not...Go back to playing with your world class chums, and let us enjoy music the way we can, and stop begrudging it. |
All I did was try to stick to the thread topic, and yet it seems someone using a woman's name doesn't like that most audiophiles simply like "gadgets" and how things work, besides their love for music. I won't apologize for this, and I am even proud of it! It's in the nature of most men to be curious about the workings of the physical world (and it doesn't seem to be that way for most women). It helps them appreciate it better...whereas those who aren't curious about these "tidbits" very often seem to have little or no appreciation for them. (I.e., on interstate highways, women driving their SUV's...aren't thinking about how heavy an 18 wheeler is, so they very often drive in their large blindspots, only thinking about staying around the speed limit...rather than foreseeing the possibility that the trucker might suddenly need to change lanes. Don't tell me any of you haven't seen this a billion times, as well!) It's all a question of personal prioroties and observatonal logic/natural curiousity). And, I feel that my views on audio in general are representative of perhaps 80% of "audiophiles". Also, we don't listen to music because we don't love it... |
And Jordan, how many CD players or DACs have YOU designed? I want to know, because it seems to me that you are pretending that you have. How about letting those who design them speak for themselves? Also, onon of you have answered how your systems perform on my little test. I submit that you are afraid to perform it. |
I thought I'd done the laymen thing already, and as you'll probably see, I may still fail at that yet...........As said above by MSB (posted by perhaps an F-14 pilot?), interpolation occurs when voltage amplitude values are APPROXIMATED during this up-conversion from CD resolution data, to much HIGHER resolution data. It's sort of like a line doubler for video projectors...sort of, but not exactly..................I think of it in this simple way: the conversion of the audio data, in the digital domain, to a higher bit and sampling rate (upsampling), allow the high performance DAC to do its conversion on this LARGE amount of data, thus making full use of the DAC's superior resolution. IT'S NOT A MATTER OF CREATING NEW DETAILS IN THE RECORDING that were never there to begin with, it's a matter of getting the most out of what was always there...just like everything else in this hobby.......................It's also not merely "digital" we're talking about, but rather how the digital data gets turned into the analog voltages/waveforms...before it goes to your amp, or preamp. THAT'S ALWAYS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN DIGITAL AUDIO. Otherwise, you're making assumptions like my smug, MIT graduated, aeronautical engineer uncle. He's said the cliche right to my face, "but digital is digital; how could one CD player possibly sound different from another one?" You know, the old/stupid "bits is bits" argument, only he didn't even bother to think of it on that level............No DAC is perfect, but it is the critical "roadblock-weaklink" in the digital playback chain. Therefore, if you can make use of a "superDAC" on "mere" CD audio, it's much better than using DACs that operate only on the level of "CD quality" data................Anyway, audio is always about maximizing your UPSTREAM performance, in order to make full use of what you have DOWNSTREAM. UPSAMPLING "guesses" at many extra millions of possible "loudness" levels (and frequency "pulses" in time) in the digital data, BEFORE IT EVER GETS TO THE DAC (that needs all the "help" it can get)..............As perhaps most who'll read this know, SACD uses a different digital process, that samples at nearly 3 million times a second, and only uses one "loudness" bit, to tell if the waveform is rising or falling. It depends on the sheer density of those 2.8 million pulses every second, to describe how quiet or how loud the music is...............It's all much more complicated than this, but oh well, I'm not the real expert here...either from a designer's viewpoint, or from a journalist's viewpoint. |
Someone deleted the whole Resolution Audio thread? That's a shame... |
I guess Jeff Kalt is a better man than me. That's why I bought his CD player over a year ago. I guess since there's no difference in upsampling and oversampling, then there'd be no difference between my CD50, and the new CD55. I'm ok with that, too. Why aren't you, you little squirrely thing, you? |
|
It's not that I dislike Wadia, I like the company. They are superb in most respects, as many of you know. |
There are those of you who seem to relish in your opinion that my views on this subject are irrational, and for that, you owe me an apology...not the other way around. I'm only defending my own viewpoints, here, afterall. And if you persist in harping about Jeff Kalt, I may just e-mail him myself, to see if the above comments from him are even real. I am a skeptic, afterall, at least as much so as you think you are... |
Jordan, your need to "call me" anything seems to highlight anger issues on your part. It looks like I will be e-mailing Jeff Kalt, and perhaps someone else as well. |
And regarding "Deborah", I feel it is he who should apologize, for hiding behind his wife's name, because he's afraids we'll all know his real name. My observatiuons on women need no apology, because they are factual observations. I love them very much, but the two genders are different, and no one need apologize for that. |
You are a petty human, Deborah. I'll pray for you. |
GM Kane, I appreciate your claimed support of my thoughts on digital audio. (I should point out that I am a fan of vinyl, and am not a total "digihead". My good friend Albert would be remiss if I didn't point this out. I admire his commitment to the single format, it shows his passion for fine music reproduction in the home)..................I have some questions for you, GM: Why is it that you think my observations about women are sophomoric? I'll grant that they aren't PC, but why must that make them sophomoric? Also, does your wife, or significant other, somehow cause you to forumlate the opposite notion (that most women actually DO enjoy highend audio systems)? We all know that is false, so why argue it? Those "activists" out there would have us believe it is solely "social conditioning" that causes the vast majority of women to "not be interested in sit-down-listening-with-concentration"...but to me, that is just illogical...flies in the face of reality. Nowadays, it seems to me that women are "conditioned" to believe that they can have it all in life, and most do a very good job of accomplishing just that (and are to be admired for it). So, why would they somehow not be able to enjoy listening to an audio system, IF THEY WANTED TO? I submit that it's that they do NOT want to, not that some man somewhere told them that they could not...that it "wasn't their place". Now, we all know that there are a handful of women that are audiophiles, and I celebrate and appreciate them very much. They are the minority, though. And as for enjoying listening to a live music performance (be it symphony, jazz, or rock) THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, HERE. We're talking about 2 CHANNEL AUDIO IN THE HOME (not "home theater", not "live" music at a venue, but RECORDED MUSIC at home)............I say this not to inflame, only to exercise my right to speak in a politically incorrect manner. No one in this forum has ever felt the least bit of pause, when they have sought to offend me in some way, so do I owe it to those same folks to show the same pause? To spout PC rhetoric that I don't believe?.................This is an "open" forum (for now) on the net, not a dinner party at the boss's mansion....ahem... |
Plsl, how nice for you, that's almost like bragging. Really, if you're married, must you hog single young ladies who are interested in audio? I'd like to meet one sometime. Anyway, it doesn't prove that these represent the majority of the women in the lives of the rest of us male audiophiles, though. Just makes us wish we were you. let me guess, your last name is Heffner?................George, my brain missed the part where you answered my questions about your criticisms of my oversampled views on women and audio. Regarding vinyl, you are wrong on basic points about the treble bandwidth capability of vinyl, and also abot the portrayal of the dynamic contrast (both micro and macro) of vinyl, over the best of CD. I'll leave it to Albert to lay into you about that (I really wouldn't want to be you right about now, that's for sure...heh heh).....................Regarding your hearing, I have pretty decent hearing, myself. How far away from, say a 32 inch crt TV, can you hear it's 15.6 kHz sweep noise? I bet I can hear it farther away than you can (and around corners, down hallways, and on many pop recordings and movie soundtracks), and I'm not in the habit of using air guns, and I always wear earplugs for any activity even remotely noisy. |
Oh well, he isn't in the mood. Maybe next time... |
Jordan, you are quite right, I'm full of nonsense, have never known what I'm talking about, and never listen to anything but pink noise on my system. I'm glad that you are so humble as to proclaim that you know so little, yet are perfectly open minded, and have found the truth of truths. Yes, indeed, nobody likes a blowhard. We all make mistakes, and it is you who is the blowhard now. Shut up already! At least I have a real man's name, and not an ambiguous-gender one.... |
First of all, let me get one thing srtaight about Resolution Audio. I admire Jeff Kalt very much, and respect his work on an exalted level (I love his CD player, and will likely never part with it). I think that far too much is being made of some minor misconceptions on my part(it's not as if I write for a mag that you are all paying for, so why do any of you hold my being "wrong" to such a high level of scrutiny? I mean, somebody freaking asked me to describe my view of that subject the best I could, so I did...I was partially in error perhaps...get over it...I have, and then some. Why can't the rest of you?). Here's where the GRAY AREA on that subject still is for me: According to another's post on here, Kevin Halverson of Muse has said that upsampling CAN be distinguished from oversamplng in the following manner (and this was also how I understood it to be all along, so if you say I'm wrong on this, it would seem you are saying Kevin is wrong also): THAT UP-SAMPLING is upstream of the DAC, AND employs processing that "interpolates"...and OVER-SAMPLING occurs within the DAC. Now, it all depends on what you describe as being "inside" or "outside" the DAC. The only thing I will concede on this, and Jeff has made it clear to me personally, is that with oversampling, the DAC does get a datastream which is already "not redbook", it's higher rez than that already. I did NOT realize that. If it makes all of you happy that this somehow has disproved how I conceived it before, so be it. Doesn't make me a retard, though. I have no plans to design DACS or CD players, a good thing, I guess. I am convinced not to even try any of the affordable "upsampling" dacs, though, even for kicks............I'm no bigot, and you are in need of a hine end correction from my foot. You are the one who is crass, and also judgemental, and are likely too old to realize it. |
I'm fully aware of RIAA pre-equalizaation, and the reason for it. And for your information, I already am a recording engineer (I make my own, which is more than you can do), so there goes that little smug blather-theory of yours. YOU STILL DIDN'T ASNWER THE QUESTION, AND CERTAINLY NO CANECHOIC CHAMEBER IS REQUIRED. You can't hear squat, old man, get a hearing aid, already!!! |
Please don't tell me that the phono stage doesn't have the equalization that re-boosts the treble response, because that is basic, and everybody should know it. Why don't either of you (Albert or George0? There is no "inherent" roll off. There is only pre_equalized roll off, that is "decoded" by the treble BOOST (like 40 dB) in the phono stage. All of you need to better eduacate yourselves about that. LP's produce harmonics well beyond 25 kHz, didn't you know that? CD's produce nothing at all above 20 kHz, that is fact. I can hear 20 kHz sinewaves on a test CD with Maggies, and the intermodualtion and squared off-ness that goes with them. Can you? You don't need an anechoic chamber, just a damped lisening room (I doubt George even has that, though). And for your info, I've been in a few dorm rooms myself, and saw no decent stereos, just stale pizza (and a few other nice things). Your comments are anectdotal, and prove ABSOLUTELY ZERO POINT. Take a break, and organize your thoughts in your brain first next time, George... |
And also, don't tell me about hearing tests with headphones. They're flawed from the get go, no matter how "calibrated" they are. My HD-600's are infinitely better and more extended in the treble than the phones they use in hearing tests, and THESE SENNEHISERS ARE NOT FLAT IN THE TOP OCTAVE. My Maggies are much more flat in the top octave. I think it has to do with the fact that the trasducer is right on your ear, and phase anomalies occur, with sound wavelengths that are, what, half an inch long? Anyway, speakers in a correctly treated room, a good test CD, a mic referencing a 1 kHz sinewave to the mid 80's decibels range, is all you need. My Maggies stay focused DEAD CENTER in every band of uncorrelated third octave pink noise. They make a ball about 2 feet diameter in the upper bass, and a golfball size "ball of noise" in the top ocatves............................DOES ANYONE ELSE'S SPEAKER SETUP/HEARING YIELD THIS? Me want to know........I CHALLENGE YOU TO DO THIS TEST RIGHT NOW (the Sheffield "my Disc" will do the trick. Otherwise, don't go telling me what I can, and can't hear, through my system, old man. Go pipe your pompousity up your own keester for a while, George.... |
Kevin, I'm glad to see your post here............Jordan, I only meant that Kevin's description was semantic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get over yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!! George, you can go to hell, and I'll be happy to send you there...name the time and place, old man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Gee, I guess I just like to know who I'm talking to. Imagine that? I expected people in this hobby to have more manners than both of you do, that's all...............I think, Jordan or Janie or Jackschmit or Jackass or whoever you are, that if you think that, somehow you know more about audio than John Atkinson (whether he's been right or wrong about any benefits of upsampling, is of little consequence...who are you, the patron saint of highend digital? For one thing, you'd need to die first...but that's another matter), that it is you who needs to keep his ego in check. You could never be anything other than envious of him, and sniping about him bears that out (and J-10 is his polar opposite, everybody knows it). There will always be those that hate people of prominance in the industry or in journalism, and he is well liked by most of us, and has done far more good, than bad (unlike you two, here). I NEVER CLAIMED TO KNOW AS MUCH AS ANY LEADING DESIGNER IN THE INDUSTRY (regarding digital audio, or anything else), so why in hell do you keep harping on this subject? I said it tens of times, that by all means, I defer to the real experts in the field (I said "Jeff Kalt is a better man than me", go look it up...what else would you have me do, sacrifice a burnt offering to him?), and to please not take what I say (when I honestly tried to explain my views, when asked to do so) as "gospel". SHOW ME WHERE I CLAIMED TO BE A MANUFACTURER, or an industry expert. I believe all I did was explain my view on the subject. I am not a manufacturer, don't pretend to be. What else is left to do, before you finally shut your pie hole on this, Jordan? Last time I checked, I wasn't on your payroll, so I guess you can't fire me. How's this, I'll continue to try shedding whatever "pathetic" (imperfect) knowledge I have on subjects in this hobby, right here in this forum...and you change your diaper, and move on. Are you obsessed with me, or something? You need a therapist. One thing I will NOT do, is stop trying to help people in this forum, where I feel like I can. You can try to stop me (for real), but please stop whining, because your posts on the subject of me are wasting Audiogon's server's memory space, and electricity for that matter. Music through audio reproduction is what's important, not interpersonal obsessions (like yours, with me)...and I should remind you that I don't play for the same-gender team (I think you've said you recently got married, but as Craig says, "who knows?"...indeed), so kindly focus your attentions on someone else. Craig seems like a good candidate, I'm sure you'll both be very happy together....unless of course you're both the same demented person. I USE MY REAL NAME, BECAUSE I, AND OTHERS, FEEL IT LENDS MORE CREDIBILITY AND HONOR, and because we are serious about the hobby. I absolutely refuse to apologize for wanting to know who I'm talking to, so get over that right now, both of you. You're both crybabies, stop wasting your time obsessing over me. I'll NOT stop participating in this forum, and I DARE you to stop me. You can't, so shut up! And if you go crying and snivelling to Tom this time, he might just be with me, so watch your back...perhaps Neil will be too...Anyhoo, I suggest you start talking about audio, and keep it off personalities (who's "right", who's "wrong"), or it is likely that YOURS will be the memberships that get revoked, not mine. And if you don't care about your member status, then you are scum, and have no business here AT ALL!!......good riddance! |
I most certainly did not "run" Deborah out of this forum! She is a very busy musician and educator, and doesn't spend every waking moment in this forum. She has better things to do, mostly. I'll have all of you know, that I have become acquainted with both Deborah, and her husband Robert. We see eye to eye on TWO pieces of equipment that we both own (one is the CD50), and I find them to be very well heeled and intelligent individuals, both in audio and music (especially music, I pale before them). And I resent all of the attacks that I have received in this whole episode. I AM NO BIGOT, NO SEXIST, NO SOPHOMORIC THROWBACK. I am just more honest than many of you PI blowhards, that's all...Joe, I appreciate your attempt to conclude this thread on a high note, and regret that I needed to add this. You'll get over it...BTW, you aren't the first to make the observations you make, many are obvious. On mics: ever try "Blue" omni mics? Saw them in "Musician's Friend" catalog, look interesting, but are expensive (for me), and I have no mic pres with phantom power (cuts out essentially all the good ones)...Knocking on the door of the Neumann price range... |
