[emailtim]

It sure would be nice if it were just about the numbers.

Hi Danny,

They are a strong indicator if we are talking about purity of signal retention (straight copper) versus additive colorations (listening to equipment signatures).

Transducers are the weakest link in today's audio chain. 

I think you have some hands on experience with the newish Purifi drivers, but don't know what your thoughts are on them. 

They appear to have some quality at a steep price and boast low distortion.

Here is a blurb from one of their staffers.

"...  The PTT6.5X is at -80dB (1Amp peak, 1kHz), the new PTT8 is at -90dB and we have prototyped a 6.5 with -100dB.  ..."

Their best transducers (including latest prototypes) fall short of the the rest of the contemporary upstream audio components in a signal chain.  Nowhere near -[240-300]dB or even 130dB.

I would appreciate your honest feedback on all 128-bit and 64-bit up to your favorite DAC, but it would require multi-channels of your favorite DAC to do so. 

Most canned consumer hardware (e.g. DEQX, miniDSP, etc.) do not do this precision of math and are tap limited, thus are not representative of current potential.

[NoahH]

@emailtim - indeed it can be done. I fully believe that some folks who are smart enough and have spent enough time (decades) on it like Theoretica get there. And I would always be delighted to audition new implementations. But the reality is the DSP based gear I have heard has underperformed simplified electronics in controlled spaces. There is a reason that many of the most-belovee DACs are NOS. Ladder DACs dominate many of the rankings.

But *theory does not matter on this*. Trial different approaches and try for yourself. There is no replacement for experience, and trying different approaches is much of the fun of the hobby.

My best suggestion for anyone new is buy used gear that you can sell at a low loss and try different stuff for a long time.

[jmimac351]

My best suggestion for anyone new is buy used gear that you can sell at a low loss and try different stuff for a long time.

BINGO!  I did that with DACs (and preamps) and found out what I wanted to know. That issue, for me, is settled.

Now I play with speakers.



Below is how the preamp / DAC mental gymnastics got settled... but the little "secret" is that little black box, by itself, is almost as good.  I did it because I work hard and could, not because I needed to to be happy. 

Buy gear used.  The only "new" I buy are special speakers / speaker parts... if they can't be bought used.  If you buy good stuff, and buy it right... you haven't actually lost the money - it's just value in a different form to have fun with until it needs to change form... like turning it into track tires.

I will say it's important not to skimp on what kind of cardboard you use for housing a test crossover that you're anxious to hear. 

[NoahH]

@jmimac351 - I am also an Ayre guy now.

[Danny Richie]

Hi Danny,

They are a strong indicator if we are talking about purity of signal retention (straight copper) versus additive colorations (listening to equipment signatures).

Transducers are the weakest link in today's audio chain. 

I think you have some hands on experience with the newish Purifi drivers, but don't know what your thoughts are on them. 

They appear to have some quality at a steep price and boast low distortion.

Here is a blurb from one of their staffers.

"...  The PTT6.5X is at -80dB (1Amp peak, 1kHz), the new PTT8 is at -90dB and we have prototyped a 6.5 with -100dB.  ..."

Their best transducers (including latest prototypes) fall short of the the rest of the contemporary upstream audio components in a signal chain.  Nowhere near -[240-300]dB or even 130dB.

I have worked with their best 6.5" models. They are well made and do a lot well, but like all things there are compromises especially when trying to build one driver that does everything well.

For instance covering bass ranges well typically means a thicker and stiffer cone (more moving mass), longer X-Max capabilities, and a motor design that will maintain linearity over a long range. All of those things compromise performance higher up in frequency. The high moving mass typically means slow or longer settling times. So a woofer playing down low and playing it hard (even cleanly) is going to compromise midrange and higher ranges. This is why we have three way designs.

Our drivers of the same size, have a more limited X-Max, and use a lighter weight cone and have a lighter moving mass. This means they settle faster, sound cleaner, and have a better overall sound. However they will not do as well playing down low.

I would appreciate your honest feedback on all 128-bit and 64-bit up to your favorite DAC, but it would require multi-channels of your favorite DAC to do so. 

Most canned consumer hardware (e.g. DEQX, miniDSP, etc.) do not do this precision of math and are tap limited, thus are not representative of current potential.

Most of my music catalog involves music that was originally recorded in 16 bit 44.1. So often the best sound can be achieved by a DAC designed to play back at that original level. So higher bit rate DAC's may have little to no advantage. The conversion to analog involves a LOT of other factors. The same is true for higher bit rate DAC's. It isn't about the bit rate, or chip set used. It has MUCH more to do with a LOT of other factors.

And yes the D/A converstion in many of the most known digital filtering divices are fair to poor.