Hi All,
At this point I feel I ought to interject. There is some confusion as to what the dAck! can and can't do and additionally I need to comment a bit about the discussion going on in this forum. First and foremost, Many thanks to Steve for posting his findings with the unit. He is a customer after all and we build our support base through the generous information sharing between customers. However, it should be clear with product owners and potential customers that Steve is in the business of modifying products. He is free to say what his personal opinion is about the product and its modified status, especially in his own forum, however, one should keep in mind that it is always in his best interest to say that a product he intends to mod needs work. I don't doubt his technical skills to enhance a product to his ideal of the sound, and Steve has a history of looking into products that provide excellent sound in their raw state. I am by no means implying not to use his mods, but I remind everyone to take things you hear with a grain of salt as this hobby is rife with misinformation and opinions colored by personal taste.
It is clear that Steve and I have very different views of what ideal aspects of sound are. I have tried very hard to generate a unique listening experience devoid of edge and long-term fatigue while still offering realistic presentation and of course the essence of music. This does not mean that other products on the market cannot do this or do some of these things better (whether they do it at an affordable price is another issue). To the point - quantifying performance of an audio product to "95%" in an almost entirely subjective field is a bit of a stretch, wouldn't one think? My experience with modified P3A's has not been positive but that is an issue of personal taste and I cannot in good conscience tell people I think it is only "XX%" of my ideal when I am in the business of selling a competitive product; I can only try to make mine suit my customer base better. I think it is dangerous and un-kosher to go around quantifying relative audio performance for everybody if you are a manufacturer or modifier unless the units of enumeration are clearly defined.
It might not be Steve's intent to create universal definitions of quality for everybody, but when these numbers start getting thrown around as fact it does raise some red flags.
Some items for the reader to consider:
The dAck! converts 16 bit stereo up to 96KHz.
Turn-on pop is something that most high end audio folks have come to accept. An extra relay in the signal path can affect the signal detrimentally. The amplitude of the pop with the dAck! does not exceed full swing (2V), which is well within the dynamic listening range of the system and is akin to a slow transient at perhaps a hundred Hz. It cannot hurt the system unless the system is improperly built!
When playing through the USB conduit at 96KHz, what is the original feed? Was the media re-sampled from 44.1 or 48 to 96, or was your original feed some 96KHz datastream? If so, what media? If not originally 96K, how can you say that the result is "better", or that we are in the realm of high-fidelity still? We have found that the audio one gets from resampled PC audio is not representative of the intended result - it tends to sound somewhat "technicolor enhanced", with emphasis on high frequencies and an artificially enhanced spaciality. Is this accurate reproduction?
What were the burn-in conditions? Were the comparisons made between a fully burned in dAck! and a fully burned in modded dAck!, with a fully burned in P3A as reference (likely the latter was the case, but what of the former)?
We know that the dAck! is fairly sensitive to variations in datastream quality. We have established a number of transports that work synergistically with the unit and freely share this information with customers. How can customers know if the modded version is going to work in their installation and get "95%" of P3A performance (subjective as it is) unless they are able to recreate Steve's system of (highly modified) reference products? Will 95% still be the case in their system?
Happy listening to all,
Christopher S. Own
Ack! Industries
