The great digital debate

miklorsmith · « **Reply #20 on:** 19 Oct 2007, 08:32 pm »

You will not begin to learn if you do not admit your need to know. Or, ignorance is bliss - two sides of a coin really.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #21 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 06:05 am »

C'mon guys- keep all shots above the belt.

darrenyeats · « **Reply #22 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 07:18 am »

Quote from: art on 19 Oct 2007, 07:56 pm

Of course, your position might be a bit easier to defend if you had not chosen a transport with such a pitiful SPDIF output.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=45330.0

Not wanting to step into someone else's punch up...but the SB3 S/PDIF output is not "pitiful" - in fact the opposite, it is very good. Despite the electrical characteristics discussed on that thread you quoted (and the modders' commendable enthusiasm) the actual measured jitter of the stock unit is very low (around 300pS). http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpost.php?p=230220&postcount=73.

When I tested it blind against my Monarchy CD transport - using my perhaps elderly and jitter-prone but cherished DAC - I preferred the SB3 as a transport (we only compared with 4 tracks due to time limitations, but at least we did choose the SB3 4/4 times.). So I can believe those good jitter figures.
Darren

ctviggen · « **Reply #23 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 10:50 am »

How did you test it? I tested my (modded, with digital and analog mods) SB2 versus my Proceed PMDT transport, but I never tested into the same DAC. For the SB2, I used my Ack Dack, whereas for my Proceed I used my Proceed AVP as DAC. Some of these tests were very close. I compared my Shengya CDP, which is a tube player, versus the SB2 digital into my Ack Dack. I liked the Shengya better, but I had to switch between the two quite a few times before deciding that. The really close test for me was the analog output of the SB2 versus the Shengya CDP, where I had to switch between the two many, many times, but I ended up liking the SB2's analog output better (the voices sounded more natural and it had slightly better imaging). I used two sets of the same interconnects on the Shengya CDP v. SB2 analog comparison.

MaxCast · « **Reply #24 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 12:12 pm »

Quote

ignorance is bliss

And cheeper.

acd483 · « **Reply #25 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 12:18 pm »

Quote from: miklorsmith on 19 Oct 2007, 08:32 pm

You will not begin to learn if you do not admit your need to know. Or, ignorance is bliss - two sides of a coin really.

Funny, last time I checked, you needed speakers to actually produce sound. Signal paths do not have their own sound. Distortion and noise alter the produced sound, but a piece of equipment, like the Benchmark with inaudible distortion and noise levels does not alter the sound produced by the speakers. It has no signature sound. That is the beauty of it. Give me what's on the recording.

art · « **Reply #26 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 01:41 pm »

300 pSec is low? Add to that..........say....at least 200 pSec for a typical "modern" Crystal RX chip, and that is around 0.5 nSec.

Nope......that is not low. Sorry, dude........

acd843........when are you going to get past this obsession of yours that inaudible distortion and noise are the only qualities to judge sonics by?

Do you really listen to the music, or just read the spec sheet?

Speaking of specs............someone has pointed out to me that there is a controversy as to whether some of the parts actually work in one of those. Supposedly.......someone opened one up, disabled some of the trick circuitry, and measured its performance. Supposedly.........the measurements stayed the same. No, I don't know what lunatic forum that was on, but wouldn't it be funny if that was the real case?

Point being: you can't always believe what manufacturers say. Even us!

The guys who write the marketing hyperbole like to lay it on the offbeat humour a bit much even for my taste.

Pat

darrenyeats · « **Reply #27 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 02:15 pm »

Quote from: art on 20 Oct 2007, 01:41 pm

300 pSec is low?

300 pSec is pitiful?
Darren

art · « **Reply #28 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 02:38 pm »

Measure the noise on the +3.3 V rail, and you will understand why.

Pat

acd483 · « **Reply #29 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 03:29 pm »

Quote

acd843........when are you going to get past this obsession of yours that inaudible distortion and noise are the only qualities to judge sonics by?

Actually, what excites me are speakers, not electronics. Electronics should be transparent, allowing the music to be reproduced as faithfully as the speakers are capable.

Let's say you look at a person through three panes of glass. If the glass has distortions or is hand blown, the subject won't appear correctly. It might look interesting or the distortion of hand blowing might evoke nostalgic feelings in the viewer (you get where I'm going here?) but I prefer all panes to be crystal clear so the subject appears as it would without the glass.

Please explain how when the glass is manufactured without flaw, where you see imperfection that can't be measured, because that is what you are claiming. You are claiming the raw data is lying. So, please explain the areas where the raw data cannot suffice.

doug s. · « **Reply #30 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 04:35 pm »

you should try a mytek dac96. everyone who has compared it to the benchmark says it's better. no, i haven't tried either, i am still happy w/the sound of my modded art di/o. but, if i find a used mytek at a good price, i will be sorely tempted.

it retails for the same price as the benchmark. mebbe the mytek passes less distortion than the benchmark's "no audible distortion"?

doug s.

Quote from: acd483 on 19 Oct 2007, 06:21 pm

The Benchmark contains state of the art components and is proven to pass on no audible distortion. What else do you want in a DAC? I really cant see, from a performance standpoint, how the results of the Benchmark can be bettered. It is technically transparent.

Your claim that "...everyone has their own reference to what is inaudible, and what is tolerable". Huh? There is no person on the planet that can hear the distortion in the Benchmark. I've stated before, it's one thing to like the sound of tubes, but quite another to claim you can hear distortion beyond the realm of human possibility.

Those "rigid, dogmatic assertions" like the test results on the Benchmark website...yeah, pretty irrefutable, but you claim there are other factors past lack of audible distortion that play a role in a component's sound...please enlighten me.

art · « **Reply #31 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 04:45 pm »

There is no such thing as an absolutely transparent piece of electronics. Never has been, never will be. All will have a sonic signature, however small (or large!) as it may be.

As Charles Hansen of Ayre said to someone recently, on some other forum:

"You must be new at this."

I think it fits well here.

Time to watch football...........

Pat

darrenyeats · « **Reply #32 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 05:08 pm »

Quote from: art on 20 Oct 2007, 02:38 pm

Measure the noise on the +3.3 V rail, and you will understand why.

Pat, you are obviously more knowledgeable about electronics than me.

My understanding is that the noise might measure like a mexican wave but it shouldn't matter, so long as the jitter is 300 pSec, since nothing else matters on a S/PDIF circuit.

Is the single-value jitter figure an oversimplification, is that what you're saying? I don't want an argument, all I am saying is that calling the digital out of the SB3 pitiful is misleading to SB3 owners and non-owners alike.
Darren

Marbles · « **Reply #33 on:** 20 Oct 2007, 05:09 pm »

acd483, you should read this:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm

acd483 · « **Reply #34 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:11 pm »

I read that a while ago when I was obsessed with finding the DAC that best reduced jitter. Then I saw the wood for the trees...jitter results in distortion. Distortion is easily tested, the DAC with the lowest distortion, by nature, has best mitigated the effects of distortion. You can either get caught up in the details or understand the big picture. Nugent has a lucrative agenda running and as he is a believer in crystals, I can't really see anything he says as legit.

acd483 · « **Reply #35 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:14 pm »

Quote from: art on 20 Oct 2007, 04:45 pm

There is no such thing as an absolutely transparent piece of electronics. Never has been, never will be. All will have a sonic signature, however small (or large!) as it may be.

Prove it! Repeating this claim doesn't make it any more true.

Quote

As Charles Hansen of Ayre said to someone recently, on some other forum:

"You must be new at this."

I think it fits well here.

Time to watch football...........

Pat

Wow, that's so brilliant. Very inspiring.

Marbles · « **Reply #36 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:35 pm »

Quote from: acd483 on 22 Oct 2007, 11:11 pm

I read that a while ago when I was obsessed with finding the DAC that best reduced jitter. Then I saw the wood for the trees...jitter results in distortion. Distortion is easily tested, the DAC with the lowest distortion, by nature, has best mitigated the effects of distortion. You can either get caught up in the details or understand the big picture. Nugent has a lucrative agenda running and as he is a believer in crystals so I can't really see anything he says as legit.

Of course what you are saying is that his I2s Off Ramp/modded Dac-1 doesn't have lower distortion than the stock S/PDIF Dac-1.

Since he has claimed that it does, you must be calling Steve a liar.

mfsoa · « **Reply #37 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:36 pm »

I'm sure the Benchmark has flat frequency response, but let's just say what if the response was 20db down from 100 hz to 500 hz.

Would there be audible distortion? (I'd guess not)
Measurable distortion? (Maybe not again, don't know what the analyzers would say)
Would it sound like crap? (Yes)

I own my system to get pleasure from listening TO music. I don't get pleasure from NOT listening to distortion.

But that's just me.

Sorry if this phrase is worn out, but if it measures good and sounds bad, it's bad. If it measures bad and sounds good, you're measuring the wrong thing.

(I don't mean to knock the Benchmark at all, it's supposed to be a really good unit for the price)

Marbles · « **Reply #38 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:41 pm »

Quote from: acd483 on 18 Oct 2007, 09:00 pm

My goal in digital is for the unit to be as transparent and distortion free as possible. The Benchmark DAC is rated as one of the most transparent components available, which is why it will be my next component purchase.

So you don't own it yet.

Have you auditioned it? In your own system?

doug s. · « **Reply #39 on:** 22 Oct 2007, 11:51 pm »

i'm still waiting for your comparison review of the benchmark dac w/the mytek dac....

doug s.

Quote from: acd483 on 22 Oct 2007, 11:11 pm

I read that a while ago when I was obsessed with finding the DAC that best reduced jitter. Then I saw the wood for the trees...jitter results in distortion. Distortion is easily tested, the DAC with the lowest distortion, by nature, has best mitigated the effects of distortion. You can either get caught up in the details or understand the big picture. Nugent has a lucrative agenda running and as he is a believer in crystals so I can't really see anything he says as legit.