Here is what I do not understand. As I said, it seems no one has heard the Emm or the Playback designs, so how on earth can they suggest an $#@ sounds at least as good or better?
It's an assumption based on experience i would say. And i think it's a fair assumption too.
We have seen, through measurements, time and time again, that there is no dependable relationship between price and performance in amps, DACs, phono preamps and so on. Worse, we have DACs that are perfect, better than our ability to differentiate and even better than the medium. These can be had for 150€.
Also, we don't have measurements for those devices you mention. It's likely they are bad, otherwise the manufacturer would submit them to someone for independent measurement. The claim to be the best is just a claim, you have to have proof. You can help by sending your stuff to
@amirm if feasible, he can measure it, then we know for sure
This is illogical and like saying a 2019 Chateau Margaux is better than a 2019 Lafitte without having tasted them.
The problem here is that "better" is judged by tasting it. That might work for wine, or oil paintings or music. Logic can not be applied to music, a track can not be logically superior, nor can a wine. Taste is no metric that is repeatable.
But DACs, amps and so on are supposed to be engineered to be neutral, without sound, not adding distortion or tonality. Once they do that, they become interchangeable and you can buy using price, optics or features. We believe we have, in most device classes, reached that level of perfection.
You can not apply taste to an engineering problem.
Well, there are plenty of threads that discuss exactly that. It's at the core of this forum, the fight between subjectivism (judge a DAC by ear and music by taste) and objectivism (judge a DAC by measurement and music by taste).