Marantz SA-10 Review (SACD Player & DAC)

[aj625]

amir says in the article:

Distortion is at -112 dB which makes it inaudible but again, is not competitive.

Limits of audibility any link for test ?

 

[nikosidis]

Limits of audibility any link for test ?

Test?
No music use anything near that dynamic range.
It is like you see some ad. that say this TV have 1000000:1 contrast ratio.
You think you will see that?

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

Really it'd be great if @amirm retested the DCA Stealth to see if 'break-in' of a physical driver is measurable!

Limits of audibility any link for test ?

I can't find anything that says 112 db, this says 118 from a test in '81.

AES E-Library » Dynamic Range Requirement for Subjective Noise Free Reproduction of Music

A dynamic range of 118 dB is determined necessary for subjective noise-free reproduction of music in a dithered digital audio recorder. Maximum peak sound levels in music are compared to the minimum discernible level of white noise in a quiet listening situation. Microphone noise limitations...

www.aes.org

If you'd like to 'test' your ability to hear a 78 db dynamic range or less:

Blind testing a 78 dB Dynamic Range

Checking your listening room's noisefloor, online.

www.audiocheck.net

 

[pma]

Limits of audibility any link for test ?

Do your own search on psychological acoustics scientific research papers. The limits are well known and far from crazy numbers.

 

[aj625]

Do your own search on psychological acoustics scientific research papers. The limits are well known and far from crazy numbers.

Which limits are well known ? If these are well known then there must be some reference.

 

[aj625]

Really it'd be great if @amirm retested the DCA Stealth to see if 'break-in' of a physical driver is measurable!

I can't find anything that says 112 db, this says 118 from a test in '81.

AES E-Library » Dynamic Range Requirement for Subjective Noise Free Reproduction of Music

A dynamic range of 118 dB is determined necessary for subjective noise-free reproduction of music in a dithered digital audio recorder. Maximum peak sound levels in music are compared to the minimum discernible level of white noise in a quiet listening situation. Microphone noise limitations...

www.aes.org

If you'd like to 'test' your ability to hear a 78 db dynamic range or less:

Blind testing a 78 dB Dynamic Range

Checking your listening room's noisefloor, online.

www.audiocheck.net

So do you mean 78db sinad is sufficient ?

 

[BDWoody]

Which limits are well known ? If these are well known then there must be some reference.

This thread has a good bit of information.

https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...text=Recap of thresholds,impedance: 0.16 ohms

"Recap of thresholds
Lenient
Dynamic range, linearity: 96 dB
THD, IMD: -66 dBFS / 0.05%
Noise: -85 dBFS / 0.005%
SINAD: 85 dB
Crosstalk: -60 dBFS
Jitter: -110 dBFS, -100 dBFS around the main tone
Frequency response: ±0.5 dB
Channel balance: 1 dB
Output impedance: 2 ohms

Strict
Dynamic range, linearity, SINAD: 120 dB
THD, IMD, noise, crosstalk, jitter: -120 dBFS / 0.0001%
Frequency response, channel balance: ±0.1 dB
Output impedance: 0.16 ohms"


This one can give a little perspective on how small these noise/distortion signals are.

The Shoutometer

We've all seen the Sound Pressure Level decibel reference tables where you have "quiet room", "chainsaw", "jet engine" and so on. While that is handy for estimating increased loudness in decibles, it didn't help me when thinking about the measurement levels obtained around here when measuring...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

So do you mean 78db sinad is sufficient ?

78 db was beyond elite hi fi before digital.

At my desktop beyond 66 db is not audible through the computer speakers.

I was just suggesting you test your ability to hear a signal 78 db and imagine how hard it would be to hear 112 db. Did you listen?

 

[aj625]

78 db was beyond elite hi fi before digital.

At my desktop beyond 66 db is not audible through the computer speakers.

I was just suggesting you test your ability to hear a signal 78 db and imagine how hard it would be to hear 112 db. Did you listen?

You might be confusing the "no signal sinad" of a dac with dynamic range of music which humans can differentiate. Isn't it. You want to say If humans can differentiate say 60db range only then there is no need of dac's having sinad of 123db, isn't it ? Actually random noise bringing sinad down may not be that big a problem than distortions . This is the reason why two dacs having same sinad of say 115db can still sound different, even if humans have limited ability of dynamic range.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

You might be confusing the "no signal sinad" of a dac with dynamic range of music which humans can differentiate. Isn't it. You want to say If humans can differentiate say 60db range only then there is no need of dac's having sinad of 123db, isn't it ? Actually random noise bringing sinad down may not be that big a problem than distortions . This is the reason why two dacs having same sinad of say 115db can still sound different, even if humans have limited ability of dynamic range.

If two dacs can sound different with a sinad of 115 db, it doesn't tell us as much as you think it does.

 

[SuicideSquid]

If two dacs can sound different with a sinad of 115 db, it doesn't tell us as much as you think it does.

It tells you how much noise and distortion the DAC is producing.

That is only one aspect of how a DAC sounds. I don't think anyone here claims that SINAD is the only thing that matters. That's why Amir measures a bunch of other things as well.

 

[rwortman]

Not every manufacturer has joined the “look at our impressive meaningless spec’s competition”. As restorer John alludedmto, there is more to a statement product than distortion and noise numbers. I don’t think it is correct to call a product like this poorly engineered.

1. It has not been demonstrated that pushing SINAD further and further below audible thresholds correlates with perceived better sound quality.
2. The audiophiles that this product is aimed at are not buying things based on what product has the best test results.
3. People that are fixated on test results aren’t buying $7500 disk players.

Given these factors, time spent by Marantz to chase ultra low distortion and S/N is a waste of resources. Products are engineered to sell them. Setting goals that don’t demonstrably improve sound and that your customers don’t care about is kind of dumb as is insisting that such products are incompetently engineered by those with different priorities. I am happy with my seldom used Yamaha BDA 1070 but if someone gave me one of these I would keep it.

 

[SuicideSquid]

Not every manufacturer has joined the “look at our impressive meaningless spec’s competition”. As restorer John alludedmto, there is more to a statement product than distortion and noise numbers. I don’t think it is correct to call a product like this poorly engineered.

1. It has not been demonstrated that pushing SINAD further and further below audible thresholds correlates with perceived better sound quality.
2. The audiophiles that this product is aimed at are not buying things based on what product has the best test results.
3. People that are fixated on test results aren’t buying $7500 disk players.

Given these factors, time spent by Marantz to chase ultra low distortion and S/N is a waste of resources. Products are engineered to sell them. Setting goals that don’t demonstrably improve sound and that your customers don’t care about is kind of dumb as is insisting that such products are incompetently engineered by those with different priorities. I am happy with my seldom used Yamaha BDA 1070 but if someone gave me one of these I would keep it.

Marantz marketed this player as providing better sound quality than less-expensive players. It does not. I agree that you're almost certainly not going to hear a difference in noise level or distortion between a player like this with a SINAD below -100dB and a DAC with a -120dB SINAD.

The issue with high-end audiophile equipment is that the manufacturers claim it *performs better*. In the overwhelming majority of cases, including in this case, does not. That is deceptive and dishonest. If Marantz wants to market this player as "it sounds the same as most other well-made players but it's built like a tank", I'd have more respect for them, at least they're being honest.

 

[rwortman]

It’s a case with high end consumer goods of many kinds. The bottom line is that most audio enthusiasts think that expensive and built like a tank sounds better. People on this site probably aren’t going to move that needle. There’s a discussion on another forum about the Schiit Freya+ making Stereophile’s A list and how it can’t possibly sound as good as some other company’s A listed $50,000 statement preamp. The fact that it can and probably does is something well heeled audio snobs will never accept. It’s also true that performs better and has better spec’s in most people’s minds is not the same thing.

 

[SuicideSquid]

It’s a case with high end consumer goods of many kinds. The bottom line is that most audio enthusiasts think that expensive and built like a tank sounds better. People on this site probably aren’t going to move that needle. There’s a discussion on another forum about the Schiit Freya+ making Stereophile’s A list and how it can’t possibly sound as good as some other company’s A listed $50,000 statement preamp. The fact that it can and probably does is something well heeled audio snobs will never accept. It’s also true that performs better and has better spec’s in most people’s minds is not the same thing.

"Lots of people do it" has never been a justification for immoral behavior.

The entire purpose of these reviews and discussions is to point out that this behavior is scammy and dishonest.

 

[BDWoody]

People on this site probably aren’t going to move that needle.

Our growth rate implies otherwise.

The key is to get them before the sunk costs become too hard to move beyond.

 

[rwortman]

"Lots of people do it" has never been a justification for immoral behavior.

The entire purpose of these reviews and discussions is to point out that this behavior is scammy and dishonest.

I’m not sure I agree that selling people what they want is immoral. This is from the Marantz manual. Standard audiophile stuff. Your idea of value is different. OK.

 

[voodooless]

I’m not sure I agree that selling people what they want is immoral. This is from the Marantz manual. Standard audiophile stuff.

The manual is not a sales tool.

 

[SuicideSquid]

I’m not sure I agree that selling people what they want is immoral.

It is if you convinced them they wanted it by lying to them.

 

[aj625]

If two dacs can sound different with a sinad of 115 db, it doesn't tell us as much as you think it does.

Exactly, that's what I say. Dac with same sinad can't sound same because sinad is dependent on many factors. So claims like all dacs sound san

Not every manufacturer has joined the “look at our impressive meaningless spec’s competition”. As restorer John alludedmto, there is more to a statement product than distortion and noise numbers. I don’t think it is correct to call a product like this poorly engineered.

1. It has not been demonstrated that pushing SINAD further and further below audible thresholds correlates with perceived better sound quality.
2. The audiophiles that this product is aimed at are not buying things based on what product has the best test results.
3. People that are fixated on test results aren’t buying $7500 disk players.

Given these factors, time spent by Marantz to chase ultra low distortion and S/N is a waste of resources. Products are engineered to sell them. Setting goals that don’t demonstrably improve sound and that your customers don’t care about is kind of dumb as is insisting that such products are incompetently engineered by those with different priorities. I am happy with my seldom used Yamaha BDA 1070 but if someone gave me one of these I would keep it.

Exactly. Then there should all the more be a justification of buying cheaper higher sinad dac than lesser sinad expensive boutique dac, if at all there is a limit of audibility of sinad. Isn't it ? Why one should spend many $ks on a dac, only for looks, show off, weight , brand value ?