Review and Measurements of the PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC

[GrimSurfer]

While I like the measurement-centric approach of ASR I'm getting more and more unhappy with the comments and interpretations of those measurements with all their "we-are-oh-so-politically-correct" attitude, anything that doesn't measure stellar and does cost a bit being considered a "rip-off" and "epic engineering failure"

I don't think political correctness has anything to do with it. I haven't seen shite being excused because it is made in the USA, keeping the downtrodden in low wage assembly jobs, etc. So there's nothing political about it.

I have seen increasingly critical views raised on equipment that performs in an objectively poor manner. I've seen abuse hurled at companies that charge four figures for such gear, which performs worse than stuff offered for considerably less.

Correctness in the audio world is synonymous with subjectivist, largely because corporations do their best to remain in control of how criticism is modulated. If that's the planet you wish to live on... well good luck with that the next time you fly, drive, or turn on a light.

 

[Zaki Ghul]

Since Art has come up several times in this thread I want to share how getting into the audio hobby affected my perception of Art as well. I'm professionally a graphic designer, outside of work I'm also an "artist". For the longest time I was obsessed with Art theory and the cleverness of it all. Over the years I gradually became more cynical, however once I started reading subjective reviews of audio equipment and then found out about sites like ASR the transformation was complete. It is depressing how many fields in our society are nothing but houses of cards, painstakingly propped up with lingo that has been specifically developed or appropriated for said field. From art critiques and artistic statements, audiophile magazine reviews and marketing blurbs, nutritional supplement labels, and even respected psychology journals (for example look up the debunked math in the mathematics of happiness study). Sometimes the "ignorant" voice describing a painting as something their five year old could do is simply pointing out that the emperor has no clothes.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I have a review unit sitting in my lab right now which combines streaming, signal processing, and amplification. And the DAC portion has analog outs as well. Performing beautifully so far... so these thing CAN be well engineered.

MSRP? Ballpark...

I don't doubt that good engineering exists. It's just not that common.

 

[SIY]

MSRP? Ballpark...

$2500-3000. Not cheap but not High End, either. Like the RME ADI 2 Pro I reviewed, I want to keep it but realistically, I can’t afford it.

 

[tw99]

I may repeat: Gilbert/Blackmer-Cell VCAs are found in the audio chain at several places, the most prominent ones being mixing desks, (mastering) limiters/compressors, and protection circuits in many active studio monitors. Nobody freaks out about their "horrid" distortion profile there, so why should one in this case?.

Even if the devices in recording studios have the same sort of distortion issues, it doesn't really matter. The recording studio is used as part of a creative process which involves selection and processing of different sounds. Added distortion is perfectly valid as part of the creative process for many types of music.

There's an enormous difference between that and subjecting every recording that you play back through your system to the same distortion.

 

[GrimSurfer]

$2500-3000. Not cheap but not High End, either. Like the RME ADI 2 Pro I reviewed, I want to keep it but realistically, I can’t afford it.

That seems to be the threshold for a reasonably well performing integrated these days.

Is there any way you could send it to Amir before selling?

It would be nice to read a review on something in this range that offers good value!

 

[SIY]

That seems to be the threshold for a reasonably well performing integrated these days.

Is there any way you could send it to Amir before selling?

It would be nice to read a review on something in this range that offers good value!

It’s not mine to do that with, but you can read my review and measurements in an upcoming AudioXpress.

 

[MediumRare]

I have a review unit sitting in my lab right now which combines streaming, signal processing, and amplification. And the DAC portion has analog outs as well. Performing beautifully so far... so these thing CAN be well engineered.

Sounds exciting, I’m in the market for that if it does what it needs to. When/where can we see your review?

 

[SIY]

Sounds exciting, I’m in the market for that if it does what it needs to. When/where can we see your review?

AudioXpress, likely around the December or January issue.

 

[ahofer]

I also think the observation may be correct that with everything below -70db cut out, that these same customers now notice more detail above that level. So we see the great subjectivist reviews as a result.

Interesting theory. I was sort of thinking they like the noise.

 

[amirm]

Weak sine signals.. Not really what most of us prefer to listen, right? How about you doing a proper listening test with real music?

It was very proper listening test. Double blind. Controlled. Hash code so you can tell the output was not edited, etc. Levels were at whopping -120 dB which people say "can't be audible due to room noise." Well, it was. So don't go there.

You have a very uphill battle to claim that device is transparent. I post my listening impressions in review of that thread with music. It was not as rigorous as test tones because it was a real-time test. But directionally shows the issues. And psychoacoustics indicates the same.

Remember, transparency needs to be for all people, all content and all listening conditions. If you relax that, I can prove to you that MP3 at 128 kbps is transparent if I get to choose the music, listening conditions, etc. Heck, we had a third-party conduct a test with WMA codec at just 64 kbps and showed that most people could not tell the difference between that and the CD! That doesn't make that universally true.

 

[AudioSceptic]

Go over to the ST70 review and look at the SINAD graph, To me, it looks a lot like this one. PS audio has created a 'tube amp' sounding DAC, which will tube-flavor anything following.

This apparently appeals to the PS 'monied' customer base, which grew up with stuff like the ST70..

I also think the observation may be correct that with everything below -70db cut out, that these same customers now notice more detail above that level. So we see the great subjectivist reviews as a result.

Good idea about the below -70 dB, but it's not really cut out, is it? Below -70 is still there but it's noise and distortion.

 

[HammerSandwich]

What is high-end if it is not precision in design and overengineering?

We already know that one: a high price tag. Isn't that why "hi-fi" has been replaced by "high end"?

 

[GrimSurfer]

Remember, transparency needs to be for all people, all content and all listening conditions. If you relax that, I can prove to you that MP3 at 128 kbps is transparent if I get to choose the music, listening conditions, etc.

Well that's the nub of it, isn't it? High performing stuff is transparent, regardless of music or listening conditions. That's what makes it "transparent" than a piece of gear that can only work well in a narrow range.

Of all the audiophile bullshit I've heard in my life, the old chestnut about two significantly different amps sounding the same is my favorite. It is all based on a trick at an audio show and has not been repeated (to the best of my knowledge) in any fair and objective way.

But it sure sounds pretty, don't it? (sic)

 

[amirm]

Looks like someone was kind enough to start a thread on PS Audio forum about this review: https://forum.psaudio.com/t/my-apologies-but-i-have-to-share-asr-s-review-of-the-sgcd/13310/23

This is the latest comment there right now:

We do understand your observations. And we know you believe that. Problem is that the science of perception is not understood. You don't perceive anything with your ears. It is your brain that interprets it all. And unfortunately said brain is influenced by far more than your ears such as watching Paul's videos, reading the incorrect technical statements made about the DAC on PS Audio website, etc.

If sound was everything, why would Paul and crew spend so much time trying to sell you on "Gain Cell?" They should have said it sounds great and leave it at that. To the extent they go on and try to convince you this DAC sounds good beyond listening, then we get to verify those statements with measurements.

Measurements show that the statements made about fidelity of Gain Cell in practice are false. The scheme hugely underperforms volume control in a DAC for example.

It takes a lot to get someone to spend so much money on the DAC. Surely customers are influenced by the techno-talk in Paul's videos, his charming character and words on the website. Those customers and potential customers need to erase all that from their mind.

Then, if you are going to perform listening tests, please do it blind. Please match levels. Don't let these two simple things that nullify any listening tests slip you by. You want to make a fair comparison, right? Why would you do things on purpose that can mislead you?

Remember, this DAC uses a very low-end DAC chip from ESS. Remember that it performs so much worse than how the creator of that DAC measured it, and recommends designers use it. What are the odds that despite all this, this DAC sounds better?

 

[GrimSurfer]

Looks like someone was kind enough to start a thread on PS Audio forum about this review: https://forum.psaudio.com/t/my-apologies-but-i-have-to-share-asr-s-review-of-the-sgcd/13310/23

This is the latest comment there right now:

View attachment 35315

We do understand your observations. And we know you believe that. Problem is that the science of perception is not understood. You don't perceive anything with your ears. It is your brain that interprets it all. And unfortunately said brain is influenced by far more than your ears such as watching Paul's videos, reading the incorrect technical statements made about the DAC on PS Audio website, etc.

If sound was everything, why would Paul and crew spend so much time trying to sell you on "Gain Cell?" They should have said it sounds great and leave it at that. To the extent they go on and try to convince you this DAC sounds good beyond listening, then we get to verify those statements with measurements.

Measurements show that the statements made about fidelity of Gain Cell in practice are false. The scheme hugely underperforms volume control in a DAC for example.

It takes a lot to get someone to spend so much money on the DAC. Surely customers are influenced by the techno-talk in Paul's videos, his charming character and words on the website. Those customers and potential customers need to erase all that from their mind.

Then, if you are going to perform listening tests, please do it blind. Please match levels. Don't let these two simple things that nullify any listening tests slip you by. You want to make a fair comparison, right? Why would you do things on purpose that can mislead you?

Remember, this DAC uses a very low-end DAC chip from ESS. Remember that it performs so much worse than how the creator of that DAC measrued it, and recommends designers use it. What are the odds that despite all this, this DAC sounds better?

I love the struggle on the forum between people who don't want to accept the measurements vs those who don't want to see them debated.

It's like witnessing a contest of intellect between really stupid people. You don't know who's the most wrong but you stick around to find out which asinine thought will ultimately prevail.

 

[StevenEleven]

No no no no. Not stupid people. Not asinine. If you want to call someone asinine try the corrupt audio press and the lazy and deceptive sectors of the high end audio industry and the people who make decisions at PS Audio.

The folks that get tied into this on the consumer end probably just have different life experiences and (like me) have no technical background. I like to tell people I don’t even know how the light switch works. Or if I do it’s a lot simpler than I think it is. A circuit gets completed, right? Two pieces of metal touch. And if you rotate magnets around a coil of wire you generate electricity? And AC vs. DC? You have got to be kidding me. So the best I can do is listen to both sides and understand the evidence the best I can and do some simple listening tests correctly until the subject matter is tangible to me and then I can judge credibility and slowly work my way up the learning curve.

I think where you (I’m not even going to say we) call other people stupid and asinine you have lost the debate. If they walk away and won’t listen to you look in the mirror.

If you’re mad at the people who intentionally set other people up like this I am all the way there with you. Have you ever made a big mistake? Have you ever found out you were really wrong about something that was important to you? Have you ever had someone take advantage of you by massively breaching your trust? If not, I trust you are not human.

 

[AudioSceptic]

It's a DAC, it has a defined function in the audio chain. The Apple comparison is germane to the discussion as it demonstrates that the core function of converting a digital signal to analogue can be done for the price of a big mac meal. Adding the various input and output functionality, a nice case etc will bump the price up, but to nothing like $1700. If you are going to charge so much for a part of the chain which was commoditised years ago then you really need to to offer something very special for the product to have a reason to exist IMO.

I just can't see the fascination in DACs and really question why anyone needs one given that so many amplifiers now have digital inputs and devices have on board DACs. OK this is a bad one, but even if it really was stellar would it really make much difference to anything? Yes you can measure differences in DACs but the measured performance of very average DACs is so far ahead of the rest of the audio chain that it is probably the least productive part of the chain to spend on if you want to boost SQ. Once you achieve transparency in a DAC, which can be done for peanuts, then any further improvement in measurement may be reassuring and indicate excellent design but it won't alter the listening experience.

I think that the real issue is that the Audio industry is convincing a lot of people to spend $$$$$$$$$$$$$$s on DACs which are completely unnecessary. People slam audiophile cables yet seem happy to applaud expensive DACs (when they work well, not this one) yet I struggle to really see much difference between the audio culture around cables and DACs.

I agree with a lot of that but wonder how many people here have amps with built-in DACs. Maybe American members are more likely to have AVRs with built-in DACs but I suspect quite a few of us are adding that functionality to an existing amp (integrated or pre+power) that we've had for some time and want to keep.

OTOH I said elsewhere that digital has become like vinyl. I meant then that I thought that CD and digital would be the end of the sort of tweakery associated with TTs and cartridges, but we have had green pens for CDs, audiophile USB cables, etc. It now occurs to me that DACs have become like cartridges. It was (is?) common for vinyl enthusiasts to have several cartridges and change from one to another according to mood or even record, and now many seem to have multiple DACs that they could use in the same way. Of course, changing DACs is much easier than changing cartridges, and you can even leave several permanently connected and switch between them just by selecting a different amp input.

 

[q3cpma]

No no no no. Not stupid people. Not asinine. If you want to call someone asinine try the corrupt audio press and high end audio industry and the people who make decisions at PS Audio.

The folks that get tied into this on the consumer end probably just have different life experiences and (like me) have no technical background. I like to tell people I don’t even know how the light switch works. Or if I do it’s a lot simpler than I think it is. A circuit gets completed, right? Two pieces of metal touch. And if you rotate magnets around a coil of wire you generate electricity? And AC vs. DC? You have got to be kidding me. So the best I can do is listen to both sides and understand the evidence the best I can and do some simple listening tests correctly until the subject matter is tangible to me and then I can judge credibility.

I think where you (I’m not even going to say we) call other people stupid you have lost the debate. If they walk away and won’t listen to you look in the mirror.

If you’re mad as hell at the people who set other people up like this I am all the way there with you.

Feelsgood bullshit aside, they're stupid. Those "corrupt audio press and high end audio industry" are just taking advantage of these stupid people, which isn't stupidity, by definition (if it works).

 

[StevenEleven]

Feelsgood bullshit aside, they're stupid. Those "corrupt audio press and high end audio industry" are just taking advantage of these stupid people, which isn't stupidity, by definition (if it works).

How do you know they’re stupid? All of them or any of them? Who individually. You don’t. It doesn’t even make any sense. And who are them? You are just on one side of a debate and you are name-calling and dehumanizing the other side. I don’t stand with that.