Mark Levinson 519 measurements

[Blumlein 88]

They have a 70 db gain stage:

Have to do the math to see if the FFT process gain is more than this.

I believe the 1 million point FFT will give 57 db process gain.

So their quote of 173 is really 173-57 or 116 db for that 20 khz band. Which is a touch over 19 bits. 173 divided by the amount per bit would give the 28.5 bits they are claiming. The 173 db number is misleading.

 

[March Audio]

Let's have a look at what MSB used to use for marketing before they wised up and realized it doesn't mean nothing.

Mike, I know someone has already mentioned this, but in your desperation to defend yourself and your product you are embarrassingly contradicting yourself.

You have banged on about the component specs and measurements in your product ad-infinitum, so you clearly believed they were important.

Are you now saying that you have realised you were wrong all along and its just your subjective appraisal that matters?

 

[Mivera]

Mike, I know someone has already mentioned this, but in your desperation to defend yourself and your product you are embarrassingly contradicting yourself.

You have banged on about the component specs and measurements in your product ad-infinitum, so you clearly believed they were important.

Are you now saying that you have realised you were wrong all along and its just your subjective appraisal that matters?

What do you mean? I've already had the measurement data I shared here on my website for a year. I thought you guys were referring to by wanting measurement data by comprehensive data. Because in reality that's the only data that matters. But as seen in the first post of this thread, not even Harman, the god of all objectivist audio, doesn't even share the data I have the whole time!

What gives? Why should I as a boutique manufacturer offer more data than the Walmart of objectivist audio?

 

[March Audio]

What data? I have not seen it.

Mikey, Mikey Mikey, you are a comedian. One minute measurements matter absolutely, you insist your better measuring clock with better measuring phase noise is the reason for how good your DAC allegedly sounds, but the moment someone asks to see the DACs output measurements you flounce off in a huff.

The products you cite above can and probably have been measured in detail by third parties. However when we ask for an example of your work to measure every excuse under the sun comes out why this isnt possible. You then go into "measurements dont matter"" mode.

Its pathetic.

 

[Thomas savage]

I'm sure stereophile mag has measured a few harman products.

Still it would be nice to see amir put his own dac under the microscope, maybe to establish a 'reference ' .

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I'm sure stereophile mag has measured a few harman products.

Still it would be nice to see amir put his own dac under the microscope, maybe to establish a 'reference ' .

We have already seen jitter spectra for his 360S DAC:

http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

It measures about perfectly in that one aspect.

 

[Thomas savage]

We have already seen jitter spectra for his 360S DAC:

http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

It measures about perfectly in that one aspect.

Well done I'd not seen that..

It's hard to win, having had complaints about the fact amir does not really put up measurements of his own stock we would definitely incur heavy criticism if he did too.. they would just say he's promoting harman products and this site is nothing but a shop window etc.

You just can't win with some folks.

 

[Mivera]

What data? I have not seen it.

Mikey, Mikey Mikey, you are a comedian. One minute measurements matter absolutely, you insist your better measuring clock with better measuring phase noise is the reason for how good your DAC allegedly sounds, but the moment someone asks to see the DACs output measurements you flounce off in a huff.

The products you cite above can and probably have been measured in detail by third parties. However when we ask for an example of your work to measure every excuse under the sun comes out why this isnt possible. You then go into "measurements dont matter"" mode.

Its pathetic.

Read the 1st post.

 

[March Audio]

Yes, all I can find on your DAC is this:

Dynamic range: -121dB (5Hz to 100Khz)
THD+N 0.0002% @ 1Khz
Output impedance: 10 Ohms
Output level: Jumper pin selectable between 2/4v with RCA, and 4/6V with XLR

It doesnt tell us anything about things like jitter for example - you know that thing you are so concerned about with your femidom clock and all. It doesnt tell us about the composition of spuria or distortion.

oh I really like this snip from you web site

It's impossible to build a DAC to be a master at all sample rates. When designing a DAC, you either have to make the DAC a master of 1 frequency, or mediocre at all frequencies.

Except of course we all know that there are a plethora of DACs that perform extremely well at multiple frequencies.

 

[Mivera]

Wise words from an industry icon:

"A full suite of tests as done by Stereophile with $50,000 worth of test equipment will show some minor differences, but your ears are a far better tool. Trying to use measurements to test audio equipment is about as smart as using measurements to test wines or food. Good luck with that. A mouse's brain literally has more computing power than every single computer ever made tied together. Nature is far, FARsmarter than people. Sorry to disappoint you there."


https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...an-a-cheap-dac/?do=findComment&comment=712961

 

[Deleted member 65]

Am I the only one tired of Mivera's posts flooding that brings nothing of value or interest?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Am I the only one tired of Mivera's posts flooding that brings nothing of value or interest?

At the very least you are not alone. You can put him on ignore which helps a little.

 

[Cosmik]

Wise words from an industry icon:

"A full suite of tests as done by Stereophile with $50,000 worth of test equipment will show some minor differences, but your ears are a far better tool. Trying to use measurements to test audio equipment is about as smart as using measurements to test wines or food. Good luck with that. A mouse's brain literally has more computing power than every single computer ever made tied together. Nature is far, FARsmarter than people. Sorry to disappoint you there."

Meaningless! The audio system has been put together by people, not nature, and unlike wine and cheese, each ingredient has been designed and manufactured from scratch.

If people are too stupid to build an audio system that works, how can other people listening to it tell them where they're going wrong? If they can't tell them where they're going wrong - merely that there's something wrong - how can it be fixed?

 

[Jinjuku]

Wise words from an industry icon:

"A full suite of tests as done by Stereophile with $50,000 worth of test equipment will show some minor differences, but your ears are a far better tool. Trying to use measurements to test audio equipment is about as smart as using measurements to test wines or food. Good luck with that. A mouse's brain literally has more computing power than every single computer ever made tied together. Nature is far, FARsmarter than people. Sorry to disappoint you there."


https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...an-a-cheap-dac/?do=findComment&comment=712961

And by the same poster:

"The major Japanese companies have never been able to build amazing sounding audio equipment. "

 

[Mivera]

Meaningless! The audio system has been put together by people, not nature, and unlike wine and cheese, each ingredient has been designed and manufactured from scratch.

If people are too stupid to build an audio system that works, how can other people listening to it tell them where they're going wrong? If they can't tell them where they're going wrong - merely that there's something wrong - how can it be fixed?

It's the manufacturers job to design the gear, and the layman end users job to listen. This is why Harman doesn't share measurements either.Because Harman also knows this.

Once you have a more impressive resume than Charles Hansen, only then will your opinions start to hold weight. He's just like most of the engineers I know in the industry. He understands the value of measurement tools, as well as the value of ears.

 

[Jinjuku]

It's the manufacturers job to design the gear, and the layman end users job to listen. This is why Harman doesn't share measurements either.Because Harman also knows this.

Once you have a more impressive resume than Charles Hansen, only then will your opinions start to hold weight. He's just like most of the engineers I know in the industry. He understands the value of measurement tools, as well as the value of ears.

And apparently the entire Japanese audio electronics industry figured out.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Once you have a more impressive resume than Charles Hansen, only then will your opinions start to hold weight.

Careful, that applies to you, too.

Ah, I see, you are fixated on weight in the figurative, professional sense. As is clear, you lost a lot of that weight, without even dieting, in your time wasting diatribes in this forum.

 

[Mivera]

Careful, that applies to you, too.

Ah, I see, you are fixated on weight in the figurative, professional sense. As is clear, you lost a lot of that weight, without even dieting, in your time wasting diatribes in this forum.

I've never once claimed to be any more than an ignorant generalist.

Henry Ford was also an ignorant generalist. Here's a great little story about him:




"THERE are two kinds of knowledge. One is general, the other is specialized. General knowledge, no matter how great in quantity or variety it may be, is of but little use in the accumulation of money. The faculties of the great universities possess, in the aggregate, practically every form of general knowledge known to civilization. Most of the professors have but little or no money. They specialize on teaching knowledge, but they do not specialize on the organization, or the use of knowledge.

KNOWLEDGE will not attract money, unless it is organized, and intelligently directed, through practical PLANS OF ACTION, to the DEFINITE END of accumulation of money. Lack of understanding of this fact has been the source of confusion to millions of people who falsely believe that "knowledge is power." It is nothing of the sort! Knowledge is only potential power. It becomes power only when, and if, it is organized into definite plans of action, and directed to a definite end.

This "missing link" in all systems of education known to civilization today, may be found in the failure of educational institutions to teach their students HOW TO ORGANIZE AND USE KNOWLEDGE AFTER THEY ACQUIRE IT.

Many people make the mistake of assuming that,because Henry Ford had but little "schooling," he is not a man of "education." Those who make this mistake do not know Henry Ford, nor do they understand the real meaning of the word "educate." That word is derived from the Latin word "educo," meaning to educe, to draw out, to DEVELOP FROM WITHIN.

An educated man is not, necessarily, one who has an abundance of general or specialized knowledge. An educated man is one who has so developed the faculties of his mind that he may acquire anything he wants, or its equivalent, without violating the rights of others. Henry Ford comes well within the meaning of this definition.

During the world war, a Chicago newspaper published certain editorials in which, among other statements, Henry Ford was called "an ignorant pacifist." Mr. Ford objected to the statements, and brought suit against the paper for libeling him. When the suit was tried in the Courts, the attorneys for the paper pleaded justification, and placed Mr. Ford, himself, on the witness stand, for the purpose of proving to the jury that he was ignorant. The attorneys asked Mr. Ford a great variety of questions, all of them intended to prove, by his own evidence, that, while he might possess considerable specialized knowledge pertaining to the manufacture of automobiles, he was, in the main, ignorant.

Mr. Ford was replied with such questions as the following:

"Who was Benedict Arnold?" and "How many soldiers did the British send over to America to put down the Rebellion of 1776?" In answer to the last question, Mr. Ford replied, "I do not know the exact number of soldiers the British sent over, but I have heard that it was a considerably larger number than ever went back."

Finally, Mr. Ford became tired of this line of questioning, and in reply to a particularly offensive question, he leaned over, pointed his finger at the lawyer who had asked the question, and said, "If I should really WANT to answer the foolish question you have just asked, or any of the other questions you have been asking me, let me remind you that I have a row of electric push-buttons on my desk, and by pushing the right button, I can summon to my aid men who can answer ANY question I desire to ask concerning the business to which I am devoting most of my efforts. Now, will you kindly tell me, WHY I should clutter up my mind with general knowledge, for the purpose of being able to answer questions, when I have men around me who can supply any knowledge I require?"

There certainly was good logic to that reply.

That answer floored the lawyer. Every person in the courtroom realized it was the answer, not of an ignorant man, but of a man of EDUCATION. Any man is educated who knows where to get knowledge when he needs it, and how to organize that knowledge into definite plans of action. Through the assistance of his "Master Mind" group, Henry Ford had at his command all the specialized knowledge he needed to enable him to become one of the wealthiest men in America. It was not essential that he have this knowledge in his own mind. Surely no person who has sufficient inclination and intelligence."

 

[amirm]

Read the 1st post.

You should read it -- carefully. Here are the specs you posted:

Mark Levinson No 519:

Your kit DAC:

Putting aside that they have half the distortion you show, and more detail at both frequency spectrums, can you tell what is wrong with your spec that is not with theirs?

And be clear: is this the DAC silicon spec or measured output of your complete kit?

Also, why is your dynamic range negative?

Looking at the spec for the AKM 4490EQ DAC chip you are using, they show the dynamic range thusly:

How did you get better dynamic range than they did?

 

[Mivera]

You should read it -- carefully. Here are the specs you posted:

Mark Levinson No 519:

View attachment 8490


Your kit DAC:

View attachment 8491


Putting aside that they have half the distortion you show, and more detail at both frequency spectrums, can you tell what is wrong with your spec that is not with theirs?

And be clear: is this the DAC silicon spec or measured output of your complete kit?

Also, why is your dynamic range negative?

View attachment 8492

Looking at the spec for the AKM 4490EQ DAC chip you are using, they show the dynamic range thusly:

View attachment 8493


How did you get better dynamic range than they did?

I see since yesterday you guys hobbled my account so it takes 5 minutes to even load a page. I log out and lightning fast again. Other accounts lightning fast, my account slow as a snail.

That aside, you think that 0.0001% THD is a game changer? Note my spec is THD+N as well.

It's these petty arguments that are eliminated when you don't post any specs.

Also the AKM4490 specs are based on utilizing the SRC/SDM faculties in the chip. All we use is the switched capacitor filter section. Which does happen to be the dynamic range bottleneck in the design. However the industry standard numbers are far beyond being good enough that the only think left that matters is what only industry insiders know. Trade secrets. I've shared some ane you should be grateful for this.