Oh ok.I'm talking about adding gimmicks with marketing buzzwords "carefully tuned six opamp I/V converter"
Oh ok.I'm talking about adding gimmicks with marketing buzzwords "carefully tuned six opamp I/V converter"
I'm talking about adding gimmicks with marketing buzzwords "carefully tuned six opamp I/V converter"
As far as marketing buzzwords go, in my opinion, this is pretty benign and very close to reality. I mean, they obviously did spend time tweaking this analogue output stage to maximize performance. In the blog, they describe this process in some detail without giving away everything of course.
An example of egregious marketing would be using fancy audiophile terminology to name this analogue output stage and then pretending that it is doing some mysterious proprietary stuff that nobody else has ever done, without providing any evidence.
They're promoting gimmickry. And youtube reviewers like Guttenberg will be quoting the marketing speak same as you did.
If there is any way I can help or volunteer to put it together let me know. I am sure you'd find many volunteers here if you ask.It is a good idea but currently I don't have a database of prices. The master index does and we are thinking about how to integrate them.
I measured it with a Topping E30 and the (fairly obvious) answer is: no, it doesn't make a difference wether Windows or the DACs volume control is used (The final truth about DSP Volume Control in Roon | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum ).is there anything that backs that statement up?
if input select is a separate button, what is the blue ring for? just a light?
in EL DAC the ring in the middle is the input selector.
Yes there is. I like DACs with volume control so if I don't have another source, I can directly drive a power amplifier with them.@amirm i see some folks who would have prefer a digital volume control in this unit, but is there any added value there?
I think there is some value in keeping even the lower performing ones...for relative perspective and transparency....So, weren't we talking about clipping off the bottom 25% of the SINAD list at this point? I mean, if a product can't hit 100dB on that chart now, they're probably not in consideration for anyone on this site, regardless of price. It's probably time to recalibrate...
Thanks for bring this to us, as always, Amir (and JDS for that matter!).
I think there is some value in keeping even the lower performing ones...for relative perspective and transparency....
it paints the Way WE HAVE COME
I think the best presentation would keep even the losers but sort into categories: USB-only DACs, SPDIF DACs, DACs with headamps or preamps, disk players and other (receivers, etc.)
You can cut down the size of the list by having separate lists for products which will rarely be cross shopped.
amirm rarely measures all connection methods. So... I don't think this would work, we don't know SINAD of most connection methods beside USB or SPDIF /sometimes coax etc. it seems like amirm is testing what he wants, depending on how he feels... sometimes more, sometimes less. That's fine, but this might not work for this type of list ...I think the best presentation would keep even the losers but sort into categories: USB-only DACs, SPDIF DACs, DACs with headamps or preamps, disk players and other (receivers, etc.)
You can cut down the size of the list by having separate lists for products which will rarely be cross shopped.
Usually different inputs don't affect SINAD/THD+N much. Jitter would change a lot and that's why Amir does jitter with different inputs.amirm rarely measures all connection methods. So... I don't think this would work, we don't know SINAD of most connection methods beside USB or SPDIF /sometimes coax etc. it seems like amirm is testing what he wants, depending on how he feels... sometimes more, sometimes less. That's fine, but this might not work for this type of list ...