Vict0r
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Get well soon, Amir!
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Mhdt Labs Pagoda Review (R2R Tube DAC)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
dasdoing
Major Contributor
agreed. It doesn't make sense to judge them for transparency, when they are not made for providing it.
they are by definition effects.
not sure how you would rank them tecnicly though. At the end it probably doesn't even make sense to meassure them
Batmobil3250
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2020
- Messages
- 2
- Likes
- 4
Well amazing test & specs. I have this dac and roll different tubes. Up against it I also have access to some of the best spec dacs listed here. Both ends meet in my system. I admit that the Pagoda has a relative high noise level and especially on efficient speakers. The noise do not follow the volume. I assume the noise is due to the lack of filters? What do you think Amir? Soundwise and when a/b it up against the other dac the Pagoda is the one that is choosen. I do not miss dynamics and details from the meassured pure bit resolution. I use streaming and 24bit data plus data from a Marantz CD-5000. So do specs really matters?
Azathoth
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2020
- Messages
- 116
- Likes
- 265
It just does not matter what the numbers say, so long as people only care about the words of others, and trust only their ears, gear like this will sound fine regardless.. Such a shame. Omne ignotum pro magnifico. What is unknown is considered great. Ignorance is bliss.
Will be interesting to compile a list of superlative comments from subjective reviewers of this one 
.
.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
These products are made because there is a demand for it.
Buyers do not care about measured performance, only we do.
Buyers (the audiophool ones) want:
R2R (because they understand the principle and people believe it sounds 'organic' and DS sounds cold and lifeless)
no reconstruction filter (because filters are bad and not needed they think and negatively affect dynamics, the dreaded 'ringing')
Tube(s) well.... because they 'sound' more analog/warm can be rolled and thus easy to tweak the sound (the most wonderful sounds are atributed to specific tubes). For this reason the harmonics must reach audible levels (and thus high) and must have a certain spread (lower in level the higher the harmonics. The tubes must be visible.
Linear power supplies (Toroid, special fuse, special rectifier diodes)
must be heavy in weight (cheap stuff has no weight and heavy gear is supposedly less susceptible to vibrations.
No opamps so only discrete parts.
Expensive and large coupling caps in the audio part.
This device is completely built to these 'demands' and seems well executed.
Lorenzo74
Senior Member
[Review] MHDT Labs Pagoda DAC review
MHDT Lab Pagoda DAC, a listening test by Nick Whetstone on TNT-Audio, Internet HiFi magazine, www.tnt-audio.com
www.tnt-audio.com
Mhdt Labs Balanced Pagoda DAC by Terry London
In the last seven months, I have received scores of emails from readers on two superlative balanced DACs (Bricasti Design M3/Rockna Audio Wavelight, which retail for around $5000). Many readers wanted to know and seek a DAC that was a truly balanced design yet would come in at a lower price point.
v2.stereotimes.com
Dear ASR community,
Pls enjoy above Readings… a clear example of subjective-objective uncorrelations…
It seems signature, details, are the additional harmonics this DAC adds (not for free at the end) to the input sound.
My Best
L.
Last edited:
Will be interesting to compile a list of superlative comments from subjective reviewers of this one
"...... Well recorded live performances (most noticeably with 'simple' music) had the ability to raise the hairs on the back of my neck...."
Ok, there are two ways to interpret this.
Visually yes. The fact that you can see all those components says enough. But well-executed...? One could probably make a pretty good measuring DAC with the components you mentioned. The trick is: it requires actual knowledge and engineering, clearly, none of these were present when cobbling together this monstrosity.
What about when a decent testing tube amp comes along? Then there would be nothing to compare it against. I'm not convinced all tube amps are effects boxes and distortion generators. I like the tube tests and am awaiting the day we get to see something new and good.
Colonel7
Addicted to Fun and Learning
I don't understand the criticism about listening. Voice sounds totally lifelike when I play "Mr. Watson, come here!"
I am going for a covid test today @ 3:30pm because I felt horrible all day with covid like symptoms yesterday but now I feel fine/great for some reason. Be careful @amirm just in case you have the dreaded covid.
KSTR
Major Contributor
I'd hazard a guess and claim that >= 90% of listeners won't be able to tell a difference vs a SOTA DAC with music, at least when considering distortion alone. Don't believe?
Try @pkane's Distort with similar settings :
The curvature of the voltage transfer can already be seen and yet it is not at all easy to identify this 1.5% distortion @ 0dBFS, in a blind listening test (ABX).
Same goes for the filterless NOS thing, once you really start to do proper (== single variable) comparisions you'll find that the ultrasonic images are inaudible.
Try @pkane's Distort with similar settings :
The curvature of the voltage transfer can already be seen and yet it is not at all easy to identify this 1.5% distortion @ 0dBFS, in a blind listening test (ABX).
Same goes for the filterless NOS thing, once you really start to do proper (== single variable) comparisions you'll find that the ultrasonic images are inaudible.
Will be interesting to compile a list of superlative comments from subjective reviewers of this one
Damn, nothing on Darko, but couldn't see much amongst all the adverts. This was a previous MHDT "Rather than focus on the individual drops of water, the flow of the entire audio river is a central tenet of this manufacturer’s DAC design philosophy."
solderdude
Grand Contributor
I don't agree. The device is well made with the right parts (desirable ones for audiophools) and has the exact measurements that is needed.
They were not aiming for low distortion and top notch performance.
This was deliberately designed this way and well executed with good knowledge of electronics and how to achieve what they were after.
I would not buy it but the isn't a cobbled together monstrosity but well designed purpose made device for a specific market.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
And one needs to take into consideration that for smaller amplitudes the distortion is lower (can't do that easily in distort) so reality may be even better than this simulation.
Deep down the rabbit hole audiophools want bad specs and distortion? Or is this smooth sounding?
solderdude
Grand Contributor
They want 'organic' and 'life-like' yet 'warm and full' sound.
Consider that human beings are not great at hearing certain types of distortion with music.
Consider that human beings are not great at hearing certain types of distortion with music.
KSTR
Major Contributor
Ehhm, Distort's harmonics are always relative to input full scale, so it fully depicts the corresponding behavior at lower input levels. For example, a -12dBFS sine then lowers THD to about -60dB, more than 20dB better ... and most certainly completely inaudible even with pure sines.
The bigger problem of this DAC appears to be the high'ish wide-band noise floor.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll