Search results

Maybe his attempts to subjectively describe what he's hearing are well over the top sometimes, but it is always interesting to hear what someone who has spent a lifetime reviewing all sorts of speakers has to say about it. 14:25 onwards is enough to sum it up without the overhype.

1ET7040SA, CCIF IMD: 1ET400A, CCIF IMD: The 400 has a cleaner spectrum than the 7040, however the 400 has a larger stated value of 0.00022% vs 0.00015% (7040). What gives? Typo? Also the 7040 seems to have better TIM measurements (DIM30).

Because those measurements were done very sh*tly maybe. Rob has his own APx555 results, and you can see measurements on HiFi news, HiFi world and Stereophile (Rob also shows his results for a -90dB small signal 16 bit and 24 bit sine, because this seems to be a problem measured on the 2722)

Thanks all, I'll be going with a 1ET400A amp. @boXem | audio, you mention the 1ET400A is current protection limited to loads below 3.3ohm and with the 7040 its lower than 2ohm, where is that from? If the 400 can deliver up to 25A peak, then it should technically be able to sink current into...

So, I intend to get the KEF Reference 1 Meta at release and looking into the Purifi monoblock amps. Would the 1ET400A suffice given the Ref 1 meta is 4Ohm nominal and dips to an EPDR of 1.8ohm? The suggested amp power from KEF is 200W (assuming @4ohm). This is a case where I don't think the...

1ET400A: 1ET7040SA: Both deliver just over [email protected], [email protected] and about [email protected] before they lose their cool, with the 1ET400A measuring slightly better... The 7040 really should be pulling those numbers up... the only thing it has over the 400 is a higher total current capacity at...

I listen to a lot of Mix 94.5 or 96.1 when I am in Perth, and all sorts of Radio when I'm in Melbourne.

Lets say you have nothing - For the price of a D&D 8c, in the AU market at least, you can buy a Ref 1 META + Benchmark AHB2 and still have $200 AUD to buy some low impedance speaker cables. Must get a DAC though and stands are not factored in here for either of course, these are optional anyway...

Niceeee. Will be picking these up in Copper/Black with a Bryston 4B Cubed in a few months.

You can't just look at a bunch of frequency response curves and think they sound the same. :facepalm:

https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/chord-dave-measurements-with-mscaler-by-goldensound.31741/post-1120627 GoldenSounds results don't count; its contradictory to many other measurements including Robs own APx555 results. Amir or Wolf needs to measure the device properly.

Its an invalid attempt at using an APx555.

There is nothing marketing about the on-paper performance of increasingly complex digital filters. As for the psychoacoustic component of it, I am not in a position to comment further. I've already talked about my own experience with both Mscaler and HQPlayer, maybe other proper ABx testing...

Fine fine. Noted.

I spend money on full custom designs, with fantastic build quality and western manufactured, that perform extremely well (prob still the best measuring DAC on the APx555 out there), because you know why? I like it. I value that a lot more than my A to B machine from 2005. I would love a Merc...

Yes they are total idiots. Yes it should be referred to as a filterless DAC. You should probably head over there and explain it to them. I am merely talking in their "speak".

Uhh... right. I can see the low pass filters on the bloody schematic. Maybe read my previous reply too. I am an electrical engineer. No, I dont work in audio.

Note how I said, "in NOS fanatic speak" NOS fanatics don't just want no Oversampling, they want no filtering whatsoever and thereby "true NOS". Just go ask them on audiogon or whatever. I know its not oversampling, but it is a filter nonetheless. Not that an analogue filter can touch a digital...

Thanks. Its using analogue LC filtering for lowpass at the output. Your point? Its as ancient as it gets. In NOS fanatic speak, "its not true NOS"