• 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!

‘As good as it gets’ Benchmark’s DAC3

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,440
Likes
632
Years ago I would read Charles' posts on AVS forum and gathering respect for him. All of that got flushed down the toilet by reading his posting there.

First of all, and most important, how dare he use such unprofessional language as a member of the industry? He gives us all a black eye. He must remain professional especially in an industry setting. And this is after JA cleaned up his post. What remains is still horrific in this regard.

Second, I have had miswired balanced cables produce hum. If he has not heard of this, then I don't know what to tell him.

Then there is that diatribe about two inputs sounding different due to UL testing, PCB traces and other nonsense? Who is he kidding? Thankfully Jim Austin put him in his place on this.

Anybody serious would know that the only FAIR way to do this type of test is to not only use the same input on the preamp (different inputs will exhibit different amounts of break-in, as the trace on the PCB needs a signal to dissipate the residual electrostatic charge after it is tested with many kilovolts for UL compliance), but to also use the exact same pair of interconnects as they need to be not only the same brand and model, but also have the same amount of break-in time.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...ifier-headphone-amplifier#4pFbeiCVuXHKwQVa.99

There there is some shallow bickering over the use of input vs channel? Really?

This is not the Charles I knew. It is just a high-end shill taking, not some experienced engineer.
I also used to consider Hansen credible. But, a lot of comments of his in recent years in a number of forums give me big questions about where the guy's mind is wandering these days.
 

Burning Sounds

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 22, 2016
Messages
523
Likes
883
Location
Co. Durham, UK
Well, OK. If JA's statements had been in an editorial, I would agree. Statements made in and as a review are, imho, in another category and carry no more of an imprimatur that those of another reviewer. Although it bothers me, here we are casual about this

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about this. For me the editor is the editor, whether they are reviewing or writing an editorial. An editor is in a unique position, usually directly employed by and responsible to the publisher. He/she may have varying amounts of freedom to take set the style and direction of the publication and are bound closer to the publication than just about any other employee. Most editors want to put their imprint on a publication. Does JA really stop being the editor when he writes a review?

Like many here, I too laude Stereophile's eclectic mix of reviewers and if that is something JA has nurtured long may it continue.....as long as he keeps taking measurements :)
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,201
Likes
16,982
Location
Riverview FL
...as long as he keeps taking measurements

That's the first thing I look at in a review, then the specifications (and price), then the reviewer conclusion, then the rest of the article if still interested (or constipated*).

*I guess that reveals where it is read for the most part, these days... Makes the mag last a month for me...
 

Don Hills

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
708
Likes
464
Location
Wellington, New Zealand
A month? That's a bit more than I cared to learn about your bowel habits.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
That's the first thing I look at in a review, then the specifications (and price), then the reviewer conclusion, then the rest of the article if still interested (or constipated*).

*I guess that reveals where it is read for the most part, these days... Makes the mag last a month for me...

I'm pretty sure "the rest of the article" could be written by a perl script

[Background tableau -- history of audio / history of manufacturer / personal history]
[Review body - music I regularly listen to plus more adjectives about how it's more [insert more adjectives], hearing [more foo] than I never heard before.]
[Comparison to similar or more expensively priced gear.]
[Conclusion - worth auditioning / bargain giant killer / new reference standard]

End
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,392
Location
Seattle Area
The bit about the music always irks me. It is like someone test driving a car and start talking about who makes his shoes, what leather goes into it, etc. We all know the reviewer listened to music. We don't need to see its album art, some silly background about said music, etc.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,789
Location
NYC
[Review body - music I regularly listen to plus more adjectives about how it's more [insert more adjectives], hearing [more foo] than I never heard before.]
The bit about the music always irks me. It is like someone test driving a car and start talking about who makes his shoes, what leather goes into it, etc. We all know the reviewer listened to music. We don't need to see its album art, some silly background about said music, etc.
The point of this is to give the reader the information needed to try to hear the same thing. It means listening to the same recording for the described perception.
Also, I'd say your analogy might be better if the test driver identified the (type of) roads that he drove.
 

Jinjuku

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
1,278
Likes
1,180
The point of this is to give the reader the information needed to try to hear the same thing. It means listening to the same recording for the described perception.
Also, I'd say your analogy might be better if the test driver identified the (type of) roads that he drove.

I would say it's better to have a standardized road test like Car and Driver does with the 60 to stop distance, skid pad, slalom. 0-60, 1/4 mile, measured highway sound (NVH), etc...

I can never replicate the back road driving because I don't have that back road to drive on. But all the above? very doable.

JA at least gets props for getting an Audio Precision unit and taking an objective approach in tandem with subjective evaluation. Too bad Stereophile tolerates reviewers that really don't know what they are talking about like Lavorgna and Plaskin. BTW Lavorgna seems to a touch off as demonstrated by his behavior that left Chris Connaker of Computer Audiophile no choice but to ban Lavorgna. Chris reached out to Michael via email and I can only guess at the profanity laced responses he's received.

In typical Connaker fasion on the after ban exchange "I won't be getting a Christmas card". If anyone knows Chris he's a peacemaker type.
 

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
The point of this is to give the reader the information needed to try to hear the same thing. It means listening to the same recording for the described perception.

If that was really the goal, the same recordings would be used by the same reviewer each time, but that's rarely the case.

And if a publication was serious about standards, they'd use the same recordings across all reviewers, which nobody does.

I sometimes find it indulgent, especially Herb Reichert's recent tendencies to use historic (like nearly 100 year old) blues / bluegrass recordings from the Smithsonian, which may be culturally important, but are terrible fidelity.

Lastly, it gets boring. I usually skim / skip it, because unless I have that specific recording, it means nothing to me.
 
Last edited:

watchnerd

Grand Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
12,449
Likes
10,408
Location
Seattle Area, USA
BTW Lavorgna seems to a touch off as demonstrated by his behavior that left Chris Connaker of Computer Audiophile no choice but to ban Lavorgna. Chris reached out to Michael via email and I can only guess at the profanity laced responses he's received.

Hadn't heard about this...link?
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO
I actually appreciate seeing the music the reviewers use. When skimming reviews I read them in full but rarely, but more often read the technical analysis and music used. I agree with Kal it is helpful to know the reference when reading a subjective review, and moreover it often provides me with new CDs to obtain. The catch is that if I don't like the reviewer's style I am more likely to skip the music used, which no doubt means I miss some good tunes. I do like it when there is a list of music rather than it only being embedded in the review. I also agree with Kal's analogy of the road... If a reviewer says a car handles the curves with speed and grace I want to know if he's on a local interstate highway, a race track, or a winding mountain road.

Whatever - Don
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,298
Location
uk, taunton
When did this become the ‘kick stereophile ‘ thread?

If you don’t think much of a publication and or a individual it serves you much better to just ignore them rather than afford them such attention as we have seen here. Id like also to add those under attack aren’t here to defend themselves and I don’t want them signing up to do battle to that end either.

You don’t like a program you don’t watch it, you don’t like a magazine don’t buy it. Stereophile does have a function that allows you to comment on their website I believe...

Lets please move back to the topic of the thread or at least step away from the present trajectory.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,392
Location
Seattle Area
The point of this is to give the reader the information needed to try to hear the same thing. It means listening to the same recording for the described perception.
Also, I'd say your analogy might be better if the test driver identified the (type of) roads that he drove.
I appreciate that. And I actually consider mentioning the music played a necessity. What I am objecting to is when extraneous information is provided as if to brag about the reviewers knowledge of music. Here is a random example: https://www.soundstagehifi.com/inde...l-music-systems-rost-dac-integrated-amplifier

"With Strayhorn’s “U.M.M.G. (Upper Manhattan Medical Group),” for example, the rhythm section sounded in sync and well organized, and the Hegel delivered the tune’s rhythmic complexities with poise and clarity. Ditto “Drawing Room Blues.” Through the Röst, it was easy to hear how the interplay of Stephen Scott’s piano and Christian McBride’s double bass gently swung the tune with toe-tapping verve and good note-to-note flow, even with no drummer keeping time."​

Why do I need to know who the Piano and double bass players are? And without drummer keeping time???

Take this review style which is quite common online: https://www.audiostream.com/content/wyred-4-sound-dac-2v2-se

There are giant pictures of album art and a number of them. They take far more space than actual equipment and go on and on:

91217wyred4.jpg

"The new release from David Benoit and Marc Antoine So Nice! (24/44.1) brought together Benoit's smooth jazz piano with Antoine's Brazilian guitar to create a wonderfully musical album that the DAC-2v2 SE reproduced beautifully. "​

Do I care in equipment review that this is a new release? Or that this is a wonderful musical album by so and so?

And these are not the most egregious examples. There are some where far more is said about the music than these examples.
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,201
Likes
16,982
Location
Riverview FL
Why do I need to know who the Piano and double bass players are? And without drummer keeping time???

You're kidding, right?
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,201
Likes
16,982
Location
Riverview FL
How is that relevant in a review of an amplifier?

How is it irrelevant if that is what the subjective reviewer was using for test tones?
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,392
Location
Seattle Area
How is it irrelevant if that is what the subjective reviewer was using for test tones?
The name of the players is not something that is stamped into music as to then be evaluated in the context of reviewing hardware. Saying the Piano notes were reproduces this and that way is fine. Saying Joe played the piano is not.

Take this turntable review by Herb: https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams18-amg-giro-turntable

"Remasterings of recordings make me angry—they mess with my memories of the songs I love, especially songs from the 1960s that I played in my bedroom on a cheap Garrard turntable through Lafayette speakers. Like my first girlfriend, these songs permanently entered my psyche and modified my DNA.

When songs I've heard a thousand times are remastered or remixed, they sound wrong and weird to me. They make my inner hard drive skip as I try to figure out what was changed, and why. This is especially true with Beatles reissues.

One day, in high school, the nerdy girl who sat in front of me in math turned around and said, "The Beatles are coming! The Beatles are coming!" I groaned and rolled my eyes.

I didn't like the Beatles. Hipsters like me gave no mind to the British Invasion. I was the right age, but where I grew up, Otis Redding and Wilson Pickett trumped all that Liverpudlian pop. I didn't like the Beatles until they stopped playing stadiums and started making statement albums that merged art, pop music, and light social commentary. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, released in the US on June 2, 1967, was the first Beatles record I bought.

Today, listening to the 50th-anniversary remix and remastering of Sgt. Pepper's (2 LPs, Parlophone PCS 7027), I submitted once again to those mop-top rockers. Guess what? It's déjà vu all over again.

The new edition of Sgt. Pepper's is the remastering I always dreamed of but never thought would actually happen. George Martin's son, Giles Martin, and Abbey Road audio engineer Sam Okell have created this revelatory remix from the original four-track master tapes—revelatory because this reissue eliminates the haze, the hard textures, the questionable stereo of my original US pressing (Capitol SMAS-2653).​


What is all this doing in a turntable review? It just reads like name dropping, bragging, and off-topic filler in a hardware review.
 

Jinjuku

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
1,278
Likes
1,180
When listening to Classical with a 119 piece orchestra I need to know every last name involved including the mascot to properly evaluate what I'm hearing.

Or

Just grip and rip
 
Top Bottom