I don't recall that Ray.
Repercussions of a youth mis-spent?I don't recall that Ray.
I don't recall that Ray.
Repercussions of a youth mis-spent?
I still believe that most everything I need to know about electronics is in the pages of this book. Plenty of design schematics in the back pages too. Kind of like a BibleCosmic Rays knocking atoms out of the crystalline structure, things like that.
On the dac:
Those yellow boxes are relays. Usually a relay is a sign of higher quality design as opposed to using electronic switches that may have more leakage. But the brand of those relays raises eyebrows. It is Huigang. A search shows no company and only ebay parts.
View attachment 4084
None of the major distributors (Mouser, Digikey, Arrow, etc.) carry the brand. Is it going to get noisy sooner? Stop working? Who knows.
The rest does look clean and is a step up from China special products but ultimately I can't give it a thumbs up based on what my antenna picks up.
Long ago, like, in the sixties, I seem to remember folks thinking transistors would, due to the physics of the junctions, have a life of about 20 years. Admittedly, there were no 20 year old transistors then for reference.
What happened to that?
My RCA Victor 8 Transistor 1963 pocket radio that I won for my bicycling skills at the local park still works after 53 years.
There are countless devices that have died because of Chinese-special caps.
Feel free to 'bring the SCIENCE ' KeithSo, I have kept quiet for a few days on this thread. None of you have spotted the elephant in the room? And you call yourselves "Audio SCIENCE Review"???
I beg to differ with you on that Thomas. We currently only have one member that consistently expounds audiophool delusional ideals. The rest are at least leaning to a objective/scientific manner of SQ evaluation.Strictly speaking there is not much true scientific thinking ( mentality) at ASR.. But we do our best, I blame amir.. Should of called it BAWATG ( bitter audiophiles with axe to grind)
So, I have kept quiet for a few days on this thread. None of you have spotted the elephant in the room? And you call yourselves "Audio SCIENCE Review"???
I beg to differ with you on that Thomas. We currently only have one member that consistently expounds audiophool delusional ideals. The rest are at least leaning to a objective/scientific manner of SQ evaluation.
Cheers