• 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!

Audio-gd R7HE vs Holo May vs Denafrips Terminator

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Ok...

The good thing about objective datas is: there's not that much room for personal opinion:

- Opinion: You can like your Audio-GD DAC.

- Proved fact: Audio-GD products show no sign of decent engineneering, plus, do lie with their published graph and at last ask hundreds of dollars for their units

So, components for components, I'm not sure. But if you're interested in performance alone (that could matter in Audio), yes, Audio-GD is a scam.

I still find that a subjective assessment; Audio GD DAC's weren't built or designed to measure well in terms of THD etc. - they use zero negative feedback, class A circuits and discrete output stages - all of that in combination will not measure well. They were designed to produce a certain type of sound, and defined in those terms they are VERY well engineered. Also, you're conflating measurements with performance, and I don't agree.

Even my lowly Topping D10 will outperform any of my Audio GD DAC's in terms of measurements, no if's or but's about it, Amir's done the measurements. However in terms of actual performance, compared to the Audio GD the D10 sounds like crap - not even close. And I really don't care which DAC comes out on top, or if it measures good or bad - I already own a whole bunch, and will own a lot more in the future, all I'm looking for is the subjectively 'best sound', and I honestly don't care how a DAC is designed as long as it sounds good.
 

Ilkless

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 26, 2019
Messages
1,757
Likes
3,438
Location
Singapore
I still find that a subjective assessment; Audio GD DAC's weren't built or designed to measure well in terms of THD etc. - they use zero negative feedback, class A circuits and discrete output stages - all of that in combination will not measure well. They were designed to produce a certain type of sound, and defined in those terms they are VERY well engineered. Also, you're conflating measurements with performance, and I don't agree.

Even my lowly Topping D10 will outperform any of my Audio GD DAC's in terms of measurements, no if's or but's about it, Amir's done the measurements. However in terms of actual performance, compared to the Audio GD the D10 sounds like crap - not even close. And I really don't care which DAC comes out on top, or if it measures good or bad - I already own a whole bunch, and will own a lot more in the future, all I'm looking for is the subjectively 'best sound', and I honestly don't care how a DAC is designed as long as it sounds good.

An assessment arrived at without reasonably reducing confounding variables such as awareness of the brand ethos and other sighted biases, as well as volume matching, a topic comprehensively covered by Zielinski and Rumsey in a literature review. Furthermore, the composite result of these circuitry choices is entirely captured by the electrical signal output into the line stage/power amp, ultimately into the speakers. We can measure these electrical signals and acoustic output (moving air) exhaustively below all known human thresholds (and there is much on this forum about worst-case thresholds). The broad mechanisms of human auditory perception that any such differences would excite are known (notwithstanding minor details and complex interactions that are not pertinent). For instance, the broad mechanism of spatial audio perception are known to be a combination of HRTF at each ear and interaural effects. Any output change caused by the mere substitution of, say, a Topping for an Audio-GD, that does not engage these mechanisms cannot be said to induce such a change. To say so is to arrogate that known physiological fact does not apply to you.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2018
Messages
76
Likes
58
I still find that a subjective assessment; Audio GD DAC's weren't built or designed to measure well in terms of THD etc. - they use zero negative feedback, class A circuits and discrete output stages - all of that in combination will not measure well. They were designed to produce a certain type of sound, and defined in those terms they are VERY well engineered. Also, you're conflating measurements with performance, and I don't agree.
more like "i bought them and i can't stand seeing that i bought some ****** equipment so i'm convincing myself that they're good using arguments with no objective validation"

it's okay to like them but you can't deny the reality that they suck as products
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
An assessment arrived at without reasonably reducing confounding variables such as awareness of the brand ethos and other sighted biases, as well as volume matching, a topic comprehensively covered by Zielinski and Rumsey in a literature review. Furthermore, the composite result of these circuitry choices is entirely captured by the electrical signal output into the line stage/power amp, ultimately into the speakers. We can measure these electrical signals and acoustic output (moving air) exhaustively below all known human thresholds (and there is much on this forum about worst-case thresholds). The broad mechanisms of human auditory perception that any such differences would excite are known (notwithstanding minor details and complex interactions that are not pertinent). For instance, the broad mechanism of spatial audio perception are known to be a combination of HRTF at each ear and interaural effects. Any output change caused by the mere substitution of, say, a Topping for an Audio-GD, that does not engage these mechanisms cannot be said to induce such a change. To say so is to arrogate that known physiological fact does not apply to you.

I have not a clue as to what you're trying to say here : ) Beyond the writings of Zielinski and Rumsey, you should strive to comprehend the implicit wisdom of TL;DR.
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
more like "i bought them and i can't stand seeing that i bought some ****** equipment so i'm convincing myself that they're good using arguments with no objective validation"

it's okay to like them but you can't deny the reality that they suck as products

Hah, not so simple - I'm loaded, so buying things that turn out to be crap don't really concern or bother me. As it happens, the Audio GD don't fall into that category : )
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,985
Location
Riverview FL

VintageFlanker

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,941
Likes
19,694
Location
Paris
Also, you're conflating measurements with performance, and I don't agree.
You don't need to agree. Your agreement won't change the definition of transparency.;)
I already own a whole bunch, and will own a lot more in the future, all I'm looking for is the subjectively 'best sound', and I honestly don't care how a DAC is designed as long as it sounds good.
I think just about any active member here also own(ed) a whole bunch of DAC. That doesn't bring much more weight to any subjective assumption, I regret.

I won't writte again what you can find few post ahead, so:
First, if you're happy with your AGD DACs, I see nothing wrong about that. Your money, your choices.

But... You can't say "the R8 sounds more like music" since it's basically... not the case at all. I believe differences between DACs may be audible. I also think that if it's the case, it does mean that one DAC is too colored (so not reliable at all), once the other is simply transparent. In that case, the R8 shows terrible results once measured. Bad measurements mean nothing but wrong fidelity. This is as simple as that. Music is music. It does need fidelity (or transparency) to sound exactly as it is. A DAC full of distortion, with a messed-up linearity, can't sound like music is intended to be reproduced. It simply can't.

In the same order of idea: no, there's no DAC which pair well with a system and not with another. That is an absolute audiophile myth. A good DAC will be a good pairing with any system. A bad one won't. Period.

If you knew the forum, you would know that you there's a tons of people before, who registered here to say the same things over and over: "Measurements don't tell the whole story", "I trust my ears, not graphs", "I'm in audio for decades, I know what I'm talking about"... And the story always ends the same way:
- "Did you perform any matched-level double blind test listening?"
- "No need to, the differences are so obvious".


At last, there's a post I love, from @RayDunzl, who resumes the entire Subjectivism Vs Objectivism standoff:

" So...

If somebody says "this measures better than that" you can, perhaps, point to data.

If somebody says "this sounds better than that" - then what?

Yes it does!
No it doesn't!
Does!
Doesn't!


Take a vote?
??? "

Edit:
I'm loaded, so buying things that turn out to be crap don't really concern or bother me.
:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
 
Last edited:

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Well, sometimes it works out...

Apologies, not a clue as to who Mugsey Bogue is, or the Hornets - some sports thing, I gathered that : )
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
You don't need to agree. Your agreement won't change the definition of transparency.;)

At last, there's a post I love, from @RayDunzl, who resumes the entire Subjectivism Vs Objectivism standoff:

" So...

If somebody says "this measures better than that" you can, perhaps, point to data.

If somebody says "this sounds better than that" - then what?

Yes it does!
No it doesn't!
Does!
Doesn't!


Take a vote?
??? "

I think that's a legitimate point - measurements are objective, sound perception is subjective - end of story, no need for a vote. I don't like clowns, or Trumpets - particularly Clowns with Trumpets - if a Trumpet measures well, does that mean I have to like it?
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,985
Location
Riverview FL
Apologies, not a clue as to who Mugsey Bogue is, or the Hornets

Me neither, until I looked for "Shortest NBA player".

Figuring that would be "bad measurement", but likely to have "good performance", and he did exhibit that.

I still have no idea where the Hornets are based. (turns out to be Charlotte NC upon further reading)
 
Last edited:

ReaderZ

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 14, 2020
Messages
618
Likes
414
BTW Still remember when they first started being more or less of one man operation and making headphone amps and sending them to someone on head-fi and I saw the review. Think that was 2004? They seems more focused on digital staff now, bad move IMHO.
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Me neither, until I looked for "Shortest NBA player".

Figuring that would be "bad measurement", but likely to have "good performance", and he did exhibit that.

I still have no idea where the Hornets are based. (turns out to be Charlotte NC upon further reading)

I should get out more : ) Thanks for clarifying. And, for everyone interested - I'm not on some mission to 'defend' Audio GD, I'm simply saying that if someone's looking for a certain type of 'colored' sound, and that someone doesn't care about measurements, the Audio GD DAC's are certainly a viable option.
 

Alfegutt

New Member
Joined
May 11, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
3
Hmmmm.... perhaps someone forgot that this is a Science" based audio forum. There are loads of other places where subjective audio impressions are more welcomed i guess.

So is there a chance that the expensive esoteric DAC with flawed measurements can sound good?
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
So is there a chance that the expensive esoteric DAC with flawed measurements can sound good?

Most certainly, because our pretty flawed hearing/brain tells us so.
When this or that 'trusted' reviewer says this or that sounds better or believe it sounds better it is time for the upgrade again.

It also works the other way around. When something measures good and one believes that is all that is needed then it will sound good as well.
The next better measuring DAC of course will be preferred and the upgrade path is taken.

I am happy with what I already own so am free of upgraditis (for DAC/amps) as this is something that was solved a long time ago already.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,699
Hmmmm.... perhaps someone forgot that this is a Science" based audio forum. There are loads of other places where subjective audio impressions are more welcomed i guess.

So is there a chance that the expensive esoteric DAC with flawed measurements can sound good?

Im sure this has been asked/ discussed elsewhere , but I've been mulling on this for a while. Some points I have gleaned from my time here, lets call them facts.

1. Some DACS measure better than others
2. In the modern market, building and buying an audibly transparent DAC is not an issue and indeed, unless broken, most modern DACs are just that, even if measure relatively "badly".
3. Some people claim to prefer the sound of "badly" measuring DACS to objectively "better" DACS- some also say they sound better even if they don't measure better.
4. Hence, there are lots of discussions like this one

Now, my question is this. In a post lockdown world , couldnt we arrange a battle of the DACs- maybe tacked on to some trade event/ Canjam etc. level matched double blind test. All attendees invited to try, bring their own music etc.Lets say the Topping D90 or similar TOTL "good" DAC Vs a badly (would have to be very badly) measuring DAC- to the point ASR folks would say no longer transparent. A TotalDac or similar. Probably dont tell folks what the DACs are at all during the duration.

Ask enough people which they prefer.

I think the consensus here is that people would be in effect guessing- so the results should be split. But what if a significant majority preferred the "bad" DAC?
 

Human Bass

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
653
Likes
660
Huh? What? I just bought two Audio GD DAC's, and they're fantastic, really don't know how you would define the company or their products as a 'scam'.
Audio-gd posts false measurements on their official page, so thats scam. Funny how their supporters say they dont need to measure remotly well to sound good, and yet Audio-gd feels the need to lie about having great measurements.
 
Last edited:

VintageFlanker

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,941
Likes
19,694
Location
Paris
Audio-gd posts false measurements on their official page, so thats scam. Funny how their supporters say they dont need to measure remotly well to sound good, and yet Audio-gd feels the need to lie about having great measurements.
Couldn't agree more.

Here's what AGD claim about their own DACs:

"Pros and cons of R-2R DAC :
Advantages:
1.R-2R will not convert the clock signal into the output signal.
2. R-2R is not sensitive to jitter while Delta-Sigma D/A is much more sensitive to jitter.
(Wrong)
3. The output signal is much more precise compared to Delta-Sigma D/A . (Wrong)
Weaknesses:
1.THD today is extremely good with Sigma Delta chips; R2R ladders are good too but not as good." (Wrong again: Unacceptable THD in both cases).

If we're talking about their DACs specificly, I see four sentences, three lies...:rolleyes: But for now, we're beating a dead horse...
 
Last edited:

beefkabob

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
1,636
Likes
2,074
Esoteric designs and random distortions are on sale! I bought a propane toaster just because I heard it was good. Sure it burns the toast, but I like burnt toast. I prefer to do everything the hard way, have a lower quality outcome, and pay more for the experience. My next car will run on avgas. It will pollute a lot and cause brain damage, but I'll feel special.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
60
Likes
34
Location
Singapore
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/old-king-of-r2r-dac-is-dead-denafrips-terminator-plus-terminator-arr...

https://redirect.viglink.com/?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_159365378073310&key=1e99669452acedd7650a...

Hi,

While is usd2k more than the standard Denafrip that I previously owned, the improvement of Terminator-Plus is much more than any upgrade in power cords, interconnects, speaker cables, power regenerator etc. can do for my system.

I had the luxury of having the demo unit for 1 week but it only took the usual warm up of about an hour to know that I wanted it.

In comparison, the standard Terminator sounds veiled which I would have never thought is an adjective to describe it.

Midbass and bass are tighter which makes all genres more tuneful or I dare say more obvious PRAT that makes my system more musical and I feel more of the reported 23hz of my Salon 2 speakers.

Highs and midranges together with midbass and bass notes are easier to be differentiated and simply "pops" ... not sure if due to yet another 3db improvement in the SNR ratio at now 127db and 137 dynamic range.

Cheers.

Richard
 
Last edited:

beefkabob

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 18, 2019
Messages
1,636
Likes
2,074
47023a.jpg
 
Top Bottom