OP
- Thread Starter
- #121
Trust there is no CE testing, certification or even marking on these units.
-
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!
Ciúnas Audio ISO DAC Teardown and Failed Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
The cells are tagged (spot welded solder tags). His 'insulation' is likely the double sided tape and the anodized coating. Unbelievable.
But at least he could upgrade from his plumber's soldering iron.../snark
(Dang - I found two humor-related opportunities to use this pic so far.)
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
Judging by the images posted, he's not using the fine-tip plumber's iron pic you posted...
Wow.
audio_tony
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Raimei Templar
Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2018
- Messages
- 56
- Likes
- 89
That is awful. Bad measured performance is one thing but that thing is a fire hazard! Thanks for the review Amir!
Does it still use the TI PCM5102 like the old unit? That is a really low rent DAC chip, in a product that he is charging over 400 dollars for he should really be offering a nicer chip at the very least. Certainly not as big of an issue as the fact that its likely to short out and catch on fire but still crappy lol.
I think if your going to spend the money on a exotic dac you should at least get high end components in it. I just bought a IFI zen dac for 129 bucks and its got better components than this thing does. Rough!
Does it still use the TI PCM5102 like the old unit? That is a really low rent DAC chip, in a product that he is charging over 400 dollars for he should really be offering a nicer chip at the very least. Certainly not as big of an issue as the fact that its likely to short out and catch on fire but still crappy lol.
I think if your going to spend the money on a exotic dac you should at least get high end components in it. I just bought a IFI zen dac for 129 bucks and its got better components than this thing does. Rough!
Veri
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2018
- Messages
- 9,598
- Likes
- 12,040
This I suppose. Yet another USB decrapifier.. thing
http://mdac2.lakewestaudio.com/USB_Detox.htm
I like the 'please note NON REFUNDABLE' lol
Eirikur
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2019
- Messages
- 318
- Likes
- 510
Thanks for posting - I just hope it's not your fire hazard in these pictures... the good news is that my own soldering skills seem plenty good for going into the audio business!
This is a USB signal cleaner/reclocker designed by John Westlake specifically for his MDAC design. It was at the time when the Uptone Regen, Jitterbug and others were making waves in digital HiFi. This design was backed up by measurements; 'eye pattern' and such like (they don't mean much to me, I no nothing about electronics). The 'fees' was to crowd fund the design and testing stages (£50).
Back on topic to the ISO-DAC. I do know that measurements are important (I was a research chemist in a past life), but good scientists always allow some time to consider a 'curve ball' and question their principles and not be dogmatic. The ISO-DAC maybe such a 'curve ball'.
Just to add. Doing 'double blind' listening tests in HiFi is very difficult (almost impossible) particularly at home. Also I believe (just a guess) that it takes a fair bit of time to adjust to the sonic signature of a product and unless the difference is glaring obvious it may take weeks.
Also on measurements, I remember reading a HiFi article on the Linn Isobaric speakers back in the 70's where the measurements were really awful and in fact Linn complained and someone re-did the measurements which although better were still poor. But as far as I know they sold very well and still highly regarded by enthusiasts (like me). My point: the final measurement is in the 'eating'.
The 'measurement/experimental repeatability problem' is a serious issue in science. Some estimate upto 50% of all scientific papers may suffer this. Not that I expect an scope or a voltmeter to lie, so this point may not apply on this forum, it was just a general point about holding too closely to scientific literature.
Also on measurements, I remember reading a HiFi article on the Linn Isobaric speakers back in the 70's where the measurements were really awful and in fact Linn complained and someone re-did the measurements which although better were still poor. But as far as I know they sold very well and still highly regarded by enthusiasts (like me). My point: the final measurement is in the 'eating'.
The 'measurement/experimental repeatability problem' is a serious issue in science. Some estimate upto 50% of all scientific papers may suffer this. Not that I expect an scope or a voltmeter to lie, so this point may not apply on this forum, it was just a general point about holding too closely to scientific literature.
Veri
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2018
- Messages
- 9,598
- Likes
- 12,040
The fact of the matter is that in such a volume-controlled proper test, you will not pass an A-B test. You will be guessing, basically.
When you remove the test controls and just listen to them over weeks/months, I'm sure you will develop a "preference" for one. It only proves we are fooled quite easily by pretty designs, high costs and lots of online reviews telling you it is "better" one reason or another.
Restore the proper testing conditions and those differences disappear as if they never existed in the first place....
Last edited:
This is almost certainly not true.
I believed this for years but having settled on a system I was content with quite a few years ago I listened without any changes but nonetheless still felt the system sounded particularly good some days. Had I been changing kit I would almost certainly ascribed this feeling to a new component, but there weren't any.
Audio memory is very short and a bit louder always sounds more dynamic, so the only way to compare items, IME, is carefully level matched to 0.1dB and with instant switch over whilst listening to the same piece of music with the switch over done by somebody else without you knowing.
It is actually trivial to do with DACs using 2 line inputs on a preamp and two digital outputs from a CD transport to the DACs as long as at least one of the DACs can have its output level matched to the other. That is how I did it, with my daughter switching.
All the differences I was sure were there disappeared...
LOL, that's a good one!
.
Actually, I mainly agree with you. My system always sounds better late at night and especially if it is raining outside on a winters evening. Sometimes I quickly stop listening and go do something else, usually in the middle of day. The brain is an emotional organ and knows when and how to get what it needs,
Switching inputs is the traditional 'demo' method (with some unscrupulous vendors adjusting level surreptitiously to the uninitiated) using a short passage of well known music. This, I feel falls into the trap of making 'self-delusion'. The brain wants to make stories; to look for rationale where there may be none (cf Daniel Dennet). However, this method will work for obvious differences in components. But when you have closely matched or subtly different attributes it doesn't.....in my experience off course. HiFi is eminently subjective particularly above the budget domain and bringing objectivity to it is a noble cause. I guess this is the point of this forum.
Similar threads
