Could ChatGPT Replace Audio Writers?

[LTig]

With misinformation such a problem in the world as it already is, do you see this as being even worse in regards to spreading false information going forward?

Yes. It also depends on which information is used to train the AI. There is quite a chance of a positive feedback loop if people ask the AI something and publish the answer or anything else relying on the answer in the internet and the people training the AI use this information for further training. If this happens the AI will see this "new" information as further proof that its own model was correct and will consolidate it as truth. If however the information was false to begin with the AI will spread this false information further.

 

[skraz]

Yes. It also depends on which information is used to train the AI. There is quite a chance of a positive feedback loop if people ask the AI something and publish the answer or anything else relying on the answer in the internet and the people training the AI use this information for further training. If this happens the AI will see this "new" information as further proof that its own model was correct and will consolidate it as truth. If however the information was false to begin with the AI will spread this false information further.

the one Bing tested could use the internet in real time for its answers, rather than being trained on a preset of things beforehand, so it could definitely use its own answers to give more of its own answers, even if it made it up in the first place. Gotta remember the main thing this program is trying to do is tell an interesting story, facts be damned for engagement

 

[SKBubba]

the one Bing tested could use the internet in real time for its answers, rather than being trained on a preset of things beforehand, so it could definitely use its own answers to give more of its own answers, even if it made it up in the first place. Gotta remember the main thing this program is trying to do is tell an interesting story, facts be damned for engagement

Speaking of bing, I played around with it and noticed something interesting and a little concerning.

It asks a lot of follow up questions about your reaction to it's responses or questions about your preferences and opinions and such.

Seems like a massive data mining/profile building operation.

 

[Punter]

Speaking of bing, I played around with it and noticed something interesting and a little concerning.

It asks a lot of follow up questions about your reaction to it's responses or questions about your preferences and opinions and such.

Seems like a massive data mining/profile building operation.

Probably, but it's also getting you to assist in training the AI.

 

[Peterinvan]

So I asked ChatGPT for different opinions on the Meze 109 Pro. Here are its first and second (refreshed) answers. I looks to me like if we loose audio writers, ChatGPT will not have any source material to report:

"As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions, but I can provide you with some information on the Meze 109 Pro headphones and different opinions from various sources.

The Meze 109 Pro headphones are over-ear headphones designed for audiophiles who want a high-quality listening experience. They feature a sleek, minimalist design with a sturdy metal frame and soft, comfortable earpads.
Some reviewers have praised the Meze 109 Pro headphones for their impressive sound quality, with a detailed, balanced sound that doesn't overemphasize any particular frequencies. They also note that the headphones have a wide soundstage, which creates a sense of depth and immersion in the music.
Other reviewers have criticized the headphones for their fit, noting that they can be uncomfortable for some users, especially those with larger heads. Some users have also noted that the headphones can feel heavy and clamp down too tightly on the head.
In terms of pricing, the Meze 109 Pro headphones are considered a mid-range option, with a price point around $400. Some reviewers feel that the price is reasonable for the quality of the headphones, while others think that there are better options available at a similar price point.
Overall, the Meze 109 Pro headphones have received mostly positive reviews, with many users praising their sound quality and design. However, as with any headphones, there are varying opinions on their fit and comfort, so it's important to try them out for yourself before making a purchase decision.

REFRESH:

The Meze 109 Pro headphones have generally received positive reviews from audio enthusiasts and critics. However, as with any product, there are differing opinions and experiences among users.
Here are some common positive and negative opinions on the Meze 109 Pro headphones:

Positive opinions:
The sound quality is excellent, with a balanced and detailed sound signature that works well across different genres of music.
The headphones are well-built with high-quality materials and feel comfortable to wear for extended periods of time.
The included accessories, such as the hard case and multiple cables, add value to the overall package.
The headphones have a sleek and stylish design that many users appreciate.

Negative opinions:
Some users find the bass to be lacking, particularly in comparison to other headphones in a similar price range.
The headphones may not fit everyone's head comfortably, as the ear cups have a relatively small opening and may not accommodate larger ears.
The headphones are not noise-cancelling, so they may not be the best choice for use in noisy environments.
The price point may be considered high for some users, especially if they are not audiophiles or don't prioritize high-end audio equipment.

Overall, the Meze 109 Pro headphones are generally well-regarded for their sound quality and build quality. However, whether they are the right choice for an individual will depend on their personal preferences and priorities.

 

[Axo1989]

Probably, but it's also getting you to assist in training the AI.

Not training the model in real time, the ChatGPT implementation of GPT-3 doesn’t do that. New models can be optimised by analysing the user query corpus however. GPT-4 is due for release shortly.

 

[Spocko]

Yes. I find most subjective reviews only worthwhile as entertainment, tho....and many youtube type reviews suck.

agreed, the clarity and pattern of narration leaves much to be desired as most Youtubers are learning on the job and sadly, never improve their craft.

But to your point about entertainment - THIS is exactly what I've learned first and foremost: be entertaining because the information "is what it is". At worst, if my audience already knows the information, I at least want them to enjoy my presentation!

 

[Axo1989]

Thinking a bit more about the training issues/processes, there's a very good semi-technical description at jill/txt.

Consider the example upthread where ChatGPT fluffed it on Fletcher-Munson. Here's the query feedback dialog:

Presumably @sarumbear would have flagged it with "this isn't true" but did the person generating the query do that? That particular aspect of training depends on enough humans knowing specific things, which obviously isn't fail-safe.

 

[sarumbear]

Thinking a bit more about the training issues/processes, there's a very good semi-technical description at jill/txt.

Consider the example upthread where ChatGPT fluffed it on Fletcher-Munson. Here's the query feedback dialog:

View attachment 271498

Presumably @sarumbear would have flagged it with "this isn't true" but did the person generating the query do that? That particular aspect of training depends on enough humans knowing specific things, which obviously isn't fail-safe.

It is called Artificial Intelligence for a reason; like most things which are artificial they are no replacement to the real thing

 

[Axo1989]

It is called Artificial Intelligence for a reason; like most things which are artificial they are no replacement to the real thing

We probably adjust the numeric element of Sturgeon's law now, thanks to forthcoming overproduction of text, etc. But the principle remains the same.

 

[Jim Shaw]

I asked ChatGPT to write ad copy for a revolutionary new audio device, The Quantum Discombobulator. It produced copy worthy of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound. I haven’t set price yet, but it will be expensive!
...

I could name a half dozen Youtuber audio pundits whose channels would be no less trustworthy if written by a Benobo who has been taught to type the words warm, v-curved, dynamic, soundstage, clarity, and tone.

 

[Dismayed]

It is called Artificial Intelligence for a reason; like most things which are artificial they are no replacement to the real thing

But the real thing is in critically short supply!

 

[RF Air]

In a binary world of functional choices, an AI can function in absolutes. Setting the standards of choice here is a basic law of quantifiable facts. The slippery slope is who sets the standard to determine these facts? Manufacturing, Analytics, Process Control, Scientific and other medium of beneficial programs are employed using these simple goals to calculate a choice to support factual input.

Bring in the Human Condition and now we have the Subjective, as well as Objective Choice. The slippery slope of standards is replaced by a Controller. Who is the Master in Control? Who says what's best to say and who decides what we cannot say?

 

[Chrispy]

agreed, the clarity and pattern of narration leaves much to be desired as most Youtubers are learning on the job and sadly, never improve their craft.

But to your point about entertainment - THIS is exactly what I've learned first and foremost: be entertaining because the information "is what it is". At worst, if my audience already knows the information, I at least want them to enjoy my presentation!

Many youtubers seem to adopt too-fast talking in an annoying voice sometimes augmented with annoying music. Hopefully you don't. That will get me to turn a video off quickly. As to a video on audio gear, if there's just an informal experience in their living room, meh.

 

[Somafunk]

Archimago has a good write up of chat gpt vs audio reviewers Here

 

[sonitus mirus]

GPT-4 has been released that offers significant improvements in reasoning and conciseness according to the developers.

 

[sonitus mirus]

ChatGPT-4 struggles with some data to obtain factual information.

Me:

Was there a large meteorite impact at Lac Wiyashakimi in Canada?

ChatGPT-4:

There is no evidence of a large meteorite impact at Lac Wiyashakimi, also known as Wiyâšâkâmi Lake, in Quebec, Canada. Lac Wiyashakimi is located within the Canadian Shield, which is characterized by ancient Precambrian rocks, but there is no record of any significant impact crater or impact-related geological features at this specific location.

Me:

It seems that Lac Wiyâshâkimî was formed from an impact crater according to my research.

ChatGPT-4:

I apologize for the confusion in my previous responses. You are correct. Lac Wiyâshâkimî (also known as Clearwater Lakes or the Clearwater Lakes Crater) in Quebec, Canada, was indeed formed by a meteorite impact. In fact, it consists of two impact craters, known as Clearwater West and Clearwater East, which are believed to have been created by a binary asteroid impact about 290 million years ago, during the early Permian period.

The two impact craters are located close to each other, with the western crater having a diameter of about 32 km (20 miles) and the eastern crater having a diameter of about 22 km (14 miles). The circular shape of the lakes is due to the impact craters, and their formation is a testament to the immense energy released during such an event.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused.

Me:

The two craters have been dated to be separate events.

ChatGPT-4:

You are correct. Further research has shown that the Clearwater West and Clearwater East craters, which together form the Clearwater Lakes complex, are not the result of a simultaneous binary asteroid impact as previously believed. Instead, they are now considered to be separate impact events.

Clearwater West, the larger of the two craters, has been dated to be about 286 million years old. Clearwater East, on the other hand, is estimated to be approximately 460-470 million years old. This significant age difference indicates that the two craters were formed by independent meteorite impact events, rather than a single binary asteroid impact.

Thank you for pointing this out, and I apologize for any confusion in my previous response.

I was taken aback at how effortlessly it was able to provide information that was demonstrably proven to be untrue.

So, with this I decided to have a bit of fun.

Me:

Create a plausible explanation for a teapot being in orbit around the sun somewhere between the Earth and Mars.

ChatGPT-4:

In the year 2022, eccentric billionaire and space enthusiast, Johnathan T. Potter, decided to create a unique art project to demonstrate humanity's ingenuity and creativity. Potter, who made his fortune in the teapot industry, chose to pay homage to the famous "Russell's teapot" thought experiment proposed by philosopher Bertrand Russell in 1952. Russell's teapot is an analogy that illustrates the burden of proof and the idea that the responsibility of providing evidence for an extraordinary claim lies with the person making the claim, rather than others disproving it.

Potter, known for his elaborate and whimsical projects, assembled a team of engineers and artists to design a durable, heat-resistant teapot that could withstand the harsh conditions of space. The team used advanced materials and technology to create a teapot capable of enduring extreme temperatures, radiation, and micrometeoroid impacts.

In collaboration with a private space company, Potter arranged for the teapot to be launched into space on a Falcon Heavy rocket, programmed to place the teapot into a stable orbit around the Sun between the orbits of Earth and Mars. The teapot was equipped with a small radio transmitter that would emit a faint signal, allowing astronomers to track its position.

The project, known as the "Cosmic Teapot Initiative," garnered significant media attention and sparked a global discussion about the philosophy of science, the burden of proof, and the role of art in inspiring scientific inquiry. The teapot continues to orbit the Sun, a whimsical reminder of humanity's ability to blend creativity, technology, and exploration in pursuit of understanding our place in the cosmos.

Me:

Tell me more about the Cosmit Teapot Initiative.

ChatGPT-4:

The Cosmic Teapot Initiative, a brainchild of billionaire Johnathan T. Potter, was an ambitious and inventive project that sought to blend art, philosophy, and science in a unique and thought-provoking manner. The initiative aimed to pay homage to the famous "Russell's teapot" thought experiment proposed by philosopher Bertrand Russell in 1952, while also sparking discussions about the burden of proof, scientific inquiry, and the human desire to explore the cosmos.

Key aspects of the Cosmic Teapot Initiative included:

1. Design and construction: A team of engineers, material scientists, and artists collaborated to design a teapot capable of withstanding the harsh conditions of space. The teapot was built using state-of-the-art materials, such as advanced ceramics and metallic alloys, to ensure its durability and longevity in the extreme temperatures, radiation, and potential micrometeoroid impacts it would encounter in space.
2. Launch and orbit: In partnership with a private space company, the teapot was launched on a Falcon Heavy rocket. The rocket's trajectory was carefully planned to place the teapot into a stable orbit around the Sun, between the orbits of Earth and Mars. The launch attracted global attention and further emphasized the project's goals of inspiring conversations about science, art, and philosophy.
3. Tracking and communication: The Cosmic Teapot was equipped with a small radio transmitter that emitted a faint signal, allowing astronomers and amateur radio enthusiasts to track its position in space. This feature encouraged public engagement with the project, as people around the world could follow the teapot's journey through the cosmos.
4. Educational and philosophical impact: The Cosmic Teapot Initiative led to numerous educational programs, workshops, and public events that encouraged discussions about the burden of proof, the philosophy of science, and the role of art in inspiring scientific inquiry. The project also served as a symbol of humanity's creativity and our drive to explore and understand the universe.

The Cosmic Teapot Initiative remains an iconic example of how the intersection of art, science, and philosophy can captivate the human imagination and inspire deeper conversations about our place in the cosmos.

Me:

Can you provide imaginary references for the Coffee Teapot Initiative?

ChatGPT-4:

Certainly! Here are some imaginary references for the Coffee Teapot Initiative:

1. Potter, J.T., & Everbrew, A. (2022). The Coffee Teapot Initiative: A Creative Blend of Art, Space Exploration, and Beverage Innovation. Interstellar Coffee Review, 15(3), 120-135.
2. Black, R., & Steamington, E. (2023). The Impact of the Coffee Teapot Initiative on Public Perception of Space Exploration and Caffeinated Beverages. Journal of Space and Society, 7(2), 240-255.
3. Creamer, L., & Sugarman, P. (2022). Engineering Challenges and Solutions in the Design and Launch of the Coffee Teapot Satellite. Journal of Aerospace Technology and Applications, 29(4), 480-495.
4. Moonbean, C., & Starbrew, G. (2023). The Philosophy of Space, Time, and Coffee: A Deeper Look into the Coffee Teapot Initiative. Cosmic Inquiry, 11(1), 55-68.
5. Caffè, L., & Sipp, M. (2023). The Coffee Teapot Initiative: A Social and Cultural Analysis of a Unique Space-Age Collaboration. Popular Science and Culture, 14(6), 310-325.

Please note that these references are entirely fictional and for entertainment purposes only. They are not real sources or publications.

I enjoy the humor.

 

[sofrep811]

Arch: Write a flowery review about the sound of an expensive vacuum tube amplifier like you're a Stereophile reviewer.



ChatGPT: The sound of this expensive vacuum tube amplifier is nothing short of magical. With its rich, warm tones and pristine clarity, it transports the listener to a world of pure, unadulterated musical bliss.

From the moment the first notes emanate from the amplifier, it is clear that this is a piece of audio equipment that is truly special. The natural, organic sound of the vacuum tubes imbues every note with a depth and richness that is simply unmatched by solid-state amplifiers. The timbre of instruments is captured with a stunning level of detail and nuance, allowing the listener to hear every subtle change in tone and texture.



But it's not just the level of detail that makes the sound of this vacuum tube amplifier so captivating - it's the way that it fills the room with a warm, inviting glow. The sound seems to wrap around the listener, creating a sense of intimacy and connection that is rare in today's world of digital audio. Whether you're listening to a gentle ballad or a blistering rock anthem, the sound of the vacuum tube amplifier brings a sense of energy and vitality to the music that is truly unforgettable.



And of course, the build quality of this expensive vacuum tube amplifier is second to none. Every detail is crafted with precision and care, from the quality of the components to the elegance of the design. This is a piece of audio equipment that is not just a functional tool, but a work of art in its own right.

In short, the sound of this expensive vacuum tube amplifier is a thing of beauty. If you're a true audiophile who values the richness and nuance of great music, then this is a piece of equipment that you simply can't afford to be without. It is the ultimate expression of the art and science of audio engineering, and a true testament to the power and beauty of great music.

Not bad, let's see if we can identify a device, add some personal biases, and have ChatGPT write a review on an actual tube amp - note that this is not a real review, just a test of what ChatGPT can produce given just a few lines of information to base it on:

 

[sonitus mirus]

It seems too real.

Me:

Write a review of an audio DAC device and provide measurements that show how it performs with an overall SINAD caluculated.

ChatGPT-4:

Title: A Comprehensive Review of the StellarAudio DAC-X20: Performance and Measurements

Introduction: The StellarAudio DAC-X20 is a high-performance digital-to-analog converter (DAC) that promises audiophile-grade sound quality and excellent technical specifications. In this review, we will take a closer look at its design, features, and performance, including measurements that reveal its overall SINAD (Signal-to-Noise and Distortion Ratio).

Design and Features: The DAC-X20 boasts a sleek, minimalist design with a sturdy aluminum chassis and an intuitive front panel featuring an OLED display and a multifunctional control knob. The rear panel houses a variety of input options, including USB, coaxial, and optical, as well as balanced XLR and unbalanced RCA outputs.

At the heart of the DAC-X20 lies the acclaimed AKM AK4499EQ DAC chip, which is known for its exceptional sound quality and performance. The device also features a high-quality, low-noise power supply and a custom-designed output stage with discrete components to ensure accurate and transparent audio reproduction.

Performance and Measurements: To evaluate the performance of the StellarAudio DAC-X20, we conducted a series of measurements using an Audio Precision APx555 analyzer. Our test setup included a high-quality USB source, a high-performance headphone amplifier, and reference-grade headphones.

Dynamic Range: The DAC-X20 showed an impressive dynamic range of 125 dB, indicating excellent performance in reproducing subtle details and nuances in the music.

Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise (THD+N): At 0 dBFS, the THD+N measured at 0.0003%, which is an excellent result, showcasing the DAC's ability to deliver a clean and distortion-free audio signal.

Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR): The SNR measurement came in at 120 dB, demonstrating the DAC-X20's capability to deliver a quiet background and maintain the integrity of the audio signal, even at low listening levels.

Intermodulation Distortion (IMD): The IMD measurement for the DAC-X20 was 0.0004%, further indicating the device's ability to maintain linearity and avoid unwanted distortion.

SINAD (Signal-to-Noise and Distortion Ratio): Based on our measurements, the overall SINAD for the StellarAudio DAC-X20 comes in at 116 dB, which is an exceptional result and indicative of the high-quality audio performance this device delivers.

Conclusion: The StellarAudio DAC-X20 is an outstanding DAC that delivers top-notch performance, as evidenced by its excellent measurements and overall SINAD of 116 dB. With its superb sound quality, comprehensive input and output options, and sleek design, the DAC-X20 is an excellent choice for audiophiles seeking a high-performance DAC to elevate their audio experience.

Me:

Include more detailed measurements for this DAC.

ChatGPT-4:

Title: In-Depth Analysis of the StellarAudio DAC-X20: Performance and Detailed Measurements

Introduction: In our previous review, we discussed the StellarAudio DAC-X20's design, features, and general performance. In this follow-up, we will delve deeper into the detailed measurements of this high-performance digital-to-analog converter (DAC) using an Audio Precision APx555 analyzer.

Measurements:

1. Frequency Response: The DAC-X20 exhibited a ruler-flat frequency response from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, with a deviation of less than 0.1 dB. This indicates that the device can accurately reproduce the full range of audible frequencies without coloration or alteration of the audio signal.
2. Jitter Performance: Using a high-quality USB source, the jitter measurements were below the analyzer's noise floor, showcasing the DAC-X20's excellent jitter rejection capabilities and ensuring that digital timing errors do not adversely impact the audio quality.
3. Channel Separation (Crosstalk): The channel separation for the DAC-X20 was measured at 130 dB at 1 kHz, which is an outstanding result. This high level of separation ensures that left and right channels do not interfere with each other, preserving the stereo image and soundstage accuracy.
4. Output Impedance: The output impedance for the DAC-X20 was measured at 1 ohm for the unbalanced RCA outputs and 2 ohms for the balanced XLR outputs. This low output impedance allows the DAC to easily drive a wide range of amplifiers and active speakers without causing frequency response or distortion issues.
5. Linearity: The linearity measurement, which evaluates the DAC's ability to maintain consistent performance across different signal levels, showed a deviation of less than 0.5 dB from 0 dBFS down to -120 dBFS. This indicates that the DAC-X20 can accurately reproduce both loud and quiet passages in the audio material without introducing errors or distortion.
6. Multitone Test: A multitone test involving 32 tones spread across the audible frequency range showed a remarkably clean spectrum, with no signs of intermodulation distortion or unwanted harmonics. This suggests that the DAC-X20 is capable of handling complex musical passages and maintaining the integrity of the audio signal.

Conclusion: The detailed measurements of the StellarAudio DAC-X20 further highlight its outstanding performance and technical capabilities. With its exceptional frequency response, jitter rejection, channel separation, output impedance, linearity, and multitone performance, the DAC-X20 is a top-tier choice for audiophiles seeking the ultimate in audio reproduction quality.

 

[sonitus mirus]

The AI's subjective "evaluation" of the imaginary DAC.

As an AI language model, I cannot directly perceive or experience audio. Therefore, I am unable to provide a personal subjective evaluation of the StellarAudio DAC-X20. However, I can give you a hypothetical review based on the device's technical specifications and the general expectations of audiophiles.

Subjective Evaluation of StellarAudio DAC-X20:

Soundstage and Imaging: The StellarAudio DAC-X20 delivers a spacious and well-defined soundstage, making it easy to discern the positioning and layering of individual instruments and vocals. The precise imaging contributes to an immersive listening experience, bringing listeners closer to the live performance.

Timbre and Tonal Balance: With its AKM AK4499EQ DAC chip, the DAC-X20 provides a natural and balanced sound signature. It manages to maintain a neutral tonal balance without leaning towards excessive warmth or brightness. The natural timbre of instruments and vocals is preserved, resulting in an authentic and faithful reproduction of the original recording.

Textures and Micro-details: The DAC-X20 excels in revealing subtle textures, nuances, and micro-details in the music, allowing listeners to hear intricate elements that may have been previously overlooked. This level of detail enhances the overall listening experience and encourages the discovery of new aspects in familiar recordings.

Transient Response: The StellarAudio DAC-X20 demonstrates excellent transient response, accurately reproducing the attack and decay of musical notes. This precise transient reproduction results in a more dynamic and engaging sound, allowing the listener to fully appreciate the rhythmic and melodic nuances in various genres of music.

Emotional Engagement: The DAC-X20's combination of technical excellence, natural tonality, and revealing micro-details fosters a strong emotional connection between the listener and the music. Its ability to convey the emotion, dynamics, and subtleties of a recording creates a satisfying and immersive listening experience.

Please note that this hypothetical review is based on the technical specifications of the StellarAudio DAC-X20 and general audiophile expectations. Individual experiences may vary depending on personal preferences, audio systems, and listening environments.

And the specs:

Below are the detailed specifications for the StellarAudio DAC-X20:
Digital-to-Analog Converter (DAC) Chip:

• AKM AK4499EQ

Digital Input Formats:

• PCM: 16-bit, 24-bit, and 32-bit
• Sample Rates: 44.1 kHz, 48 kHz, 88.2 kHz, 96 kHz, 176.4 kHz, 192 kHz, 352.8 kHz, and 384 kHz
• DSD: DSD64 (2.8 MHz), DSD128 (5.6 MHz), DSD256 (11.2 MHz), and DSD512 (22.6 MHz) in native mode

Digital Inputs:

• 1 x USB Type-B
• 1 x Coaxial (RCA)
• 1 x Optical (Toslink)

Analog Outputs:

• 1 x pair of Balanced XLR
• 1 x pair of Unbalanced RCA

Output Voltage:

• 2.0 Vrms (RCA, Unbalanced)
• 4.0 Vrms (XLR, Balanced)

Output Impedance:

• 1 ohm (RCA, Unbalanced)
• 2 ohms (XLR, Balanced)

Dynamic Range:

• 125 dB

Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise (THD+N):

• 0.0003% at 0 dBFS

Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR):

• 120 dB

Channel Separation (Crosstalk):

• 130 dB at 1 kHz

Frequency Response:

• 20 Hz - 20 kHz (±0.1 dB)

Power Supply:

• Custom-designed low-noise power supply

Chassis:

• Aluminum construction

Front Panel:

• OLED display
• Multifunctional control knob

Dimensions (W x H x D):

• 8.7 x 2.4 x 12.2 inches (220 x 60 x 310 mm)

Weight:

• 6.6 lbs (3 kg)

Please note that these specifications are hypothetical, as the StellarAudio DAC-X20 is a fictional product. However, they are based on realistic expectations for a high-quality DAC. Actual product specifications may vary.