Focus on SINAD Gives Vendors Hiding Space

[DDF]

Since MS finally got on board with UAC2 do drivers even matter anymore unless you need ASIO for live recording or something?

Mostly for asio and setting its buffer. But when I see dacs suffer different amounts of bit errors with different drivers, both using directsound, cmon. Shouldn't be penalized for using the vendor's driver, but it happens. Very hard (maybe impossible in a general way) to test for as PC build compatability becomes a factor

 

[JohnYang1997]

Yup, of course. But if you get a stinker, it also means that stinkers exist and no pre-screening of pots is occurring, so that becomes a useful data point.



I'm was fascinated by the Muses device so I bought a dac+pre+HD amp that specifically used it. Perfect channel balance, no coarse settings, selectable with a remote, never gets dirty or intermittent, transparent. Its great. Given a choice, I'll never go back to a pot again. Measures like a champ:
https://www.innerfidelity.com/content/katzs-corner-episode-8-my-current-affair

Don't know why its not used more, (maybe cost?)



Yup, but with a proper jig, one can much better detect gear that doesn't work well with others. Alas, nothing's perfect.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-gives-vendors-hiding-space.14271/post-438100
I mentioned those volume control chips. They are not transparent and are responsible for poor performance.

 

[DDF]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-gives-vendors-hiding-space.14271/post-438100
I mentioned those volume control chips. They are not transparent and are responsible for poor performance.

Have a look and read the link with measurements of the Muses. It measures great. Its no JRC.

 

[JohnYang1997]

Have a look and read the link with measurements of the Muses. It measures great. Its no JRC.

Bruh. Have you even searched for it? Muses is basically a branding from NJR which is just JRC. And yes 0.002% thd+n performance is horrendous at this level of competition. 0.002%? We got 0.00002%. Even the A50 original has 0.0004% which used that chip. That's not so important still, it's the inherent noise it gives that really matters. You don't have attenuation afterwards so you basically stuck with the high noise. For sensitive IEM you get full of noise. We did our homework. We looked into all the possibilities. We even used some of the chips. I am really offended by this. Honestly.

 

[DDF]

Bruh. Have you even searched for it? Muses is basically a branding from NJR which is just JRC. And yes 0.002% thd+n performance is horrendous at this level of competition. 0.002%? We got 0.00002%. Even the A50 original has 0.0004% which used that chip. That's not so important still, it's the inherent noise it gives that really matters. You don't have attenuation afterwards so you basically stuck with the high noise. For sensitive IEM you get full of noise. We did our homework. We looked into all the possibilities. We even used some of the chips. I am really offended by this. Honestly.

I looked into a JRC volume chip for a design years ago (for a commercial product) and its spec stunk, nothing like this Muses. So when you said the JRC had "poor performance", I thought you were being rational and referring to one of their truly mediocre parts, not the Muses.

0.002% thd+n is completely inaudible. Please find me a single shred of evidence that this is within even an order of magnitude from audible. Regarding noise, I can place my ear right at the tweeter and not hear a single bit of hiss from my "poor" Muses based pre-amp (my amp is NC400 so any noise would come through unmasked).

So according to you, somehow a part (the Muses volume chip) with inaudible distortion and noise but fantastic channel balance tracking and no possibility of getting dirty with age is somehow "poor'' but a part with clearly audible channel mis-tracking and proven risk of corrosion or dirt affecting performance (pretty much any pot) is just the way it is and somehow better?

If an IEM has such incredibly high sensitivity, put in a setting with loss after the chip if need be and get the best of all worlds. This isn't rocket science.

But, thank you for proving the point of this thread. In the same way the subjective magazines have consumers (that don't know better) chasing meaningless attributes, I had wondered if the SINAD race had done the same, causing vendors to play the game and chase meaningless specs to "wow" customers that don't know any better, but at the cost of performance that matters, meaning clearly audible.

Wonder no more.

 

[JohnYang1997]

I looked into a JRC volume chip for a design years ago (for a commercial product) and its spec stunk, nothing like this Muses. So when you said the JRC had "poor performance", I thought you were being rational and referring to one of their truly mediocre parts, not the Muses.

0.002% thd+n is completely inaudible. Please find me a single shred of evidence that this is within even an order of magnitude from audible. Regarding noise, I can place my ear right at the tweeter and not hear a single bit of hiss from my "poor" Muses based pre-amp (my amp is NC400 so any noise would come through unmasked).

So according to you, somehow a part (the Muses volume chip) with inaudible distortion and noise but perfect channel balance tracking and no possibility of getting dirty with age is somehow "poor'' but a part with clearly audible channel mis-tracking and proven risk of corrosion or dirt affecting performance (pretty much any pot) is just the way it is and somehow better?

Well, thank you for proving my point. In the same way the subjective magazines have consumers (that don't know better) chasing meaningless attributes, I had wondered if the SINAD race had done the same, causing vendors to play the game and chase meaningless specs to "wow" customers that don't better, but at the cost of performance that matters.

Wonder no more.

What's important in real world is the noise. You can add another switched attenuation stage to attenuate noise further. If used alone, the noise will be very prominent when using sensitive iems. It's not just about your using case.
In terms of distortion and power. It's about competition and just for the means of being able to. I of course won't design audio electronics products for long. It's an end game.

 

[DDF]

What's important in real world is the noise. You can add another switched attenuation stage to attenuate noise further. If used alone, the noise will be very prominent when using sensitive iems. It's not just about your using case.
In terms of distortion and power. It's about competition and just for the means of being able to. I of course won't design audio electronics products for long. It's an end game.

I use my Muses based pre-amp with sensitive IEMs. No problem with noise. But my pre-amp has switchable gains.

I agree with your last statement, its a wise decision. I got out years ago.

 

[solderdude]

When you aim for the best measured performance the Muses isn't what you want in there.
When you aim for measuring good enough and no channel imbalance and remote control the Muses chip is an option.
Of course there is a price increase because the chip is more expensive than a good volpot and you also need parts around it as well.

 

[JohnYang1997]

When you aim for the best measured performance the Muses isn't what you want in there.
When you aim for measuring good enough and no channel imbalance and remote control the Muses chip is an option.
Of course there is a price increase because the chip is more expensive than a good volpot and you also need parts around it as well.

The muses has +-18V operating voltage. Other than that it's basically the same as a dual channel version of njw1195a which is in A50 and the distortion is lower.
However tho, it's still possible to get good matching from pots. Just manual selecting is needed.

 

[JohnYang1997]

Though it's different to each individual. But at the age that we have headphones like he6 k1000 and 145db/V iems. It really needs some engineering to get it right.

 

[DDF]

When you aim for the best measured performance the Muses isn't what you want in there.
When you aim for measuring good enough and no channel imbalance and remote control the Muses chip is an option.
Of course there is a price increase because the chip is more expensive than a good volpot and you also need parts around it as well.

That would be an incomplete definition of "measured". Channel imbalance is highly measurable and highly audible. Thats the point, really.

 

[carlosmante]

Each resistor element on each substrate layer was individually laser trimmed to match. When you pull them apart, there are tiny laser cuts on each step in the material. Must have been an early application of laser trimming?

Unfortunately, people squirt Deoxit into those wonderful pots and well, you know what happens after a bath in Deoxit...

What happens?

 

[solderdude]

That would be an incomplete definition of "measured". Channel imbalance is highly measurable and highly audible. Thats the point, really.

Aside from channel matching other performance will be limited by the Muses. To get down to high SINAD, low distortion and widest frequency response the Muses will not be the best component. It is an option when you want good channel matching, small steps and remote.
There are other (and more expensive) steps to do that as well using motorized steppers or relay steppers for instance.
They will be technically superior over the Muses as well.

 

[mt196]

I agree with the true meaning of the post: who cares if you create a DAC with 130db sinad vs a 105db one (for example). Ok it can be nice from an engineering point of view, but actually if I reach the >100 sinad the important things to look at become others like build quality, functionalities, materials, and I think this forum stress too much the idea of sinad, thd, and noise in its reviews (while a lot of users admits that after a point they become just marginally important). thus we see product like geshelli that measure absolutely stunning but that are ugly af, lack A LOT of functionalities, and are build in plexiglass just for the sake of showing better engineering skills in reducing noise and distorsion