Gustard R30 Review

[Caléo]

NOS and fast filter.
I don't hear any solid sound difference between the different modes.
Level matching done with the ears, maybe you missed my last post. No discontinuity during the switch with my method.
I realized too that I could listen louder with the Gustard in the hearing confort zone. Like 2.5 db louder on the RME screen (no real db, just digital measurements).

It seems that LS50 are far from perfect, so the dac conditions balanced those problems. But the listening was more pleasant and natural with the R26. Like very very more natural.

I couldn't match the listening signature with EQ. Roll-off in the highs didn't bring the soft and naturalness of the R26. But I have to say I didn't have my microphone to check the spectrum this time.

 

[DVDdoug]

We are used to make blindtest with my friends during listening sessions. We didn't even need to think about it so much the difference was indisputable.

Never heard THAT before!

It's amazing how often those "night and day" differences go away in controlled-blind listening tests. Proper blind listening tests can be very humbling.

...If you tell me there's no bass, or a buzz in the left channel, I wouldn't question it a defect like that.

I'll also believe you if you can identify "X" 10 out of 10 times in a proper-controlled ABX test.

Otherwise, I usually just ignore claims like this... I don't know why I'm responding here...

What is a blind ABX test?.
Audio Blind Listening - You Are Doing It Wrong!

If a DAC affects bass or treble that's a SERIOUS DEFECT and it will be easily measurable. Anything mysterious that can't be measured should be confirmed in a controlled listening test. But in reality DACs (or other electronics) only have a few "sound characteristics" and they ALL can be measured. (Speakers in a room, or even headphones are trickier to measure.)

 

[voodooless]

Level matching done with the ears,

That is in no way appropriate, not by a long shot

 

[Caléo]

Never heard THAT before!

It's amazing how often those "night and day" differences go away in controlled-blind listening tests. Proper blind listening tests can be very humbling.

...If you tell me there's no bass, or a buzz in the left channel, I wouldn't question it a defect like that.

What is a blind ABX test?.
Audio Blind Listening - You Are Doing It Wrong!

If a DAC affects bass or treble that's a SERIOUS DEFECT and it will be easily measurable. Anything mysterious that can't be measured should be confirmed in a controlled listening test. But in reality DACs (or other electronics) only have a few "sound characteristics" and they ALL can be measured. (Speakers in a room, or even headphones are trickier to measure.)

As I said twice. I am used to practice blind tests, I have already had surprises.
That's what we did with the D50, Babyface and Adi 2 Pro.
Confused results, couldn't feel any real difference.
The r26 was so different in sonic presentation that we didn't even make a blindtest.
I ve owned the two dacs for more than a year but listened only to headphones.
To match the bass level of the R30 I had to elevate the bass with 2.5 db below 200hz bass with a low shelf.
I didn't measure with the protocole. But such a difference MUST be measurable.
I concluded that the R26 is certainly not a neutral dac, but compensate problems in a chain lacking bass and with treble glares.
I didn't manage to copy the frequency presentation on my Adi 2 Pro with the EQ.
The bass section was heavier but lacked a lot the resolving capacities of the Adi 2 Pro. Mids were more forward, sweet and shining (harmonic trick ?), trebles were softer. Maybe the focus on the mids permits this "naturalness" effect...
The most enjoyable thing and what made that I kept this dac : I could listen louder, like very louder compared to the RME. (Headphones used : Meze Elite, ZMF Caldera, Fostex TR909, Beyerdynamic T1, T90, Dt1990, Dt770 250ohms). By increasing the volume and keeping the comfort, the feeling was denser, fuller, and it made the difference.

 

[Caléo]

That is in no way appropriate, not by a long shot

More accurate than with my umik2 considering I don't have the same frequency response on both devices...

 

[voodooless]

More accurate than with my umik2 considering I

Your ears are most definitely not more accurate, but it doesn’t even matter, because matching by microphone or SPL meter isn’t good enough either.

don't have the same frequency response on both devices...

How do you know, you didn’t measure with an objective instrument…

 

[Grotti]

No proper blind test (by far!), no measurements, useless level matching by ear, testing in NOS mode....what are you trying to prove here?

 

[Deleted member 79552]

If all DACs sound the same what’s the point of ASR?

 

[SorenTyson]

If all DACs sound the same what’s the point of ASR?

Faq question 3:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audio-science-review-faq-1.65328/

 

[voodooless]

If all DACs sound the same what’s the point of ASR?

Reacting to strawmen arguments...

 

[IronPyrite]

If all DACs sound the same what’s the point of ASR?

The rule of thumb at ASR is: if we can't measure it and make objective comparisons, its not a valid point of conversation.

While the spirit objective comparisons is well-meaning (we don't want people coming here and claiming "my $3K digital interconnect makes the music sound syrupy, because I'm TOTALLY not biased by how much I spent on it"), like anything taken to an extreme, it can make conversation dry and fatiguing at times.

Its not possible to achieve a perfect balance between objectivity and subjectivity, so we have a Technocratic Theocracy at ASR, and a New Age Cult at head-fi. We're all friends in the hobby, a bit of patience and tolerance is needed all round.

 

[Caléo]

That's true, I can't prove anything. I apologize for my approach, which was clumsy and not in keeping with the spirit of ASR. The reminder of the rules was meant to be.

 

[rs172]

All DACs sound the same. Try comparing blind and level matched next time.

Saying all DACS sound the same is like saying all amplifiers sound the same. As with amps, every dac has its output stage which has its own characteristics and influences the dac. I'm not saying that tonally there's a night and day difference (unless something is "broken" in the dac) but there are slight tonal differences

 

[Purité Audio]

A dac will only sound different ( to an audibly transparent design) if it produces audible distortion.
All that counts are the measurements taken at the unit’s output.
Keith

 

[IronPyrite]

I just received my R30 today, the sound is a huge upgrade over the R26, NOS enabled on both DACs. And as folks may gather from "today," there was no burn-in involved, which we won't talk about on this forum. However, there was enough time allowed (2 hours) to presumably allow the OCXO clock to reach a stable internal temperature. The sound is the closest I've ever heard to a pure analog vinyl setup (minus all the pops and ticks).

The DAC is connected to a pair of Focal SOLO6 ST6 monitors (also reviewed by Amir here), the monitors are slightly analytical to a fault, differences in sound are easy to hear, even for old farts such as myself.

Since I can hear the difference between the Gustard R26 and R30 DACs, it is with a heavy heart that I must notify everyone here at ASR, my friends, and my family, that I am compelled to schedule a visit with a hearing specialist, neurologist, and a psychologist, because the people here with 1000's of post who repeatedly type "there is no difference in the sound between DACs" as if they were being punished like Sisyphus himself, can't possibly be wrong.

 

[Purité Audio]

Perhaps the NOS implementation in the new model is even worse than the old model, perhaps two hours just wasn’t quite long enough for the flux generator ?
Keith

 

[voodooless]

The sound is the closest I've ever heard to a pure analog vinyl setup (minus all the pops and ticks).

Yeah, super analog:

The irony is palpable...

 

[IronPyrite]

Perhaps the NOS implementation in the new model is even worse than the old model, perhaps two hours just wasn’t quite long enough for the flux generator ?
Keith

There is no denying that NOS enabled produces more distortion. Some people just prefer the sound, probably more so if you grew up around 8 tracks, before everything was fully digitized. Some people like to eat their fries with objectively worse mayonnaise, and some prefer to eat their fries with ketchup, as god intended.

I'm all for digitization for preservation purposes (even master tapes degrade and proportionately lose treble over time), but I'm not sure modern mixing engineers intended for music to be listened at its fullest fidelity, most will understand that people listen to MP3s on EarPods, and will mix accordingly.

 

[Purité Audio]

So the ‘huge upgrade’ was more distortion?
Keith

 

[IronPyrite]

Yeah, super analog:
View attachment 485143

The irony is palpable...

When you listened to a DAC with NOS both enabled and disabled and compared the 2 modes, which on did you prefer? You did A/B compare the sounds of the 2 modes in person, and not just the graphs, right? If you haven't, please go do so - I will accept and respect your opinion based on hands-on experience.

When I was in college (long ago), the professors taught based on theory, which is good because theory is objective, and insulated from bias. When I got out into the real world, things were done differently for a whole variety of reasons, some for practical reasons (applying theory directly isn't always practical), and some for backwards legacy reasons. The point being, everyone should set aside their bias and experience things for themselves before passing judgement. In theory, Pollocks's paintings seem lazy, something any child could paint - in person, I'm open to the idea they hold more appeal.