There is a whole mystique around DACs and people promoting the idea that the things are jumping along leaps and bounds similar to computer CPUs in the 80's and 90's. Yet, the audio DAC is a mature technology which achieved audible transparency years ago. There are plenty of older DAC designs that work perfectly well and these days even USB dongles for cellphones costing not much more than a sandwich perform extremely well. CD players made in the 1990's sound fine. Of all the parts of the audio chain the DAC must be the bit for which audible transparency is achievable at the lowest cost and quite honestly many on-board DACs in devices are transparent. Yes, some high level DACs have stellar measurements and clearly are superbly designed (such as Benchmark, RME and some Chord equipment) but if you just want audible transparency to enjoy music it is available for peanuts. Yet people like Paul McGowan and plenty of others continue to push the idea that you need expensive DACs and that it is some sort of innovative tech at the cutting edge, odd.
-
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!
More wisdom from Paul McGowan
- Thread starter JJB70
- Start date
There is a whole mystique around DACs and people promoting the idea that the things are jumping along leaps and bounds similar to computer CPUs in the 80's and 90's. Yet, the audio DAC is a mature technology which achieved audible transparency years ago. There are plenty of older DAC designs that work perfectly well and these days even USB dongles for cellphones costing not much more than a sandwich perform extremely well. CD players made in the 1990's sound fine. Of all the parts of the audio chain the DAC must be the bit for which audible transparency is achievable at the lowest cost and quite honestly many on-board DACs in devices are transparent. Yes, some high level DACs have stellar measurements and clearly are superbly designed (such as Benchmark, RME and some Chord equipment) but if you just want audible transparency to enjoy music it is available for peanuts. Yet people like Paul McGowan and plenty of others continue to push the idea that you need expensive DACs and that it is some sort of innovative tech at the cutting edge, odd.
invaderzim
Senior Member
It is just mysterious enough for people to believe there is magic in some of them. As people settled in happy with their amps and speakers this mysterious computer like device that 'creates' the sound for them to hear was the perfect direction for their marketing to go.
Azeia
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2019
- Messages
- 123
- Likes
- 297
The irony is that for someone like myself that has a more IT-centered background, I've had the opposite experience, where I have much more faith in the DAC, but started out a bit more confused about amps, etc. It didn't help that I ended up buying some really hard to drive headphones without knowing much in advance (DT 990, 250 ohm), so I had to do a bunch of research about amp specs and what they mean, so I could figure out what I needed to get to drive them well.
invaderzim
Senior Member
It is his engaging style and story telling ability that make him an exceptional salesman. I think most of the golden eared youtubers would be interesting to have a drink with but like many with exceptional people skills they are using them for evil.
Last edited:
solderdude
Grand Contributor
So any DAC built by Paul that is more than 2 years old is outdated and doesn't perform well any more (fizzeling sound while dropping the hand).
In his case every few months you need to 'flash' it again and it totally changes everything, well not everything.
This means he did not know how to build a DAC and every few months he learns something new and completely 'changes' the DAC yet again.
In his case every few months you need to 'flash' it again and it totally changes everything, well not everything.
This means he did not know how to build a DAC and every few months he learns something new and completely 'changes' the DAC yet again.
Completely agree.
Unless you want a single recorder then DAC to be able to record and then replay all audible sound without having a volume control one of the super DACs isn't needed and even though it is easy to say that such a device must be audibly transparent, and it certainly will be since it covers the whole frequency and amplitude audible range, anybody who has ever recorded music even a bit knows that the dynamic range actually needed is way less that that which is easily achieved in a DAC and has been for decades.
He is trying to sell that CPU/GPU race that's going on. A similar analogy would be that running an online version of word can be done on any computer with a browser. But using CPU/GPU for AI and big data analyzing requires as much number crunching that you can get. Thing is, audio is not big data...
He's selling stuff making use of peoples fear of being obsolete. (Using a GPU for DSP work on the other hand...)
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 7,315
- Likes
- 12,263
Well, I don't take anything the gentleman says seriously. McGowan certainly isn't my go-to source on any audio information. He may say some tetchnically sound things, but it's too mixed up with subjectivist audiophile shibboleths and I can't be bothered to untangle them. I think he believes much of what he says. But ultimately he's a salesman that many have confused for an engineer.
McClowen..
McGowan - or as I call him Goofball. What a con man - no engineering chops at all. Hires folks to create his designs. Marketing? Guy is good - though he often gets sloppy as per his comment - in one of his videos - 'that 30 dB of gain is about 30x." Really Goofball? You can fake it for awhile but you always get caught in the end.
I bought one of his HCA-2 amps - a Class Dumbass special - Goofball is real big on "me too" products. Damn thing ended up smoking, spewing sparks with flames coming out of the top. Nice work Goofball. Have sworn off all of his creations since that event. I have met the guy and in person he is not much - more than a little off-putting. But hey - an impresario, a ring master, and he has kept the show going. For somebody with little or no talent you have to give him credit for creating something out of NOTHING.
I bought one of his HCA-2 amps - a Class Dumbass special - Goofball is real big on "me too" products. Damn thing ended up smoking, spewing sparks with flames coming out of the top. Nice work Goofball. Have sworn off all of his creations since that event. I have met the guy and in person he is not much - more than a little off-putting. But hey - an impresario, a ring master, and he has kept the show going. For somebody with little or no talent you have to give him credit for creating something out of NOTHING.
Let's not get too personal about industry people folks. Some do that to me in other forums. It is not right form. Let's focus on the topic, not the person.
i had a couple of sony 700-series ES single-loading cd players that sounded great. but i built a music server in 1999 and ripped all my cd’s to hard disc. back the, the weak links were plainly the amps and speakers. celestion sl700. adcom. but god did i love that system.
Amir,
You are correct. Sorry about that. The ASR forum is a haven of decency and thoughtfulness. I certainly don't want to turn this place into another version of WTF.
Instead we should focus on products. Like the HCA-2 Class D amp I bought from PS audio. The thing went up in smoke, sparks and flames. When I opened it up there was a small PCB - on risers - above the main boards (one for each channel apparently). That small board caught fire. I "think" that board was the clocking circuit - it had a crystal oscillator (can style) on the board. Whatever - the board was black and burned.
I threw the amp in the trash - I was NOT going to pay PS Audio "twice" for an inadequately designed component. I did notice that the line of amplifiers quietly went away from PS Audio shortly after mine blew up. I wonder how many others smoked and flamed? I did salvage the huge toroidial transformer that the amp employed - quite nice, very heavy and wrapped - as I recall - in copper foil.
I have been buying audio equipment for over 40 years - and this boat anchor from PS Audio was the first - and ONLY - device I have ever purchased that blew up in flames, sparks and smoke. Had any number of units that quietly "died" - particularly Yamaha manufactured devices - or in the case of multiple Marantz 22xx receivers the lights in the panel consistently failed. But never a dangerous, burn down your house style failure.
For that reason I cannot recommend ANY PRODUCT FROM PS AUDIO.
You are correct. Sorry about that. The ASR forum is a haven of decency and thoughtfulness. I certainly don't want to turn this place into another version of WTF.
Instead we should focus on products. Like the HCA-2 Class D amp I bought from PS audio. The thing went up in smoke, sparks and flames. When I opened it up there was a small PCB - on risers - above the main boards (one for each channel apparently). That small board caught fire. I "think" that board was the clocking circuit - it had a crystal oscillator (can style) on the board. Whatever - the board was black and burned.
I threw the amp in the trash - I was NOT going to pay PS Audio "twice" for an inadequately designed component. I did notice that the line of amplifiers quietly went away from PS Audio shortly after mine blew up. I wonder how many others smoked and flamed? I did salvage the huge toroidial transformer that the amp employed - quite nice, very heavy and wrapped - as I recall - in copper foil.
I have been buying audio equipment for over 40 years - and this boat anchor from PS Audio was the first - and ONLY - device I have ever purchased that blew up in flames, sparks and smoke. Had any number of units that quietly "died" - particularly Yamaha manufactured devices - or in the case of multiple Marantz 22xx receivers the lights in the panel consistently failed. But never a dangerous, burn down your house style failure.
For that reason I cannot recommend ANY PRODUCT FROM PS AUDIO.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Not even his book ?
Well... some may want it to participate in a book burning ritual
Well... some may want it to participate in a book burning ritual
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Agree.
So all those freed up R&D funds can go into making better turntables, instead.
Full disclosure: my analog rig is DSP based.
Last night, I was at a meeting of the local audio society. One of the guys there had arranged a visit to PS (they do this routinely and McGowan makes a point of that in his videos) and waxed rhapsodical about the experience. They do a great job of customer engagement. Too bad that's so intertwined with snake oil.
An impresario, a ringmaster, a popular DJ - which he did while in the Army (US version). Guy is a great promoter. Ginning up all kinds of noise, flash and a thick fog of contradictory confusion somewhat like his amps - though less dangerous. But hey - it is the audio business - and that approach works in an industry that can sell $20,000 power cords to otherwise rational, at least somewhat sane folks.
This weeks version of "The Atlantic" has a short story about P.T. Barnum - whose motto was "a sucker is born every minute". The upshot of this article is that the American people enjoy being humbugged. If Barnum were alive today he would lead a company no doubt named, P.T. Audio and be raking in millions. People would love his offerings. They would line up to be fleeced.
I have heard the PS Audio DAC - from the mind of Ted Smith - the fellow who looks like an old Testament prophet descended from the mountain. The unit sounded fine to my ears. But upon analysis it became apparent that despite all the digital legerdemain cleverly implemented by Smith what really gives the thing its smooth sound is a fifty cent coupling transformer used in the I/V stage. Not only does that tranny smooth the sound considerably it forms a pole in a relaxed - as in very - reconstruction filter. Damping the inevitable Gibb's oscillations caused by a rectangular function (steep band reject) as Gibbs predicted way back in the 19th century. Those oscillations are the pre and post ringing that I THINK cause the harsh sound sometimes associated with digital playback.
I would really like Amir to check in on this theory. Amir knows the technology far better with much greater depth than myself. I am doing something akin to being an armchair quarterback with my theory.
Clever and effective design - but the resultant has NOTHING to do with the endless transformations that Mr. Smith implemented through his FPGA. Instead it is all about - to MY analysis - the relaxation of the reconstruction filter and the inevitable smoothing that a transformer has on an analog signal passing through its tender mercies. Same as a tube amp.
This weeks version of "The Atlantic" has a short story about P.T. Barnum - whose motto was "a sucker is born every minute". The upshot of this article is that the American people enjoy being humbugged. If Barnum were alive today he would lead a company no doubt named, P.T. Audio and be raking in millions. People would love his offerings. They would line up to be fleeced.
I have heard the PS Audio DAC - from the mind of Ted Smith - the fellow who looks like an old Testament prophet descended from the mountain. The unit sounded fine to my ears. But upon analysis it became apparent that despite all the digital legerdemain cleverly implemented by Smith what really gives the thing its smooth sound is a fifty cent coupling transformer used in the I/V stage. Not only does that tranny smooth the sound considerably it forms a pole in a relaxed - as in very - reconstruction filter. Damping the inevitable Gibb's oscillations caused by a rectangular function (steep band reject) as Gibbs predicted way back in the 19th century. Those oscillations are the pre and post ringing that I THINK cause the harsh sound sometimes associated with digital playback.
I would really like Amir to check in on this theory. Amir knows the technology far better with much greater depth than myself. I am doing something akin to being an armchair quarterback with my theory.
Clever and effective design - but the resultant has NOTHING to do with the endless transformations that Mr. Smith implemented through his FPGA. Instead it is all about - to MY analysis - the relaxation of the reconstruction filter and the inevitable smoothing that a transformer has on an analog signal passing through its tender mercies. Same as a tube amp.
D
Deleted member 2944
Guest
30db of gain IS about 30x. If that's the type of quibble you have with him, I suggest to re-adjust your quibbling threshold.
The guy is a real character, but this industry is full of them.
Dave.
30 dB - from a power perspective - is 1000x the input. 10x the common (base 10) log of the ratio of the output/input. So a 30dB gain is a 1000 fold gain. Bell - as in Alexander Graham - invented the dB scale because he was working with the ranges involved in human hearing the numbers were huge - If I recall correctly that a human with normal hearing has about a 70 dB range - or a difference of about 10,000,000 between the loudest and softest sounds - dynamic range - that a human can discern. Easier to say 70 dB than 10,000,000.
I recall that a symphony orchestra can swing a 100 dB difference between loudest and softest. I may be incorrect in this - but I am certain that the difference in dynamic range of symphonic music is HUGE.
Now if we are describing VOLTAGE gain then the formula is 20x the common (base 10) logarithm of the ratio of the output/input. Using the numbers above the antilog is 31.62. So in the case of VOLTAGE GAIN the 30 dB equals about 30x is CORRECT. BUT - and it is a big butt - the context in which that number was presented was one of POWER GAIN. Or at least that is the way I understood the presentation.
Never to mind - the man is a character - but almost everybody is a character of some sort especially in the psychologically florid world of audio. I still do not give much credence to his views, opinions or products. YMMV. He is a great marketing mind. And - probably - does more good than harm. If nothing else his epistles and missives are somewhat entertaining. Find the good no matter what. Say?
I recall that a symphony orchestra can swing a 100 dB difference between loudest and softest. I may be incorrect in this - but I am certain that the difference in dynamic range of symphonic music is HUGE.
Now if we are describing VOLTAGE gain then the formula is 20x the common (base 10) logarithm of the ratio of the output/input. Using the numbers above the antilog is 31.62. So in the case of VOLTAGE GAIN the 30 dB equals about 30x is CORRECT. BUT - and it is a big butt - the context in which that number was presented was one of POWER GAIN. Or at least that is the way I understood the presentation.
Never to mind - the man is a character - but almost everybody is a character of some sort especially in the psychologically florid world of audio. I still do not give much credence to his views, opinions or products. YMMV. He is a great marketing mind. And - probably - does more good than harm. If nothing else his epistles and missives are somewhat entertaining. Find the good no matter what. Say?
Similar threads
