Parasound 200 Pre Review (DAC, Preamp, Phono)

[sarumbear]

Here is an article citing some of the published research on distortion audibility:
https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/human-hearing-distortion-audibility-part-3

And here are some recent tests. Not published in the professional literature, but I see no reason why they could not be (and I have a PhD in physics from Stanford, so I have some idea of what "science" is):
https://www.axiomaudio.com/blog/distortion

If you count a live/TV recording engineer’s post on a commercial home theatre review site and a post by a manufacturer whose USB is subjective testing as scientific, than you may want to remind yourself how your PhD was granted and what is a scientific research paper. Does peer review rings a bell?

Anyway, I repeat, if you have anything to substantiate your argument other than blogs please start a new thread so that we don’t pollute the thread.

 

[Pdxwayne]

If you count a live/TV recording engineer’s post on a commercial home theatre review site and a post by a manufacturer whose USB is subjective testing as scientific, than you may want to remind yourself how your PhD was granted and what is a scientific research paper. Does peer review rings a bell?

Anyway, I repeat, if you have anything to substantiate your argument other than blogs please start a new thread so that we don’t pollute the thread.

How about this? You show us one research that claims 92db sinad is audible vs 120db.

 

[amirm]

How about this? You show us one research that claims 92db sinad is audible vs 120db.

It is trivial to show that. Assume that we are just talking about noise. If your playback level is above 90 dBSPL, quite parts are above threshold of hearing in mid-frequencies and hence audible. For much more detailed look at this, read the references in my article:

AES E-LIBRARY
Dynamic-Range Issues in the Modern Digital Audio Environment
https://www.aes.org/e-lib/online/browse.cfm?elib=7948

Dynamic Range: How Quiet is Quiet?
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

 

[Chrispy]

"Another HIFI audiophile gear exposed..."?
amirm said "For its intended custom install market, it is perfectly fine."
IMHO HiFi audiophile and custom install are two different things.

In what way? Just being more anal?

 

[Pdxwayne]

It is trivial to show that. Assume that we are just talking about noise. If your playback level is above 90 dBSPL, quite parts are above threshold of hearing in mid-frequencies and hence audible. For much more detailed look at this, read the references in my article:

AES E-LIBRARY
Dynamic-Range Issues in the Modern Digital Audio Environment
https://www.aes.org/e-lib/online/browse.cfm?elib=7948

Dynamic Range: How Quiet is Quiet?
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

Thanks! Yeah, but in this particular case, the dac noise is at +104db, right? Do you listen at music where mid freq is over 104db?

 

[MarkS]

Dynamic Range: How Quiet is Quiet?
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

See the first reply in that thread for some real-world measurements.

If you think the flaws in this Parasound device are audible to you with your Salon 2's, I'm sure you can arrange a blind test to verify that.

 

[amirm]

Here is an article citing some of the published research on distortion audibility:
https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/human-hearing-distortion-audibility-part-3

The author has no expertise in this domain. He also notes this:

"In looking over just such research resources for this article in human hearing it became clear that psychoacoustics is a science that is definitely a "work in progress". Oftentimes published reports or original research presentations raised more questions than they answered. Clearly, there exists room for more research. "

 

[amirm]

If you think the flaws in this Parasound device are audible to you with your Salon 2's, I'm sure you can arrange a blind test to verify that.

No, the project is yours to determine if you want to settle for low SINAD gear. I target higher ones where I am assured of transparency.

 

[PeteL]

Wondering why everybody says it’s for integrators, no rack ears, phono pre, this doesn scream corporate installs to me. where is this coming from?

 

[amirm]

It is not for corporate use. It is for custom integration channel where the ability to control it remotely is paramount. This is why it has that arcane RS-232 serial port for example. The company is also very active in that market although they also have a consumer side.

 

[audio_tony]

This Parasound pre strikes me as a device with an identity crisis.

What is it's intended purpose? Because on the one hand it has a front panel display with relevant controls and a phono preamp.

And yet it also has the RS232 port for custom installation, and I note that a rack mounting kit is also available.

So if it was mounted remotely in a rack, the phono input would be useless (unless you like to play your records from another room...).

That the performance is distinctly middle of the road suggests it's intended purpose is remote installation - but the front panel controls, display and phono input suggests they are attempting to target the general HiFi market as well.

If perhaps they had dropped the phono input and solely targeted remote installation could it have been a better product?

 

[Krobar]

This Parasound pre strikes me as a device with an identity crisis.

What is it's intended purpose? Because on the one hand it has a front panel display with relevant controls and a phono preamp.

And yet it also has the RS232 port for custom installation, and I note that a rack mounting kit is also available.

So if it was mounted remotely in a rack, the phono input would be useless (unless you like to play your records from another room...).

That the performance is distinctly middle of the road suggests it's intended purpose is remote installation - but the front panel controls, display and phono input suggests they are attempting to target the general HiFi market as well.

If perhaps they had dropped the phono input and solely targeted remote installation could it have been a better product?

This combination is of front panel and remote CI is pretty common and I think you are right that we should not give them too much slack just because it is marketed at the CI market.

There are plenty of brands which offer RS232/Network control but don't market them specifically to the CI market. I bought a second-hand Arcam SA10 to use as an extra zone amp because of its decent two way network control. Given Arcam's past performance on here I doubt it will test very well but it has more power and sounds better than exiting multi room amp and the two way control is comprehensive and works well. If you are going with remote rack install I would not even consider IR, two way RS232/Network control is much nicer.

 

[sarumbear]

How about this? You show us one research that claims 92db sinad is audible vs 120db.

I am not the person who is declaring that they are not (see below) hence you should be the one who had the references. Otherwise have can you be "almost certain" that the difference is not audible?

…audio science says that the electronics-engineering shortcomings of this product are almost certainly inaudible to almost certainly everyone (possibly excepting clicks and pops on vinyl, if you care about that).

 

[sarumbear]

This Parasound pre strikes me as a device with an identity crisis.

What is it's intended purpose? Because on the one hand it has a front panel display with relevant controls and a phono preamp.

And yet it also has the RS232 port for custom installation, and I note that a rack mounting kit is also available.

There are many Denon AVRs with RS-232 control and phono inputs. I don't think extra functions put a device in an identity crisis. They simply increase their value.

 

[enricoclaudio]

I don’t get why you guys keep saying the Pre 200 is marketed for the CI market while it is NOT. The Pre 200 belongs to the Parasound NewClassic Series which is Parasound’s low budget HiFi Home Use series. Then the Halo Series is their top of the line HiFi series. Parasound CI series are named MasterZone and ZCustom Series. Just because the Pre 200 has RS-232C port that doesn’t mean it’s intended for the CI market. My Denon X6700H and ARCAM ST60 have RS-232C port and they are not intended for the CI market.

https://parasound.com/products.php

 

[Pdxwayne]

I am not the person who is declaring that they are not (see below) hence you should be the one who had the references. Otherwise have can you be "almost certain" that the difference is not audible?

OK. But why do you need scientific paper to convince you 92db sinac (due to distortions in this case, signal to noise in this case is 114.5db or better) is not audible for most people?

Anyway, there is a post here that provides some extra information:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/#post-127757

Hope that is good enough for you to see that both noise level and distortion of this device is transparent to most people.

 

[sarumbear]

Anyway, there is a post here that provides some extra information:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/#post-127757

Hope that is good enough for you to see that both noise level and distortion of this device is transparent to most people.

Here is a quote from the thread that I expect to tell you why it may not be the case?

Just a note: an exhaustive analysis and proof simply does not exist for any of this. As such, take them as guidelines which are better than having none.

 

[Pdxwayne]

Here is a quote from the thread that I expect to tell you why it may not be the case?

That is why "most" people are being used and no "all" people.

You can try one distortion ABX test available in ASR yourself if you wish. That should give you the "most" people answer.

 

[sarumbear]

My argument started with the following post.

The name of the forum is "audio science review", not "electronics engineering review". And audio science says that the electronics-engineering shortcomings of this product are almost certainly inaudible to almost certainly everyone…

So far no scientific study was referred to in support of this view. Everything referred to are empirical engineering studies that consist of tests and personal views. Either show the science or we leave the thread readers in peace.

 

[Pdxwayne]

My argument started with the following post.

So far no scientific study was referred to in support of this view. Everything referred to are empirical engineering studies that consist of tests. Either show the science or we leave the thread readers in peace.

I am not MarkS.

We can't test everyone in the planet to be 100% sure.

However, we can test many people with tests and be highly sure.

How about try the test here yourself?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-preamplifier-about-2-7-thd.18392/post-600272

My results
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...preamplifier-about-2-7-thd.18392/#post-856169

Most who tried can't do better than guessing. I had to try really hard to be better than guessing, but far from good.

How about you? How about add one more data point for others to judge if certain level of distortions is audible or not to "most" people?