Peavey USB-P Review (Balanced DAC)

[fordiebianco]

It is from the book, "Bread in half the time," page 153 with the title of, "rich dinner rolls in an hour." It is by Linda West Eckhardt and Diana Collingwood Butts.

Ordered. Nice one.

 

[anmpr1]

For those not familiar with Peavey, they are a low-mid end music instrument, amps and stage pro-audio equipment much below Marshall and Fender and I don't think they have ever built a low distortion product.

Fender and Marshall are building 'low distortion' products?

 

[anmpr1]

I am not sure this should even be reviewed here. This was probably put in the lineup for mixing in audio from a laptop into stage DJ equipment.

In the context of your living room hi-fi, the headless panther makes some sense. In the context of a cheap solution for a portable 'throw it in the back seat of your station wagon' PA set up, it's an altogether different thing.

From reading consumer reviews, a lot of these are used in 'houses of worship' for A/V and PA use. Given their necessarily low budgets, and physical requirements of those folks, this little Peavey might be better awarded a panther with a halo on top of its head.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

I am not sure this should even be reviewed here.

There is real value is measuring almost everything. This device meets its published specs, so can't really be faulted. But highlighting those specs and noting how much better they could be holds the heat to Peavey in terms of improving the product, even if it may mean pitching to a different price point. Although we mutter on about Lundhal or Jensen transformers, there are intermediate quality ones available. With a highlight on the measured performance potential buyers will see that performance in perspective. It can act to raise expectations.
Minimally the review underlines the poor voltage swing. I suspect a great many buyers barely register the specs, and buy it on the recommendation that it solves their problem. That there might be usefully better solutions, albeit at a higher price, is worth understanding. Peavey may be moved to market such an improved device themseves if they see the demand.

 

[Rottmannash]

Fender and Marshall are building 'low distortion' products?

Fender tube amps (and I did say tube) have a very desirable "clean" output when played without overdrive-hence why many guitar players use them. I have 3 of them.

 

[anmpr1]

Fender tube amps (and I did say tube) have a very desirable "clean" output when played without overdrive-hence why many guitar players use them. I have 3 of them.

Desirability is one thing. Low distortion is another. Fender doesn't publish specs on their amps (other than power), and I didn't find any comprehensive specs at the Marshall site. So I don't know for sure how clean is clean. With electric guitars my experience is that 'clean' just means less distorted. There are a lot of variables when it comes to electric guitar sounds, and in any case no one is adverse to guitar amplifier distortion, especially since you can dial it in just the way you like it.

FWIW, Mesa used to market an actual tube hi-fi amplifier. Atkinson ran it down here:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mesa-engineering-baron-power-amplifier-measurements

Distortion aside, I found the following FR graph of a guy's homemade tube guitar amp. It's just FR. And it's just one amp design. YMMV

 

[Vasr]

With respect, if we applied that same brush to everything, there would be no SMSL, Topping, Ciunas, March Audio, LoxJie, Dutch & Dutch, Kii or Mola-Mola reviewed here on ASR at all. What are you suggesting the pre-requisites are?

Peavey has been around for 63 years, since 1957, 5 years before Marshall and their gear even existed. If anything, they deserve to be reviewed more than a boutique, flavor of the month, or flash in the pan company wouldn't you say?

Can you misinterpret it any more @restorer-john ?

It would be like guitar magazine reviewing the brands you mention and saying they suck for not having a "tone". Or Automobile magazine reviewing a John Deere and says it cannot recommend it because of its 0-60 timings. Has nothing to do with how big/small or how long the company has been in the business. Same would apply to Marshall or Fender musical equipment. I thought it would be obvious for anybody.

Just giving it context because many people here might have heard of Peavey in the audio context ... for a good reason

If this site evaluated in context of a device's audience and use, then perhaps you may have a point.

Fender and Marshall are building 'low distortion' products?

Not what I said is it?
Low distortion products are not what anybody designs to build in that business. Peavey is at low-mid end of that business. Clear now?

In the context of your living room hi-fi, the headless panther makes some sense. In the context of a cheap solution for a portable 'throw it in the back seat of your station wagon' PA set up, it's an altogether different thing.

From reading consumer reviews, a lot of these are used in 'houses of worship' for A/V and PA use. Given their necessarily low budgets, and physical requirements of those folks, this little Peavey might be better awarded a panther with a halo on top of its head.

This is exactly it. Site does not evaluate units in the context of its use or intended use. It chases SINAD whether it is a DAC, and AVR or PA equipment. And rates it with no context.

There is real value is measuring almost everything...
But highlighting those specs and noting how much better they could be holds the heat to Peavey in terms of improving the product, even if it may mean pitching to a different price point.

Evaluated in the context of its audience and use. Perhaps measuring the 0-60 of a Honda Civic will push them into improving their track times and " better themselves".

The least someone can do is describe the context of this device/company which is what I did. Didn't think too many people knew what/who Peavey was based on the original review or the following comments. My mistake.

 

[amirm]

Yeah. Could you measure THD @ 20 Hz, or over frequency, of the Peavey, please?

Could do but first I am going to do a teardown.

 

[amirm]

This is exactly it. Site does not evaluate units in the context of its use or intended use. It chases SINAD whether it is a DAC, and AVR or PA equipment. And rates it with no context.

I don't know what you are saying. My review talked about real life applications and why it may be useful regardless of measurements. So it did not at all "chase SINAD."

If you are saying a proper review of this product would put zero emphasis on measured performance, then you are wrong. People want to know how well a device performs technically in addition to its application as there may be choices in the market with some better than others. And as said, it may motivate the company to improve the measured performance in future versions.

Even in its intended application, it is very important to understand its limited output level. The downstream pre-amp may need to be more quiet than otherwise to amplify its output. Without that, it may create its own hiss and noise. So this aspect of the measurements was downright important.

 

[LTig]

Low distortion products are not what anybody designs to build in that business. Peavey is at low-mid end of that business.

This unit is not designed to "tone" an instrument, so anything written WRT guitar amplifiers is completely OT. Peavey also produced PA power amps where low distortion is the target. Long time ago I used a CS-800 a few times for live gigs. It was a very heavy and reliable work horse.

The USB-P is designed to overcome grounding problems as cheap as possible, and it does this properly. Of course it's good that @amirm has measured it so now people who need to break ground know what they have to pay for regarding loss of fidelity. If you're after high SINAD look elsewhere, otherwise it's a cheap solution for nasty problems. Yet I doubt that there are many people who are able to hear a difference in a properly controlled ABX blind test against a SOTA DAC.

 

[anmpr1]

Not what I said is it? Low distortion products are not what anybody designs to build in that business. Peavey is at low-mid end of that business. Clear now?

This is exactly it. Site does not evaluate units in the context of its use or intended use. It chases SINAD whether it is a DAC, and AVR or PA equipment. And rates it with no context.

1) Sorry for misinterpreting your original sentence. If you meant by 'they' to say that Marshall, Fender, and Peavey all make pro products where lo distortion is not important, then I certainly agree with you about that. I also think that your judgement about the general quality of Peavey v. the other two is the case, although FWIW I've had a Fender amp fall apart in the warranty period. A lot depends on the individual product.

2) That ASR does not very well take into account the intended use of the product when offering value judgements on quality (the different panthers) is one of the big limitations of the site. I think that 'objectively' this item can be highly recommended for what it is, given what it costs, and for its intended purpose. At least until another fifty dollar device with similar function and build quality but with better specs can be found.

 

[anmpr1]

The USB-P is designed to overcome grounding problems as cheap as possible...

It seems to me that there are two categories of most interest. First, is the best, from an engineering standpoint. Here, price is not much of an issue. The criterion is the best, given what is possible, strictly from a design standpoint.

Then there is the best at various price points--low and mid. Of these, for me the cheapest price point is the most interesting.

Important and often hard to judge intangibles, especially with gear like this Peavey, have to be considered. Primarily portability and build quality (is it going to fall apart in sustained use?). Portability is a given with this thing. I am looking forward to the tear down, which could better indicate how it will hold up.

 

[restorer-john]

Just giving it context because many people here might have heard of Peavey in the audio context ... for a good reason

Anyone who's ever seen or heard a live band/video clip or walked into a music store would have Peavey/Marshall/Fender logos seared in their mind. I'd say there's nary a soul on ASR who wouldn't know the brand.

I get it, you have an issue with Peavey for some reason, but you've really added no "context" as you like to put it. More like a bias and expectations not comensurate with price, utility, and the device actually in question.

It's a valuable review and the device does what it claims, at a low price. What's not to like?

 

[Vasr]

I don't know what you are saying. My review talked about real life applications and why it may be useful regardless of measurements. So it did not at all "chase SINAD."

The evaluation and rating is "chasing SINAD".

But it is possible that certain amount of decapitated panthers is good for the site (for the entertainment aspects). It is a blood sport after all. Some people seem to be here entirely for "owning the manufacturers".

If you are saying a proper review of this product would put zero emphasis on measured performance, then you are wrong.

I never said that.

People want to know how well a device performs technically in addition to its application as there may be choices in the market with some better than others. And as said, it may motivate the company to improve the measured performance in future versions.

Understanding the context of the market for this company or its audience is relevant and important. It is not in a vacuum. Otherwise, this is like the "purity tests" of ideological groups regardless of reality or pragmatism which is counter-productive but makes them feel self-righteous. Just hubris.

So, because of ASR ratings Peavey is going to hire engineers (that it doesn't have so far in its existence) that can design low distortion DACs, arrange for a manufacturing facility that can ensure the low noise, and to make all of this effort worthwhile, they are going to redesign their 80db mixers and amps and their 2% distortion speakers and to justify all of that, they are going to hire new marketeers to go after an audience they don't have because the "target market segment of houses of worship" or "home DJ" clearly cannot afford all of those increased costs nor are they likely to notice a difference even if they could afford it.

Talking points that apply to NAD or Denon don't apply to everybody. To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

Even in its intended application, it is very important to understand its limited output level. The downstream pre-amp may need to be more quiet than otherwise to amplify its output. Without that, it may create its own hiss and noise. So this aspect of the measurements was downright important.

They sell an enter chain of audio equipment at a low price level where this works and already has enough noise floor to make all those irrelevant and the audience for these is not a critical listening group.

I am certainly not going to tell you what to measure or not but I do think prioritizing, for example, the Essence HDMI Dac that I understand is sitting in your queue for many, many months with its distributor making audiophile comments even in these forums enough to make one barf and validating those claims (or invalidating it) might be more productive and useful for the audience here than the cathartic benefits of decapitated panthers for DJ and PA equipment that makes no pretense of being anything more.

 

[Vasr]

Anyone who's ever seen or heard a live band/video clip or walked into a music store would have Peavey/Marshall/Fender logos seared in their mind. I'd say there's nary a soul on ASR who wouldn't know the brand.

Sure, Jan.

I get it, you have an issue with Peavey for some reason, but you've really added no "context" as you like to put it. More like a bias and expectations not comensurate with price, utility, and the device actually in question.

Wrong again.

I started my music playing many decades ago with Peavey which is all I could afford at the time and have fond memories. But I am not going to romanticize what it is not. It has its place and utility.

A review of the type done without context is useless for equipment like this and it would apply to Fender or Marshall amps as well. It is a simple concept.

 

[amirm]

Understanding the context of the market for this company or its audience is relevant and important.

Again, this was noted in the review so not sure what the continued argument is about: "There are some 227 reviews on Amazon with average of 4.5 stars. Just about everyone had a ground loop/buzz/hum that they could not get rid of and were ecstatic when the USB-P did the job. "

But to be clear, I can test the heck out of the performance of audio devices. I cannot though consider all their uses and scenarios. That is outside of the scope of what I do (cover functionality and usage). You don't see me digging into DSP capabilities of pro interfaces, or video features of AV products. I perform a unique function which is to provide comprehensive performance measurements of the core audio engine of these products. To that end, there should not be any expectation of me to include the "audience" or specific usage. Any search on the internet will show all of that information. What it won't show is measured performance and that is the hole I fill.

 

[Vasr]

But to be clear, I can test the heck out of the performance of audio devices. I cannot though consider all their uses and scenarios. That is outside of the scope of what I do (cover functionality and usage).

Fair enough. Which is why I provided the context.

Some audio units are just not relevant or suitable for what this site brings value to. I understand you may not know what a device is likely used as or what it is used with for all devices.

Note that out of all the responses before mine, only one seemed to know what Peavey is and their target audience/market and hence my context.

I also think, it is not a good use of your time to evaluate these kinds of devices when you have a long pipeline of products that aspire to audiophile quality (and audiophile claims). But that is just an opinion, not telling you what to do or not.

 

[amirm]

Some audio units are just not relevant or suitable for what this site brings value to. I understand you may not know what a device is likely used as or what it is used with for all devices.

Note that out of all the responses before mine, only one seemed to know what Peavey is and their target audience/market and hence my context.

I also think, it is not a good use of your time to evaluate these kinds of devices when you have a long pipeline of products that aspire to audiophile quality (and audiophile claims). But that is just an opinion, not telling you what to do or not.

Seems like you are determined to leave a sour taste here. I know the company, I know the brand. I know the usage of the product. There is no reason for you to assume otherwise and worse yet provide advice that I should not test a simple USB DAC. Everything was clear in the review as far as application for the product.

 

[GimeDsp]

Can we get food reviews too? Thats what I really want to know.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

Can we get food reviews too? Thats what I really want to know.

Ah, but objective scientific reviews?