Yeah, you can also say that about for example reviewed by stereophile in 1993 Mark Levinson No.35This is just further proof the dac problem has been essentially solved.
You're maybe not far,the previous one has a similar scheme and no ground connection:It might be a 'double-insulated' version without the ground tab on the IEC power connector being connected to anything, alongside the X class EMI/RF supression cap connected across the HF transformer (next to the feedback optocoupler). Quite a strange design choice seeing as it would have been possible to easily use the ground from the IEC connector for what might ultimately be better RF performance and stronger decoupling from the mains (the suppression cap will allow quite a bit of leakage - at least from what I've seen in the past), which could be completely mitigated by grounding the low voltage side of the power supply...
Nonetheless the performance is excellent so I really can't complain, although I have a feeling that if the unbalanced output was measured with a cable longer than a meter or so we might see evidence of small mains leakage currents across the suppression cap. Having said all of that, it's highly likely now looking at the PCB layout that the ground is being used as there are pins front the ground that go into the PCB and the tap appears to be possibly just a way to connect it to the chassis, in which case all of what I've just said my be disregarded!
I know what SINAD is, but can you explain the word SOTA for me? Thanks.people, this should be the result of the SOTA war, great features with great price not just churning out Pro Max series all the time.
Oh it means State Of the Art.I know what SINAD is, but can you explain the word SOTA for me? Thanks.
But for them, this needs to be in a larger heavier case with a larger price tags. Most audiophiles I know write off these products seeing how inexpensive they are.Thisall linear PSU*and the melf resistors at the audio output will make "old" audiophile souls happy
Thanks Amir!
Edit:*Nope,SMPS
On the contrary,the ones I know buy them buy the tens for fun,they just don't make it to the main display on the rackBut for them, this needs to be in a larger heavier case with a larger price tags. Most audiophiles I know write off these products seeing how inexpensive they are.
Their loss.But for them, this needs to be in a larger heavier case with a larger price tags. Most audiophiles I know write off these products seeing how inexpensive they are.
Not a fan of this "glued on display" style either, but I think there is a strategy behind it: They're effectively maxing out their design department and releasing new DACs as fast as they possibly can. Each unit also has a very limited lifetime. They use a shotgun approach to design choices and produce some quite quirky devices (e.g. the slanted M200) along with more mainstream stuff (mainly the SU-line). Thereby, they effectively cover most of the market including some rather niche tastes and saturate alternating market segments with a never ending inflow of new products. Everytime something "sticks" and sells well, they release a follow-up device with ever so slightly better specs and a similar design. If something doesn't stick, the product line is dropped.I really hate the design with the elevated display glass. I think the designer made a mistake and they didn't want to fix it, because they had already ordered 10.000 pieces of that display glass. So now they sell it as a design feature. Horrible.
I suppose it's a no-go for people who stuck them on desktop use.Not a fan of this "glued on display" style either, but I think there is a strategy behind it: They're effectively maxing out their design department and releasing new DACs as fast as they possibly can. Each unit also has a very limited lifetime. They use a shotgun approach to design choices and produce some quite quirky devices (e.g. the slanted M200) along with more mainstream stuff (mainly the SU-line). Thereby, they effectively cover most of the market including some rather niche tastes and saturate alternating market segments with a never ending inflow of new products. Everytime something "sticks" and sells well, they release a follow-up device with ever so slightly better specs and a similar design. If something doesn't stick, the product line is dropped.
This approach is quite different to most western manufacturers, which heavily rely on a-priori market research and aim to keep development, distribution and support costs lower by focusing on a comparatively much smaller number of products and product lines. I honestly don't know what is better, but each approach certainly has advantages and disadvantages.