unpluggged
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2023
- Messages
- 983
- Likes
- 1,228
That was funny at leastI wish people would stop trying to use Arbitrary Incomprehension generators as research tools.
And as usual - also in this case - it has just regurgitated audiophile folklore.
Troll? Idiot? Either way, best not to engage with any furtherASR operates heavily on groupthink. Some things are considered anathema and R2R is one of them, even if you acknowledge the limitations as I have in this thread. I limited my inquiry strictly to 16/44 redbook CD, which good R2R implementations can very accurately decode, without any of the extra tomfoolery employed in DS implementations and look at the reaction it provoked.
Wrong word. "Pointless" would be more accurate.Some things are considered anathema
That "tomfoolery" allows DS dacs to achieve far better accuracy than R2R designs at lower cost (both/especially design cost and BOM cost)without any of the extra tomfoolery employed in DS implementations
Indeed.ASR operates heavily on groupthink. Some things are considered anathema and R2R is one of them, even if you acknowledge the limitations as I have in this thread. I limited my inquiry strictly to 16/44 redbook CD, which good R2R implementations can very accurately decode, without any of the extra tomfoolery employed in DS implementations and look at the reaction it provoked.
Neither, and this is the very definition of groupthink, right here. Look up the definition."Best not to engage with any further"
That's easy: it cannot. Turning off oversampling on these things at 44.1khz sounds close enough to the ear, but it is not really doing anything resembling accurate reconstruction of the sampled signal.Neither, and this is the very definition of groupthink, right here. Look up the definition.
If a resistor network is capable of passively decoding a 16/44 signal without any oversampling or noise shaping, and the rest of the product is competently designed, as is the case with the Topping and Denafrips Ares II reviewed here, tell me why a DS implementation for 16/44 is superior.
Without oversampling of 44.1 kHz your back to the problem of very step filters very close to 20kHz probably a combination of digital and analog filters like in the late 80’s when CD arrived , this is not an improvement. Note correctly implemented reconstruction filters can not be omitted especially when i NOS mode .Neither, and this is the very definition of groupthink, right here. Look up the definition.
If a resistor network is capable of passively decoding a 16/44 signal without any oversampling or noise shaping, and the rest of the product is competently designed, as is the case with the Topping and Denafrips Ares II reviewed here, tell me why a DS implementation for 16/44 is superior.
Also, the ChatGPT hate is stunningly laughable. It easily passed the Harvard Medical boards, Harvard Law Bar exam and is capable of writing code surely better than 99% of ASR contributors, welcome to reality.
Comprehensive rebuttal you've done here Oleg.
ASR operates heavily on groupthink. Some things are considered anathema and R2R is one of them, even if you acknowledge the limitations as I have in this thread. I limited my inquiry strictly to 16/44 redbook CD, which good R2R implementations can very accurately decode, without any of the extra tomfoolery employed in DS implementations and look at the reaction it provoked.
I don't even own an R2R dac, I'm just trying to understand the potential strengths and getting this much pushback. Also, the ChatGPT hate is stunningly laughable. It easily passed the Harvard Medical boards, Harvard Law Bar exam and is capable of writing code surely better than 99% of ASR contributors, welcome to reality.
"R-2R DACs perform direct conversion from digital to analog by using a network of resistors to create discrete voltage steps corresponding to the digital input. This simplicity is a significant advantage in terms of signal purity, as there is no intermediate signal processing like in delta-sigma DACs.
References:
- R-2R DAC: The DAC directly outputs the analog signal without any digital modulation, oversampling, or noise-shaping.
- Delta-Sigma DAC: Involves oversampling (usually 64x or higher), noise shaping, and the use of a modulator to convert the input signal to a high-frequency bitstream that is then filtered to produce the final analog signal.
In the book "Data Conversion Handbook" by Walt Kester (Analog Devices), the author explains how oversampling in delta-sigma DACs leads to the reduction of quantization noise but can also introduce distortion and intermodulation products if not well-managed. In contrast, R-2R DACs avoid these issues by directly converting the binary input to an analog voltage.
The paper "Design and Optimization of DACs for High-Speed Data Conversion" published in the IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems discusses how the speed of a DAC architecture like R-2R is often superior to delta-sigma designs, particularly in systems where latency is a priority.
The paper "Performance Analysis of R-2R Ladder DACs" (IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems) highlights that R-2R DACs, with careful resistor matching, are able to provide high linearity and low distortion, making them ideal for systems where signal purity is prioritized.
Of course you would think the spew of LLM nonsense (which scarcely makes it once sentence before a serious "citation needed" claim) you posted merits a comprehensive rebuttal, that's ChatGPT for you - people who don't know what they're talking about feeding garbage in, getting garbage out, and expecting other people to seriously engage with this ridiculous exercise.Comprehensive rebuttal you've done here Oleg.
I own a few R2R DACs. They are expensive to make linear, and even more expensive to keep that way as the resistor ladders drift with time and temperature. Just because something is passive doesn't make it better, even if ChatGPT says soNeither, and this is the very definition of groupthink, right here. Look up the definition.
If a resistor network is capable of passively decoding a 16/44 signal without any oversampling or noise shaping, and the rest of the product is competently designed, as is the case with the Topping and Denafrips Ares II reviewed here, tell me why a DS implementation for 16/44 is superior.
It was brand new at the timeWas it an old CD player from the 80s?
This.Also important to mention that ChatGPT does a lot of "positive reinforcement". If the input is "tell me why x is better than y" then it will try to do so even if not really true.
I have no idea if Schiit sent one to Amir, but as a reminder, they post their own Audio Precision reports, though of course without Amir's editorial comments:Thanks for the review!
amirm, do you have any plans to review “Schiit Gungnir 2”? Since both of them were released recently, it would be great to see a comparison between two players.