The sound will be much better.
Mmm...not so much.
The sound will be much better.
I will need a preamplifier. The question is which pre will not ruin the sound?
If you say so.Your nonsense only says that you read decimal places in advertising characteristics
If the difference is obedient it is already a lot. Who will know that it is possible to improve the sound, intentionally do not.Mmm...not so much.
If the difference is obedient it is already a lot. Who will know that it is possible to improve the sound, intentionally do not.
If it’s not possible to use an external preamplifier, it is not necessary to turn on the DAC mode, but if you can ever try the external preamplifier, the sound is incomparably better. Even the inexpensive Emotive
Don’t deceive music lovers. Your nonsense only says that you read decimal places in advertising characteristics. But you don’t know how to listen to music and trust your perception of music.
No thanks tar, no one here has any time for this kind of response.Don’t deceive music lovers. Your nonsense only says that you read decimal places in advertising characteristics. But you don’t know how to listen to music and trust your perception of music.
You are a well-known Troll on the forum. Everyone knows that.
FifyMore of a ass...that's different.
Fify
Who wants to sell me their non-MQA D90...? I'm ready to buy..!
Don't get anxious. Unless you have to operate your volume control at -40dB or lower, its effect on the sound quality is minimal.
This is another typical audiophile obsession that is totally disconnected from reality.
BTW, also note that the best measuring D/A converter Amir has tested (Mola Mola Tambaqui) uses a single bit DSD converter in its final stage-there is good reason for this, and for the excellent measurements.
There are only two cases where the internal format coincides with an existing audio format. On one extreme are R2R DACs that directly convert the PCM data you feed them by controlling 24 switchable current sources, each of which has half the current of the previous one. On the other extreme sit 1-bit converters that switch a single current or voltage source but at a high sampling rate. Both these extremes have limitations and the most common choice these days is a kind of compromise. They use a small number of bits (typically 5) that are used to control 32 (2^5) current sources with nominally equal currents, plus some trick to make the conversion minimally sensitive to any imbalances in those currents. The Tambaqui sits more or less in this camp: the PWM signal has a switching frequency of 3.125MHz, and can take 33 discrete lengths from 0*10ns to 32*10ns. So it's basically a 5-bit, 3.125MHz converter. The choice for PWM was given by the need to get rid of those idle tones I mentioned.
One inherent weakness of the DSD format is that it cannot be properly dithered. So it's a non linear encoding by definition. Non need to go further.DSD is not audio madness, there are real audio benefits to DSD, which apparently you have not investigated. Perhaps you might like to investigate such before making such inaccurate statements, this is OT here (accept for the fact that the D-90 allows for Direct DSD mode, which IME with the D-90 allows for its best possible sound quality).
There are downsides to DSD as well of course (no free lunch applies here), such as the inability to edit it in its native state.
There often appear to be a lot of blanket statements made at these forums which do not apply actual science-I would love to see an actual scientific discussion of DSD recording (A/D) and playback (D/A), without prejudice, on these forums.
BTW, also note that the best measuring D/A converter Amir has tested (Mola Mola Tambaqui) uses a single bit DSD converter in its final stage-there is good reason for this, and for the excellent measurements.