What items have you NOT purchased as a result of ASR?

[renaudrenaud]

I've sold a lot of audiophile grade equipment accumulated amount few decades. No regrets and I am sure the buyers love them.

 

[tmtomh]

I personally think you 'should' at least try things out and don't rely on measurements alone - perhaps this review of the D90 will make you think about not just taking the linear approach to choosing audio components ... you really must listen for yourself.

Thanks for your reply. I haven't checked out that review (as it's more than 20 min and I just saw your comment), but I've put it on my list and will watch it later today.

You've every right to your personal opinion and I certainly understand the logic of listening for oneself. Auditioning gear - for sound, build quality, usability, presence or absence of noise/hum in one's individual setup, etc. - can be very valuable when it's feasible.

However, I think your position here - and your subsequent comment that "you need to try all options" - has a basic logical flaw. We cannot in fact "try all options" because we lack the time and money to do so. There are dozens, and in most cases 100s of options for every part of a potential stereo system, and not even the wealthiest, most dedicated "listening only, no measurements" subjectivist tries anything more than a tiny fraction of the equipment that's out there.

Even if you decided to try, say, only five examples of each item in the signal chain, and even if you have only speakers, a power amp, a digital source, speaker cables, and component interconnects, that's still more than 3,000 possible combinations you'd have to listen to.

So all of us use pre-listening information to narrow down our choices. The only question is what information we use.

By using measurements that have a well-documented correlation with performance, I'm able to greatly narrow down my choices. For example, flat frequency response in my digital source component/DAC and amplifier - plus an amp whose measurements show that its frequency response is insensitive to impedance variations - means I can be confident that frequency coloration is occurring only in my speakers (and the interaction with the room). Any source component, DAC, or amp whose measurements suggest it might not be flat from 20Hz-20kHz, I rule out of consideration, narrowing the field.

Similarly, low noise measurements tell me that it's less likely I will hear hissing or buzzing or humming from my speakers when I put the new piece of equipment into my system. More specifically, if I have unusually high-efficiency speakers - or if I think I might upgrade to higher-efficiency speakers in the future - then by looking for a very low-noise preamp, I can increase the chances that I won't have hissing or buzzing or humming issues (since high-efficiency speakers can accentuate that).

For interconnects, I know from certain physics- backed electrical principles, backed by an overwhelming number of measurements easily accessible online, that a certain gauge of speaker cable will work fine for a certain length of run, and that there are a large number of affordable interconnects that have been tested and produce results identical to (or in some cases better than) much more expensive interconnects. So I can narrow down the field there, based on specs, performance, and price.

With all of this my choices remain somewhat random - for every piece of equipment I have, there are others I could have gotten instead that would perform equally well and likely be indistinguishable. There are also many that might sound very slightly different, but - and this is crucial - not necessarily better or worse. And there are no doubt some that would indeed sound better or worse to me. I will never know with 100% certainty if I have the best performance per dollar from my purchases - and neither will you or anyone else.

I think the underlying difference in our perspectives is something much more basic. I have no interest in using source components, amplifiers, component interconnects, or speaker cables as tone controls. For me, tone controls, equalizers, and DSP are what should be used to actively and intentionally change the sonic profile of one's system (plus speakers and acoustic treatments, although with them its more of a necessity than a desirable situation that they influence the sound so much). What I'm looking for is maximum fidelity, which I equate with good sound but which some folks do not necessarily equate with good sound.

Vinyl playback and tube amplification are measurably, demonstrably lower fidelity than well-engineered, high-quality digital playback and solid-state amplification. So too, albeit to a lesser degree, is it easier and more likely to have IC-based op amps and single-chip DACs that are more accurate than discrete-component op amps and R2R DACs. (Certainly not impossible for discrete/R2R units to achieve superb fidelity - just harder to design, harder to control for unit to unit variation, and usually more expensive.) No reasonable person can dispute this with regard to fidelity. Yet our audiophile world is full of folks who prefer the sound of tubes and vinyl, and who at least claim to prefer the sound of discrete op amps and R2R DACs (and in some cases, 1980s 14-bit DACs and NOS DACs). They've every right to their listening-based preferences - but the notion that there is some greater fidelity magically lurking in these lower-fi components - that measurements not only do not tell the full story but actually indicate the opposite of the real story - is a notion with no real evidence to back it up.

If folks who prefer sound that deviates from maximum fidelity in certain ways would simply say that and be fine with that, we wouldn't have to have a lot of these disagreements.

 

[PierreV]

Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus.
If it wasn't for ASR, I would have gotten this, it has most of the features I need, well within my budget, I liked their CD player, and it's a reputable brand known for good value and reasonable price. If not for ASR, I would never buy some Chinese brand that I never heard of over this one.
Although if I bought it, it would be far from my worst audio decision.
That and some high end custom pure silver XLR cables.

Interesting on how the same review can lead to different behaviors : that's one of the pieces I did purchase because of ASR.

 

[fieldcar]

Massdrop THX AAA 789
supposedly sounds the same to Atom

I didn't listen, but now I've got an incredible stack for the office. The 789's build quality and feel is the only real improvement for my use case and borderline worth it. I also have the ability to run balanced if I ever want to get into some hard to drive headphones in the future. My HE4XX are the hardest to drive, and they are pretty much identical on the atom and 789, though the 789 has more gain to push it above safe listening levels. Man, what a time to be an audiophile.


As for my addition to this thread. I almost bought the older schiit magni+modi, then the atom launched, and I was an ASR addict. I ended up getting a JDS atom and Topping D10 for my first stack and have since upgraded to the D50S + THX 789.

 

[Karu]

I didn’t get any of the fancy input buffers or a second PSU for my Purify amp because of both the reviews and the discussion. I also didn’t spend money on replacing my old mytek 192 dac as it’s transparent enough. Finally, saved some 8m of 10 AWG speaker cable for the speaker sitting next to the amp thanks to a calculator shared here.

 

[tmtomh]

Interesting on how the same review can lead to different behaviors : that's one of the pieces I did purchase because of ASR.

Yes, very interesting! Although even in those cases I think the approach of this site helps clarify the reasoning for choices. No one here is arguing that this or that DAC "totally stomps all over" another one sound-wise, or that a particular DAC has "special magic" or "sounds analogue" or has an "extra sparkle" and so on.

There's nothing wrong with one person foregoing the Cambridge DAC for a cheap Chinese DAC that measures just as well or slightly better. And there's nothing wrong with another person going for the Cambridge unit because it measures well and they like the functionality and user interface and/or trust the build quality and/or want the warranty and/or suspect that unit-to-unit performance variations will be smaller.

We all have subjective reasons for our purchases. This site just tends to make those reasons more clear and transparent.

 

[ReaderZ]

Interesting on how the same review can lead to different behaviors : that's one of the pieces I did purchase because of ASR.

I think the timing as well, in last 2 year new, better and cheaper DACs are coming out in high numbers. Also where we live, this is 599 CAD in Canada while only 349 USD in US. While the DX7 pro I bought was 599 USD and 798 CAD.

 

[A Surfer]

I would also say that to an extent, but not completely, the conversational style here at ASR pushes FOT spending impulses a lot less than at other communities where the subjective wave is allowed to build with no objective conversations to dampen the feeding frenzy. Believe me, I know, I have been a member at head-fi for a decade and been involved and or watched many such happenings.

 

[GeorgeWalk]

I haven't bought anymore tube gear. I did have a Schitt Valhalla 2. I sold it. I always believed that tubes would sound ok, but once I saw the measurements and heard the difference I quit tubes. I think tubes look good in the living room glowing when friends come over but that's about it.

Also, I always thought that expensive cables and power cords were snake oil - now I know they are.

 

[simbloke]

When I stumbled upon this place I was looking for a new streamer, an Allo or Bluesound maybe. After I started reading here I realized that my USB connected DAC was probably find just fine.

Instead I have replaced my amp, started measuring my room and figured out how to apply dsp. Eventually I'll get some new speakers but have no plans to replace the DAC or streamer.

 

[pozz]

Thanks for your reply. I haven't checked out that review (as it's more than 20 min and I just saw your comment), but I've put it on my list and will watch it later today.

You've every right to your personal opinion and I certainly understand the logic of listening for oneself. Auditioning gear - for sound, build quality, usability, presence or absence of noise/hum in one's individual setup, etc. - can be very valuable when it's feasible.

However, I think your position here - and your subsequent comment that "you need to try all options" - has a basic logical flaw. We cannot in fact "try all options" because we lack the time and money to do so. There are dozens, and in most cases 100s of options for every part of a potential stereo system, and not even the wealthiest, most dedicated "listening only, no measurements" subjectivist tries anything more than a tiny fraction of the equipment that's out there.

Even if you decided to try, say, only five examples of each item in the signal chain, and even if you have only speakers, a power amp, a digital source, speaker cables, and component interconnects, that's still more than 3,000 possible combinations you'd have to listen to.

So all of us use pre-listening information to narrow down our choices. The only question is what information we use.

By using measurements that have a well-documented correlation with performance, I'm able to greatly narrow down my choices. For example, flat frequency response in my digital source component/DAC and amplifier - plus an amp whose measurements show that its frequency response is insensitive to impedance variations - means I can be confident that frequency coloration is occurring only in my speakers (and the interaction with the room). Any source component, DAC, or amp whose measurements suggest it might not be flat from 20Hz-20kHz, I rule out of consideration, narrowing the field.

Similarly, low noise measurements tell me that it's less likely I will hear hissing or buzzing or humming from my speakers when I put the new piece of equipment into my system. More specifically, if I have unusually high-efficiency speakers - or if I think I might upgrade to higher-efficiency speakers in the future - then by looking for a very low-noise preamp, I can increase the chances that I won't have hissing or buzzing or humming issues (since high-efficiency speakers can accentuate that).

For interconnects, I know from certain physics- backed electrical principles, backed by an overwhelming number of measurements easily accessible online, that a certain gauge of speaker cable will work fine for a certain length of run, and that there are a large number of affordable interconnects that have been tested and produce results identical to (or in some cases better than) much more expensive interconnects. So I can narrow down the field there, based on specs, performance, and price.

With all of this my choices remain somewhat random - for every piece of equipment I have, there are others I could have gotten instead that would perform equally well and likely be indistinguishable. There are also many that might sound very slightly different, but - and this is crucial - not necessarily better or worse. And there are no doubt some that would indeed sound better or worse to me. I will never know with 100% certainty if I have the best performance per dollar from my purchases - and neither will you or anyone else.

I think the underlying difference in our perspectives is something much more basic. I have no interest in using source components, amplifiers, component interconnects, or speaker cables as tone controls. For me, tone controls, equalizers, and DSP are what should be used to actively and intentionally change the sonic profile of one's system (plus speakers and acoustic treatments, although with them its more of a necessity than a desirable situation that they influence the sound so much). What I'm looking for is maximum fidelity, which I equate with good sound but which some folks do not necessarily equate with good sound.

Vinyl playback and tube amplification are measurably, demonstrably lower fidelity than well-engineered, high-quality digital playback and solid-state amplification. So too, albeit to a lesser degree, is it easier and more likely to have IC-based op amps and single-chip DACs that are more accurate than discrete-component op amps and R2R DACs. (Certainly not impossible for discrete/R2R units to achieve superb fidelity - just harder to design, harder to control for unit to unit variation, and usually more expensive.) No reasonable person can dispute this with regard to fidelity. Yet our audiophile world is full of folks who prefer the sound of tubes and vinyl, and who at least claim to prefer the sound of discrete op amps and R2R DACs (and in some cases, 1980s 14-bit DACs and NOS DACs). They've every right to their listening-based preferences - but the notion that there is some greater fidelity magically lurking in these lower-fi components - that measurements not only do not tell the full story but actually indicate the opposite of the real story - is a notion with no real evidence to back it up.

If folks who prefer sound that deviates from maximum fidelity in certain ways would simply say that and be fine with that, we wouldn't have to have a lot of these disagreements.

This was a very kind, full-worded response to that post. It was nice to read.

 

[idiomatically]

I personally think you 'should' at least try things out and don't rely on measurements alone - perhaps this review of the D90 will make you think about not just taking the linear approach to choosing audio components ... you really must listen for yourself.

Not sure that’s the best review to go off, ole CurraWong is pretty heavily invested with Schiit. That Topping D90 could be light years ahead of anything else he has there and I seriously doubt he would fess up to that fact. I think it is very important to know who is doing the review and why they are doing it as much as the review itself and use trusted sources.

I like ASR for its objective testing that confirms the qualitative feelings I have about gear. I have never heard something sound great that measures badly.

 

[tmtomh]

I personally think you 'should' at least try things out and don't rely on measurements alone - perhaps this review of the D90 will make you think about not just taking the linear approach to choosing audio components ... you really must listen for yourself.

Hello again,

I'd like to follow up, as I've now watched the video. "Currawong" didn't ring a bell when @idiomatically mentioned the name in response to your posting of this video, but as soon as I started watching the video I realized I know this guy's channel and have seen some of his videos before.

I don't mean to sound dismissive, but there's nothing in this video that I find useful. He states that there are nuances of DAC performance that are not captured by measurements. Almost more of an issue than the total lack of evidence for this claim is the level of vagueness and generality of it - I don't know how you can reasonably make such a claim without providing some kind of specific example.

Similarly, his "comparison" of the Topping D90 and the Schiit Bifrost is that the Topping measures exceptionally well and sounds very good but still can't quite equal the BiFrost - again in no particular or specific way: the BiFrost just sounds more musical or refined. I'd have to rewatch the video to be sure, but I don't even know if he makes it clear if he's talking about the regular Bifrost or the Bifrost multibit.

It's not that I don't believe him per se - his claim is not so much false as it is meaningless. I have no way of knowing what exactly he thinks the Bifrost does better, if that allegedly better thing is a fidelity thing or a pleasant coloration thing, if that better thing only sounds better to him with his preferred headphone type or model, and so on.

So it very well could be that if I bought a D90 and a Bifrost and I compared them, I might prefer the Bifrost. But it's at least as possible (to put it mildly) that I'd prefer the D90 or that I'd prefer neither one over the other. His 100% evidence-free assertion means nothing to me, unless I subscribe to the Appeal to Authority argument, in other words unless I believe his sonic assertions are ones I should take at face value because of who he is - which I most certainly do not.

So I'm back to the problem that the D90 and the Bifrost are among dozens if not 100+ DACs I could potentially purchase if I were in the market for one.

Should I consider buying and/or auditioning one or more of these DACs? Well, the Bifrost Mulltibit measures exceptionally poorly - 10 bits' worth of linearity is atrocious, and the jitter, noise, and distortion measurements are rather poor - perhaps most notably, intermodulation distortion is poor, which is likely to cause all kinds of problems. Since a DAC is perhaps the component that's easiest to find with the lowest noise and distortion in one's equipment chain, I would feel foolish spending money on a DAC that performs worse than a lot of amplifiers, let alone other DACs, on some of these key fidelity metrics.

That leaves the regular Bifrost and the D90. That's not an easy decision as the D90 costs $700 while the Bifrost is only $400. If I can afford the extra $300, though, the D90 is the clear choice for me: it has USB input, balanced outputs, a nice and useful display, and I don't have to reach around to the back of it to turn it on and off.

Moreover, the Bifrost Amir tested had three internal heatsinks rattling around in the unit because they were not properly secured, and one channel had 11dB worse distortion and noise performance than the other, which is very unusual even for analogue components like amplifiers and IMHO totally inexcusable for something like a DAC.

Even putting that aside, though, and comparing just the "good" channel of the Bifrost to the D90, the distortion and noise performance is 20dB - twenty! - better than the Bifrost and the linearity is 20-22 bit vs 18 bits. Those are massive differences.

So the specs and measurements - along with the features - tell me the D90 is the choice for me, unless I can't swing the $700 in which case I'd go looking for a $400 DAC that appears to perform better, be built better, and have better features and design, than the Bifrost.

Either way, I'm not a buyer of the Bifrost. Because the one thing no one is going to convince me of is that despite using an off-the-shelf chip DAC, lacking balanced outputs, and having analogue performance that is mediocre to decent, there is nevertheless some unique magic pixie dust in the Bifrost that makes it more "musical" than other DACs despite - or because of - its failings in the fidelity department. Refusing to believe that does not make me close-minded. It simply makes me someone who does not have blind faith in the unsupported assertions of random individuals like Currawong (no offense to him).

 

[RayDunzl]

I've not bought much since joining ASR...

Mostly because I was already equipped.

And less, perhaps, due to some "great measurement" and more as a "well, I didn't think of that and want to try that idea".

My typical purchase follows this path:

Think of some class of product I want.
Look at the equivalent products.
Maybe read between the lines of some reviews.
Pick one, and shop on price.
Buy it, wait for the doorbell to ring, hook it up, and make it work.

I can't remember returning anything, if it gets replaced in one system, it gets repurposed in another, or given away.

There is not one piece of gear in this room that I "listened to" before buying.

 

[idiomatically]

I did notice Currawong also posted a video yesterday pretty clearly slagging Amir and the ASR community off.

 

[Jimbob54]

I did notice Currawong also posted a video yesterday pretty clearly slagging Amir and the ASR community off.

I fell asleep halfway through. I'm sure he had a point, but blimey, so dull.

 

[Racheski]

I did notice Currawong also posted a video yesterday pretty clearly slagging Amir and the ASR community off.

Yeah wtf was that about?

 

[yodog]

Will never buy Emotiva gear. After seeing their responses to ASR measurements. Very unprofessional.

What responses?

 

[yodog]

Yeah wtf was that about?

Who’s currawong??

 

[maverickronin]

What responses?

I think it was of their AVR's Amir reviewed here.

Who’s currawong??

A mod on head-fi.