Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Objectively "Good" Amps and DACs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Objectively "Good" Amps and DACs - Page 4

post #46 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Don't you remember the nuforce udac2 drama?

"better sounding wins over better measuring" blink.gif and then they admitted the measurements of their own product surprised them!

I don't remember those details, but I do remember the problems they had when the v2 came out ... Lots of product returns. Did they ever get that sorted out? I knew a couple of their project managers, but I was never familiar with their engineering department. As I recall, they did a lot of products on spec. In other words, they would get bids from product houses in Asia and have products built for them by the companies they awarded their contracts to. At least that was my perception for afar. I could be wrong about that. I liked their uDAC2 when it first came out, but lost my affection for it when they started having serious reliability problems with them.
post #47 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Don't you remember the nuforce udac2 drama?

"better sounding wins over better measuring" blink.gif and then they admitted the measurements of their own product surprised them!

I don't remember those details, but I do remember the problems they had when the v2 came out ... Lots of product returns. Did they ever get that sorted out? I knew a couple of their project managers, but I was never familiar with their engineering department. As I recall, they did a lot of products on spec. In other words, they would get bids from product houses in Asia and have products built for them by the companies they awarded their contracts to. At least that was my perception for afar. I could be wrong about that. I liked their uDAC2 when it first came out, but lost my affection for it when they started having serious reliability problems with them.
post #48 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post

As I recall, they did a lot of products on spec. In other words, they would get bids from product houses in Asia and have products built for them by the companies they awarded their contracts to. At least that was my perception for afar. I could be wrong about that. I liked their uDAC2 when it first came out, but lost my affection for it when they started having serious reliability problems with them.

But obviously they didn't check if the products they got actually met their specs. Probably they still don't, though very unlikely after what happened. Actually in that sense it's good that this happened to them. After this I expect their products to meet the specs.

 

I don't know if there are any laws on this in the US but I guess not, which is a shame.

 

btw: Do they actually have an engineering department? Why would they need one if they have their products built for them? To do the listening? confused_face.gif


Edited by xnor - 8/2/12 at 4:10pm
post #49 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post

As I recall, they did a lot of products on spec. In other words, they would get bids from product houses in Asia and have products built for them by the companies they awarded their contracts to. At least that was my perception for afar. I could be wrong about that. I liked their uDAC2 when it first came out, but lost my affection for it when they started having serious reliability problems with them.
But obviously they didn't check if the products they got actually met their specs. Probably they still don't, though very unlikely after what happened. Actually in that sense it's good that this happened to them. After this I expect their products to meet the specs.

I don't know if there are any laws on this in the US but I guess not, which is a shame.

btw: Do they actually have an engineering department? Why would they need one if they have their products built for them? To do the listening? confused_face.gif

The guy that I knew was a VP for another company that did 3rd party product design to spec. And his company did some work for NuForce. So first hand, I have no idea how big their "engineering department" is, or if there even is one. I've since lost my enchantment with such off shore "value" leaders. Though not perfect, I'm really digging our (USA) domestic companies these days.
post #50 of 88
For me, it has a lot to do with a company's commitment to and delivery of after the sale customer support and service.

To me, a good approach to this is to employ Six Sigma design philosophies. Without that, the cost eventually will eat you alive. That being said, design for manufacturability and reliability are so critically important in product design and I'm sure most people here haven't even a clue of this and what's involved. That's a large part of why I get so enthusiastic when I see a company that "gets it".
post #51 of 88

I thought this was a thread about amps and dacs that have objective measurements to match the thread starters "good measuring LCD2's" vs how things are designed etc....six sigma is absolultely the most boring topic in the world.....ugh!!!

 

What about amps and dacs that have great measurements proving they dont add discerable impact to the source, have no audible bad traits etc....and thusly I hope sound totally neutral....amps and dacs from the low end cost wise to the high end cost wise....

 

If an amp or dac that costs hundreds of dollars less than and amp or dac that costs hundreds of dollars more with the same measurements..which one is the better ones???

 

I just got done playing with the O2 amp and ODac...and compared with my ears to other amps and dacs....I dont have the megabuck stuff anymore but to me I have made decsions based on what I am hearing?

 

How about your amps and dacs...that have 'great' measurements that sound great etc..

 

Alex

post #52 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by adydula View Post

I thought this was a thread about amps and dacs that have objective measurements to match the thread starters "good measuring LCD2's" vs how things are designed etc....six sigma is absolultely the most boring topic in the world.....ugh!!!

What about amps and dacs that have great measurements proving they dont add discerable impact to the source, have no audible bad traits etc....and thusly I hope sound totally neutral....amps and dacs from the low end cost wise to the high end cost wise....

If an amp or dac that costs hundreds of dollars less than and amp or dac that costs hundreds of dollars more with the same measurements..which one is the better ones???

I just got done playing with the O2 amp and ODac...and compared with my ears to other amps and dacs....I dont have the megabuck stuff anymore but to me I have made decsions based on what I am hearing?

How about your amps and dacs...that have 'great' measurements that sound great etc..

Alex

I guess when assigning "value" to one design or product vs. another we have to decide what factors are important to us. Is there any value to the level of support I can look forward to if my amp runs into trouble down the road? After all, failures do sometimes happen despite the best laid plans of men and all that rot. If I am concerned ONLY with performance, whether it's acoustic or on paper via measurement, then it makes my choice much easier. If I don't, care one whit about long term reliability and support, then there are a whole range of products that are likely to be cheaper in the short term.

So I guess we have to state our values first. What are the things we value most highly in an amp product? Physical style? Aesthetic coolness factor? Performance on paper? Performance acoustically? Convenience factors...I.e. remote control or not? Support-ability? Will the manufacturer be around tomorrow, or is it ok if here today and gone tomorrow is the way it is? There are many other factors to consider for value assignment. They differ from person to person. Nothing is more important than your individual list of values and that is why it's generally not a good idea to run after something just because someone else values it highly. Maybe their values line up with mine or maybe they don't?

So this whole discussion of objective vs subjective is sort of silly when one considers the big picture. In these tough economic times is there any "value" to me to know that the company I do business with is supporting workers and commerce in my country vs. another? You have to decide these things for yourself. It's an individual decision.
post #53 of 88

Very interesting...

 

Well I am as vain as the next guy.....and like cool things, that look great, and work great that do not cost much etc.....but I like the high dollar cool things as well....just not gonna buy them.

 

But as I have aged like a fine wine.....the cost / performance curve comes into play for me more and more.....

 

That said...in an industry full of all kinds of subjective claims....it comes down to what we can afford and how it sounds to our ears.

 

If I find an amp that is low cost, has outstanding objective measurements, that sounds great...well I am "in"....

 

If the cost is low to begin with, and well designed and documented and open source etc....then I am not worried about it going 'south' or not being able to build, purchase or replicate it.

 

In the case of the Objective amp, its well documented, has stellar measurements, very inexpensive to purchase or build, and its made in the USA if that matters to you.

 

And from personal experience it sounds great as well.

 

All the best

Alex

post #54 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post


I guess when assigning "value" to one design or product vs. another we have to decide what factors are important to us. Is there any value to the level of support I can look forward to if my amp runs into trouble down the road? After all, failures do sometimes happen despite the best laid plans of men and all that rot. If I am concerned ONLY with performance, whether it's acoustic or on paper via measurement, then it makes my choice much easier. If I don't, care one whit about long term reliability and support, then there are a whole range of products that are likely to be cheaper in the short term.
So I guess we have to state our values first. What are the things we value most highly in an amp product? Physical style? Aesthetic coolness factor? Performance on paper? Performance acoustically? Convenience factors...I.e. remote control or not? Support-ability? Will the manufacturer be around tomorrow, or is it ok if here today and gone tomorrow is the way it is? There are many other factors to consider for value assignment. They differ from person to person. Nothing is more important than your individual list of values and that is why it's generally not a good idea to run after something just because someone else values it highly. Maybe their values line up with mine or maybe they don't?
So this whole discussion of objective vs subjective is sort of silly when one considers the big picture. In these tough economic times is there any "value" to me to know that the company I do business with is supporting workers and commerce in my country vs. another? You have to decide these things for yourself. It's an individual decision.

Well said, I've been seeing for a while that what grounds peoples evaluation of what is good depends on their values they hold. The "good" in something doesn't seem to be a thing like "red" that can simply be pointed to. Understanding what values a person is using to ground a judgement on is necessary; however, it doesn't mean that disputes disappear but an understanding of the differing values is possible.  

 

There is another factor that seems to enter into the dispute, and that's something a bit more difficult to unpack- authority. Part of the values people have is who or what gets to make truth claims about the way things are, this is where I see things get the most disputed. If I believe that scientific materialism creates understandings that are absolutely truthful descriptions of the "world" as it is, I give the authority of determining truth to science. If I believe my senses alone give me the truth then I can't recognize the authority that someone else gives to science. 


Edited by JadeEast - 8/3/12 at 7:38am
post #55 of 88

Why cant you have both???

 

Alex
 

post #56 of 88

It would be like having two courts make a ruling on a legal case. 

 

* ^ Edit- Sorry that's a poor analogy on my part.

 

We can use both methods of getting to an understanding of the world. The issue I see is the necessary incompatibility when one side is privileged with the sole authority for determining truth value. 


Edited by JadeEast - 8/3/12 at 9:57am
post #57 of 88

What would you do if you bought a device, amp, dac whatever and it sounded really, really good to you, makes you all tingly inside etc...and all those wonderful adjectives start flowing about it....

 

Then you discovered that the objective measurements were just plain off the charts good as well???

 

Would you throw it away????

 

Has this ever happened to you??

 

Thinking, thinking....

 

Alex

post #58 of 88

I'd throw on Bill Evans live at the Village Vanguard and kick back.smily_headphones1.gif

post #59 of 88

Well JadeEast ...I agree 100%....

 

Last night I did just that playing around with the new ODAC.....instead of Bill Evans I was kicking back with:

 

 

Eva Cassidy...Live At Blues Alley and her SongBird CD....Songbird.....

Alanis Morrisette, Jagged Little Pill, song..."Perfect".....

Quincy...Also Know As Mary.....

Kenny Rankin...A Song For you...

 

Simply delightful...

 

Alex

post #60 of 88
So, if "science" says something measures well, but my ears tell me it sounds terrible, who wins and why? Goes back to what values I hold as an individual.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Objectively "Good" Amps and DACs