DIY amp/DAC with better measurements than O2/ODAC? - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustA 

 

Sunglasses are designed to take away some sunlight, it's their purpose. However, amplifier is supposed to AMPLIFY the signal, nothing more.

 

That said, I have nothing against amplifiers that introduce distortion and change the frequency response... They are just not completely hi-fi (high fidelity). IMHO

I'm not sure if I understand. An amp designed to colour the sound will, well, colour the sound. Think of the sunglasses as the coloured amp. They're both designed to alter the result, the sunglasses reduces brightness, and the coloured amp can also reduce brightness.

HiFi according to certain standards, does not included a lot of gear, in fact IIRC most of my headphones are not considered HiFi because they have a frequency response that deviates far from neutrality. That doesn't stop me from enjoying them, and that was the point of KimLaroux's post, its about enjoyment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustA 

 

Sunglasses that don't lower the amount of sunlight going through, are not sunglasses anymore. However, an amplifier that does not change the frequency response is still an amplifier.

 

An amp is supposed to amplify the signal. Equalizer is supposed to change the frequency response.

If someone knows that they want a certain sound from their setup, and an amp gives them that, then not only is the amp not broken or bad, it is in fact a superior PRODUCT for that person.  Companies aren't selling theoretical constructs, they are selling products that people (in theory) want.  The best companies will understand what their customers desire and will give that to them.

I am not trying to hear the recording exactly as the engineers made it, I am trying to hear the music that the engineers were trying to record.  I would assume that I am not in the minority when it comes to audio related hobbies.  Nothing compares to live music, but I am still going to try to find gear within my budget that gets me as close to the involvement and enjoyment that I have when I listen to it.  If a piece of gear doesn't measure flawlessly, but gets me closer to that state, then the producer of that product has done something right. 

What are you actually after?  

There aren't many DIY projects that are advertised as "DAC & Amp combo". In fact, I can't think of any that are. A DAC&Amp is essentially just an amplifier and a DAC inside the same enclosure. Nothing prevents you from doing such a thing with any existing project. In fact, that's the beauty of DIY: You build exactly what you want.

Like a Buffalo III and a B22 inside the same enclosure... 

If that's no better than your Objective duo, then I fear you won't ever find anything better. Not in DIY anyways.

oh, it seems my posts didn't make it or I didn't post it yesterday... AMB supposedly didn't use the best testing equipment for the b22 from what I saw somewhere on the forums.

I believe "the wire" hp amp, as discussed over on diyaudio, may be at the top of the heap spec wise, but it has been quite a while since they did the gb.  I learned about it a week or so too late to jump on board and have been looking for a chance to hear this amp ever since.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KimLaroux 

 

1. Because software EQ are unreliable.
2. Because software EQ degrade the sound.
3. Because Software EQ is a pain to manage, especially when you have multiple DACs, amplifiers and playback software.
4. Because it's not Chinese crap.
5. Because your alternative is made of parts made in China. How's that different?

 

 

That was my point, I think. 

 

Nobody has the same ears. Everybody ears differently. There are no consensus on the perfect reproduction of audio signal, even less so for something as personal as headphones. I have a hard time believing every human's ears has the same flat frequency response. If you're going for "objectively best", then the _real_ way of doing it is to get your ear's frequency response verified, and find audio gear that compensate for this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RustA 

 

No, they aren't clear since this is completely subjective. No, they don't sound like crap because they don't sound at all, they are neutral and transparent and this is what the real hi-fi (high fidelity) should be (because otherwise, it's not "fidelity" anymore if you intentionally alter the frequency response and add distortion). And yes, this is only what YOUR ears prefer.

 

I personally have nothing against amplifiers and DACs that colour the sound and I am also searching for some suitable amp/DAC unit within my budget but I would never call any of them more hi-fi than O2/ODAC. The combination of O2/ODAC and HD800 is the most neutral and enjoyable I have ever heard, I enjoy to get close to what recordings are supposed to sound like. I don't think that O2/ODAC is the best amp/DAC ever but unless I get enough money to purchase Benchmark DAC2 HGC, I am most probably staying with what I have... Nothing seems to be convincing up to 1000USD.

Just want to point out that he is right, most of the people in this thread are wrong, and if you don't believe me, I dare any one of you to write a letter to audio note (who make both tube and SS amps) and ask them which ones they prefer. 

The whole notion that taking audio measurements with microphones and then pretending that your ears will respond in the same way is laughable at best. 

@ OP: I IMPLORE you to break away from the common lies that people like to feed to each other and make up your own opinion by seeking out audio stores where you can actually audition amps and dacs for yourself before you drink the kool aid that the 'graph noobs' like to follow. 

After that, if you like SS amps, then by all means, build yourself an O2 combo. The only way it can get better is if you use better quality components (ie. better caps, better op amps).

But if you prefer tube, the there are several open source designs. 

No kool aid and no microphones in amp testing lol. . . do some more research. 

The Objective duo sounds great if you like actual hi-fi. If you like distorted low-fi it will not be enjoyable. Distortion sounds so much better to so many people but to me it just sounds bad.

Also if the designer of the B22 has proven himself useless at taking accurate measurements. . . so it is not a contender based on the OP's criterion. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satellite_6 

No kool aid and no microphones in amp testing lol. . . do some more research. 

 

The Objective duo sounds great if you like actual hi-fi. If you like distorted low-fi it will not be enjoyable. Distortion sounds so much better to so many people but to me it just sounds bad.

 

Also if the designer of the B22 has proven himself useless at taking accurate measurements. . . so it is not a contender based on the OP's criterion. 

Hum. No. "Hi-Fi" has never been a flat frequency response before engineers high-jacked the term and redefined it using their test equipment. And I think we can agree that distortion is bad either ways, and so is not really the problem here. Even "subjective designers" agree that the lower the distortion, the better. Frequency response is the core issue here.

If you go back only a decade, a Hi-Fi system was expected to have a steep roll off before 100 Hz and a slow treble roll off. Sure, advancements in technologies has allowed to extend that, but no Hi-Fi system is claiming to have a perfectly flat response from 0 Hz to 100 Hz. That's just silly. And it hurts.

And here's the most silly part with all this argument: Few are the mastering studios that use a single, objectively better set of speakers or headphones to mix the final master. They use many different sets representing Home Theater systems, Multi-media systems, car systems, ear-buds... you get the idea. Audio albums are not mastered to be listened trough audio systems able to recreate a perfectly flat frequency response. Therefore, they are mastered in a way that compensate for that. In other words: Even your source, the music album, is not flat. Forcing this trough a perfectly flat system results in a non-flat output.

Conversely, The O2 measurements all the faibois are using as their bible to defend their opinions come from the same guy who designed the damn thing. A creator cannot be perfectly objective towards its own creation. Something can only become a scientific fact after the results have been replicated from different teams not having any interests in the final results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satellite_6 

No kool aid and no microphones in amp testing lol. . . do some more research. 

 

The Objective duo sounds great if you like actual hi-fi. If you like distorted low-fi it will not be enjoyable. Distortion sounds so much better to so many people but to me it just sounds bad.

 

Also if the designer of the B22 has proven himself useless at taking accurate measurements. . . so it is not a contender based on the OP's criterion. 

I really could care less. Until they make a test where it is one hundred percent customized to the buyer then there is no telling what sort of experience you are going to get.

For instance. If I look at the graphs of the HE-500s and even the worlds best SS amp with silver wire and a fancy 6.3 mm plug, I would be lead to believe that they sound amazing. However, I think they sound like total junk IMO.

I know the issue with the headphones is my own (and yes, I have tried many different HE-500s, they all have the almost echo sound) but it gives you some perspective that if I were to have bought those headphones based upon the charts, I could have lost quite a bit of money. 

In  the end, until people have actually heard both high quality tube and high quality SS amps, then saying one is better than the other is sort of asinine. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satellite_6 

No kool aid and no microphones in amp testing lol. . . do some more research. 

 

The Objective duo sounds great if you like actual hi-fi. If you like distorted low-fi it will not be enjoyable. Distortion sounds so much better to so many people but to me it just sounds bad.

 

Also if the designer of the B22 has proven himself useless at taking accurate measurements. . . so it is not a contender based on the OP's criterion. 

If you're trying to sound like an objectivist, you're doing it wrong. This is a personal attack on the designer of B22, you've not shown any evidence that the B22 is not a good amp, where as third party measurements previously posted have shown that the B22 measures well.

I have a friend who is a professional musician...He listened to my 3 channel b22 ($800+) and was like "eh"... and then listened to my Millett MAX ($200+,12FM6) and raved for an hour...he bought a spare board from me and built his own. I feel my b22 is the finest amp I have ever built, he felt it was just ok.