Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M - Page 3

post #31 of 69
7/20/04 at 9:33pm
Thanks for the review, I've been waiting a long time to read a comparison between computer sound cards and a high-quality external DAC.

My (new, from AudioAdvisor) Benchmark DAC1 arrives tomorrow....maybe I'll post a mini-review here comparing it to my stock 1212M after I've had a chance to listen to it a bit.
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #32 of 69
7/20/04 at 9:46pm
Heheh, you feeling the urge to mod yet, Peter?

-Ed
Reply
post #33 of 69
7/20/04 at 10:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood
Heheh, you feeling the urge to mod yet, Peter?

-Ed
No, expecially after what Benchmark's lead engineer discussed in the other forum. In fact after I removed the screws to have a look when it arrived, I left them off, in case I wanted to mod. Today I screwed them back in, while listening to the thing, no less. I am feeling the urge to change cans, however, to something less bright.
Reply
post #34 of 69
7/20/04 at 11:04pm
Time to start putting in some extra overtime so I can afford a DAC1 soon

I am thinking of upgrading my headphones first, maybe wait to see which ones you go with for that beastly source hehe.
Reply
post #35 of 69
7/20/04 at 11:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer
I know the RMAA result is not consistent with what I hear, it might be due to the high output impedance of the RCA jacks, but at any rate the RMAA results are not worth posting since they are inaccurate.
RMAA result are inaccurate???

I think you are insulting RMAA designers, honestly. Read this from them:
Quote:
As we can see, the results in Noise level and Dynamic range have just a 1.3-1.5dB difference (1 percent). We deem our precision quite appropriate considering that the use of professional equipment costs tens of thousands of US dollars while our expenses have been minimal (in the case of RMMA). Certainly, you won't receive passport data the same way, but one can be quite able to check the announced figures. Thus, we had the same picture with LynxTwo and the difference between passport parameters was about 1 percent. The test also enables to reveal if there are any quality problems in different modes.
Pardon me, they are comparing with Audio Precision System Two equipment.

[sarcasm]I guess your ears is more accurate than those equipments and they should invite you to come to their lab using your ears as a reference design of their next version of RMAA. Oh no, hearing test is subjective, many more people will question the RMAA accuracy then.[/sarcasm]

Sorry if I sound to be harsh. I am not doubting your listening experience, however, as I said before, listening is subjective to individual preference. So said, while I respect your opinion based on your listening experience, please do yourself a favour and respect those designer's works as well.

And regarding the RCA output impedence, what is the measurement of individual soundcard? How much the difference is?
Reply
post #36 of 69
7/20/04 at 11:56pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeeyy
RMAA result are inaccurate???

I think you are insulting RMAA designers, honestly. Read this from them:

Pardon me, they are comparing with Audio Precision System Two equipment.

[sarcasm]I guess your ears is more accurate than those equipments and they should invite you to come to their lab using your ears as a reference design of their next version of RMAA. Oh no, hearing test is subjective, many more people will question the RMAA accuracy then.[/sarcasm]

Sorry if I sound to be harsh. I am not doubting your listening experience, however, as I said before, listening is subjective to individual preference. So said, while I respect your opinion based on your listening experience, please do yourself a favour and respect those designer's works as well.

And regarding the RCA output impedence, what is the measurement of individual soundcard? How much the difference is?

Dude, back off. I am not saying that RMAA in general is inaccurate. I'm saying that the particular tests I ran using the DAC-1 were inaccurate, as they looked nothing like the tests shown by DIP16DAC of the DAC1. I don't know why mine were way off, but they were. Nothing against you or RMAA. I just didn't think they were right, so I didn't want to post something misleading.
Reply
post #37 of 69
7/21/04 at 1:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer
Dude, back off. I am not saying that RMAA in general is inaccurate. I'm saying that the particular tests I ran using the DAC-1 were inaccurate, as they looked nothing like the tests shown by DIP16DAC of the DAC1. I don't know why mine were way off, but they were. Nothing against you or RMAA. I just didn't think they were right, so I didn't want to post something misleading.
Hmm.... seems I misunderstand your post then.

I am sorry, my apologize.
Reply
post #38 of 69
7/21/04 at 2:26am
Iron, measure using headphone out for unbalanced or using XLR outs going balanced to 1212m, RME has inferior ADC which won't tell us the whole story, but the results looks nice anyway..
Reply
post #39 of 69
7/21/04 at 2:30am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glassman
Iron, measure using headphone out for unbalanced or using XLR outs going balanced to 1212m, RME has inferior ADC which won't tell us the whole story, but the results looks nice anyway..
I will try it again using the headphone jack tomorrow, since I've no XLR cables currently.
Reply
post #40 of 69
7/26/04 at 2:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer
I couldn't detect any real difference between the digital outputs of the cards. A couple of times I thought I heard something, but it turned out to be placebo.
Awesome review.

I am relieved to haer you say that digital sources don't make a difference. Based on the publshed datasheet of Benchmark, even injected jitter or 100 ft cable can't produce any measurable effect using Audio Precision instumentation. I am really curious why a hi-fi magazine reviewer claims that expensive cables elevates its sonic quality to a higher level. Too bad that I only have one digital source right now and can't test this with my own ears.
Reply
post #41 of 69
7/26/04 at 2:55am
Benchmark will drive a lot of snake oil cable manufacturers out of business
Reply
post #42 of 69
7/26/04 at 3:26am
When used as an unbalanced source, the Benchmark is particularly sensitive to cabling because its unbalanced outputs have a relatively high impedance.
Reply
post #43 of 69
7/26/04 at 3:34am
So what kind of unbalanced RCA cables have low impedance, that would be suitable to be used with the unbalanced analog out of the Benchmark?
Reply
post #44 of 69
7/26/04 at 3:37am
You're looking for cables with low capacitance. (Though, realistically, it probably doesn't make any difference with short lengths of cable.) In the thread where the Benchmark engineer was commenting, he suggests a simple XLR-to-RCA adapter that has a lower output impedance.
Reply
post #45 of 69
7/26/04 at 3:40am
Yeah, if memory serves, that XLR to RCA cable has to have the third pin floating.

Right now I am using a 3ft RCA to RCA radioshack fusion cable. Is this short enough?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M