Sonicweld/Cryo-Parts Diverter 96/24 USB to SPDIF Review
Sep 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM Post #47 of 318
Not that I can tell. It looks for all intents and purposes sealed like a clam.
 
Sep 26, 2009 at 3:52 PM Post #49 of 318
After some serious searching I think I found a pic of the internals:
IMG_0197.jpg


What do you think n3rdling?
 
Sep 26, 2009 at 5:24 PM Post #53 of 318
FYI--Josh, the engineer/designer of the Sonciweld Diverter submitted a post to this thread about the Diverter, which touched a bit on his philosophy of design. However, when trying to submit it, apparently it required the mods to approve it. The mods have either been behind and held his post up for two days now, or perhaps they are not going to approve the post, either which is cool.

So...if the mods do not approve it by the end of the weekend, I will post it in my sponsor forum.

Peace,

Lee
 
Sep 28, 2009 at 3:51 PM Post #54 of 318
Quote:

FYI--Josh, the engineer/designer of the Sonciweld Diverter submitted a post to this thread about the Diverter, which touched a bit on his philosophy of design. However, when trying to submit it, apparently it required the mods to approve it. The mods have either been behind and held his post up for two days now, or perhaps they are not going to approve the post, either which is cool.


Any update on this? Having the designers direct input on this would really help people understand this product.
 
Sep 28, 2009 at 7:02 PM Post #56 of 318
Quote:

Originally Posted by santacore /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Any update on this? Having the designers direct input on this would really help people understand this product.


I hope that it will hint about the actual design of this product, but more then likely it is a lot about how he designs audio products in general.

I would like to know how burn-in makes a huge difference for a USB digital transport. Its just a data signal, SPDIF does not even send a clock signal. The data doesn't change if its bit-perfect with any USB transport and impedance surely isn't changing with burn-in. Almost any modern DAC is even reclocking it once the data reaches it. Its not like an analog output with large capacitors that many people burn in and I don't think the traces or chips are going to benefit from burn-in much. I guess that is one for the sound science forums, but being responsible for making any large difference for a DAC and/or HD800 is so hard to swallow.
 
Sep 28, 2009 at 9:05 PM Post #58 of 318
Seems to me like 90% of the post is about the physical case than the audio quality itself.

Don't get me wrong. I think the 'design' of the case looks AWESOME. No question about it. I just wish he can sell the not-so-beautiful product that has same sonic quality for $100. The looks might be a factor in making a decision to some, but not me. And I am sure many people would value $$$ > aesthetic looks.
 
Sep 28, 2009 at 9:58 PM Post #59 of 318
Sorry but I'm not buying it, literally and philosophically. We are talking digital domain here, not moving parts like speaker drivers. I linked to the Audio-gd Ref-3 earlier to show the components he incorporates like DSP, class A transisters and a big transformer, etc. for $550. There may be others like it out there, I don't know, but it's about value for the dollar to me and the Sonicweld piece does not feel like value.
If I want art, I buy art.
 
Sep 29, 2009 at 12:02 AM Post #60 of 318
A product is just not just a combination of parts to Josh, but rather everything coming together to be more than the sum of its parts, ie., $1000. How does not claiming military grade or boutique components, but not saying anything about whats actually inside your bomb proof device make it more valuable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top