diamondears
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2014
- Posts
- 1,867
- Likes
- 133
You seem hell-bent on proving the point that you don't understand the difference between bashing a technical solution and insulting someone (notice how your resorted to name calling in the quote above). Those two are not equivalent. Some people who like Planars think and post how Dynamic headphones are inferior based on the technology employed, that is totally ok. However, It is a false equivalency between someone calling out DS designs as inherently flawed one the one hand and suggesting that someone raises "suspicions" and is just putting on a "big commercial" for expressing their belief that a technology is flawed on the other hand.
You missed the point. The point is the bashing of Sabre/D-S DAC chips, and that the bashing is I suspect being used just to market or advertise the non-Sabre/DS DAC chip. In other words, I didn't start this. In fact I'm not criticizing just for the sake of it, I'm presenting arguments, and that is---how can you say/bash the DS DACs for being digitally glary when you didn't even bother to test (making sure other things are equal during the test, and not hearing different DAC units with different filters and implementations) if it's caused by the digital filter used, which is my suspect.
Look at the Yggy, it doesn't use the standard filter with lots of pre and post ringing. So how can we be sure that the non-digitally glary sound coming from it is primarily due to the AD chip and not the filter or "non-filter" used?