FredA
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2013
- Posts
- 5,554
- Likes
- 6,894
Looking inside of the two of them via the pictures, they look very much the same.
An amp requires volume control and amp components of whatever design he chooses. Whether its current-feedback, standard op-amp with Class AB driver or a full Class-A setup. The cost of a larger transformer is negligable, and the size of the two units looks comparable atleast from pictures. Chassis don't cost that much to justify 2x the price by only adding in a DSP and removing everything else.
Additionally the R2R-11 has every output that the R2R-2 has minus the XLR connectors (which would be around $2 to add, since its not actually balanced anyway). But the R2R-2 has no headphone jack, POT, or gain switches, input selector options, etc.
Its obvious that the R2R-11 is analog control and the R2R-2 is digital control, but the cost of such controls are not high. When companies like SMSL can make the M8 and sell it for $180 via massdrop while still making a profit, it shows that the DSP switching stuff doesn't cost much.
Hell I have a SMSL xUSB with XMOS implementation for output to i2S HDMI, Coaxial, and Optical for $60 and it has a screen and a select button for output & power.
As far as the NFB series.... hes selling something as Balanced which is not balanced. Dual Mono IS balanced. Everyone else selling a Balanced product is selling it with 2 DAC chips running in Mono mode for a balanced output.
Running a single DAC chip in 2 channel mode is the same as every other non-balanced device like a SMSL M8 for example. Just because he splits the output at the end for 2 XLR connectors doesn't mean anything as XLR is literally just a connector and you can buy RCA->XLR adapters for around $5.
As far as ACSS.... all the research I have done on it shows that it makes basically zero difference. It just transfers the current directly from one Audio-GD device to another Audio-GD device vs going through input/output buffers.
This would be the same as using any device with an internal DAC/Amp vs using something that is 2 separate units. At the end of the day no real difference is made unless you use some horribly terrible cables and manage to find some products that are terribly mismatched.
I've plugged all sorts of Amps into different DAC's and they don't sound different from unit to unit, only volume is different based on the DAC's output voltages.
The amp section is the same as the DAC's output stage in Audio-gd-s combos. You don't need much more than what i mentioned to add a headphone out. Maybe an additional gain control switching device to increase the gain when selecting the headphone out.
Transfos, the bigger, the more expensive. It's almost by the pound. Same for the chassis which is 2-3 times the weight for the r2r 2. Take a close look and compare all specs. Weight is specified as well as dimensions.
The altera dsp is not cheap. Quality connector are not cheap. All things mentioned justify twice the price at least.
As for ACSS, try a dac with it. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
The balanced statement refers to the output stage only. Balanced is not synonym to dual mono. Dual mono can be single-ended. Balanced means symmetric. A positive and a negative phase per channel all the way through, submitted to the same surrounding noise, implying ideally a symmetric layout, such that the noise gets mostly rejected when subtracting the two phases to derive the final signal.
Last edited: