[Dynobot]

Quote:

I asked the exact same thing in the loaner thread.  Currawong said it was because the loaner program was planned months ago.  But still, why do it if they are being discontinued?

one reason might be to let perspective customers get a hands on experience with AudioGD products.  They might not be able to buy a Ref7 if they miss out on the remaining stock, but they will have a good idea of AudioGD workmanship and skill at creating good sounding products.  For me at least having experience with their product first hand made me a firm believer in Kingwa's design philosophy and build quality.  So now I would not only recommend any product that he makes but would actually feel comfortable buying any other product that might fit my needs.  Which is why a lot of people [at least me] wish they had a complete Audiogd set-up.
 
Another thing, having a loaner program means you must have real confidence in your product.  For example if it sucks or is even distinctly flawed you will "freely" give the opportunity for some real bad press from the buying public.
 

 

[audio-gd]

Quote:

You would hope, but it wouldn't really make sense because someone said Kingwa mentioned he's sold DACs with 20,000 PCM1704UK chips already.  If that isn't enough of a business case, I don't know what would be, especially since you can order a real from TI in lots of 1050 or 1600 pcs.  And of course, people still want these DACs so there is a demand for them.  There's got to be some other reason.

I don't know if I this reply is proper at here.
Before the end of last year we can through agents application a factory price low than the standard quote if we got enough amount, like more than 2000 pcs, so why the audio-gd 1704 built in gears so cheapest . But now we can't, it mean the price rise a lot. Not to mention the price on some web shop which is a lot cost than the Ti standard qoite.

 

 

[Dynobot]

-delete-

 

[noinimod]

Kingwa states in the nfb1/nfb7 page that he's been testing the sabre chip for over a year, and i'm guessing over that long period of time maybe he figured out that the 1 sabre chip could sound as good as 8 x pcm1704 chips. Obviously it makes a lot more economic sense for him to use 1 sabre than 8 pcm 1704 chips and not to mention, easier job soldering and assembling as well. It's all about profits

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

I don't know if I this reply is proper at here.
Before the end of last year we can through agents application a factory price low than the standard quote if we got enough amount, like more than 2000 pcs, so why the audio-gd 1704 built in gears so cheapest . But now we can't, it mean the price rise a lot. Not to mention the price on some web shop which is a lot cost than the Ti standard qoite.

 

As far as cost of the the PCM1704 chip, maybe you could ask if people would be willing to pay extra.  Even if the price of the Ref-7, 8 and 9 go up in price, I still think people would buy them.  Your DACs are very high quality and still much cheaper than other offerings.  Even if the Ref-7 and Ref-8 was $200 - $300 more, I think people would still feel it is a very good price.

 

[lmswjm]

Quote:

As far as cost of the the PCM1704 chip, maybe you could ask if people would be willing to pay extra.  Even if the price of the Ref-7, 8 and 9 go up in price, I still think people would buy them.  Your DACs are very high quality and still much cheaper than other offerings.  Even if the Ref-7 and Ref-8 was $200 - $300 more, I think people would still feel it is a very good price.

Not if the NFB-7  = Ref-7 (with the DSP as a variable factor).....
 

 

[Epoch]

Well, I have to say that if the NFB series is almost equal to the Reference counterpart with a DSP-1 in it, I would already be making a tough choice between a $850 NFB-1 and $1010 Reference 5 DSP.  If I had to choose between a $850 NFB-1 and a $1200 Reference 5 DSP I can't honestly say that I would go with the Reference 5.
If the NFB line is improved and the Reference series increases in price it would be very hard to make a case for the PCM1704 lineup.
 
If there was a price increase of the magnitude suggested it would be very difficult to justify jumping from $1350 for a NFB-7 to around $1900+ for a Reference 7 if I was ever in the market for that kind of gear.
 
I see the reasoning for wanting to keep the higher end PCM1704 based units available, but I think that having a much cheaper alternative that is extremely similar will make it difficult to justify that.
 
Even on the low end, Heatfan12 just did a comparison of the DAC-19 DSP to the NFB-3 and did not find large differences, which is what Kingwa told me in an email before about the unit.  So if he is saying that the high end units are pretty similar between the NFB and Reference units, I really cannot state that I would purchase a Reference unit instead of a NFB unit.  In fact, as much as I love my DAC-19, I would not regret purchasing the NFB-3 instead, especially if it meant that I had a couple hundred dollars back in my pocket.

 

[IPodPJ]

Yes, but in Hi-Fi "pretty similar" can be a big difference for some people.  That extra 2% is why people spend big money on gear that they like.  That extra 2% is why someone would spend $800 more than the RE7 to get the RE7HE.  Even if the RE7 and NFB7 sound identical, you will always have people that have a bias towards R-2R DACs.  Until I hear the NFB-7 for myself, I have no such bias, but others will and do.

 

[les_garten]

I would argue that Audio-GD is not ALL about profits.
 
Compare what they offer for $1000 and then visit a ton of other places and see what your $1000 gets you, like for instance the single chip wonder offered by ALO called the Amphora.
 
I'm not saying that KW and Co. are not businessmen, I just think he's not ALL profit driven in what he does.  But I'm sure he has margins like everyone else does that he has to try and live within.  I don't think he makes the margins a lot of other vendors do. 
 
Think how much Ray Samuals would charge for a REF7?
 
Quote:

Kingwa states in the nfb1/nfb7 page that he's been testing the sabre chip for over a year, and i'm guessing over that long period of time maybe he figured out that the 1 sabre chip could sound as good as 8 x pcm1704 chips. Obviously it makes a lot more economic sense for him to use 1 sabre than 8 pcm 1704 chips and not to mention, easier job soldering and assembling as well. It's all about profits

 

[dmac03]

Happy Camper is on scheduled to receive the ref 7 in late November, in which he will be bringing it to our local meet. I feel like the nfb-7 is calling me out for the utlimate showdown on that date.

 

[Epoch]

Quote:

Yes, but in Hi-Fi "pretty similar" can be a big difference for some people.  That extra 2% is why people spend big money on gear that they like.  That extra 2% is why someone would spend $800 more than the RE7 to get the RE7HE.  Even if the RE7 and NFB7 sound identical, you will always have people that have a bias towards R-2R DACs.  Until I hear the NFB-7 for myself, I have no such bias, but others will and do.

I understand all of that, and I know that there will always be a market.  I just think that with both products the market for the much more expensive version is going to be extremely small.  Also, upgrades and changes to the NFB series are not impossible, there is plenty of room for more.  Dual mono has yet to be done, regenerative power like the HE version of the Reference 7 is possible as well, and any other tweaks that may be done.  There is still the question about what ESS means when they say that the filter is user programmable as well, so there is more room to tweak there as well.
 
I am by no means stating that the NFB series is better, or that others won't want the Reference series regardless of what happens, I too await further comparisons to have a better understanding of the different products.  I just see that there is room for changes to the NFB series, which could prove very promising.
 
I understand that some people will always prefer R-2R DACs no matter what, just as some will always prefer vinyl, and some will always prefer valves, preferences will always be preferences.  Preferences aside, an improved NFB-7 whatever it might be called, at Reference 7 prices, could be an extremely compelling product.
 
Again, its all up to results, I just see some extremely good reasons to not continue with PCM1704 units, just as there will always be reasons to keep making them.

 

[The Monkey]

Quote:

I don't know if I this reply is proper at here.
Before the end of last year we can through agents application a factory price low than the standard quote if we got enough amount, like more than 2000 pcs, so why the audio-gd 1704 built in gears so cheapest . But now we can't, it mean the price rise a lot. Not to mention the price on some web shop which is a lot cost than the Ti standard qoite.

 

 
I think this type of reply by an MOT is certainly proper here.  And based on the positive response to the audio-gd products, it would seem that you could probably pass along a price increase on a top of the line 1704-based model and do just fine.  Good luck.
 

 

[SP Wild]

Still waiting for my REF7.  Will do a shootout with the Bryston and seeing as I will actually own both, there should be little room for bias, and the loser goes on the chopping blocks simple as that. 
 
I am not at all concerned with tonal balance as this is merely subjective, what I will be paying extreme attention to is the detection of "digital glare",  those that can hear the digital glare will know exactly what it is that I refer to, otherwise all well designed dacs have strengths and weaknesses, most have sounded excellent to my ears.

 

[The Monkey]

How do you like the Bryston?  I found it to be a bit on the boring side.  I really wanted to love it, though.  In fact, I did love it at first, but it just sort of seemed rather dull to me after a while.  Nicely built piece of kit, though.

 

[SP Wild]

Quote:

How do you like the Bryston?  I found it to be a bit on the boring side.  I really wanted to love it, though.  In fact, I did love it at first, but it just sort of seemed rather dull to me after a while.  Nicely built piece of kit, though.

The Bryston is a professional orientated DAC, it sounds like one as well, detail retrieval and bass control was better than the Benchmark Pre and CA840, yet it wasn't as bright or as lean sounding as the others - those three were the only dacs available for me to audition by Australian retailers.  I had no problems with the Bryston as it was well advanced of my Dacmagic, until I heard a multibit DAC.  Only then I heard the digital glare on the Bryston and every other DA processor I have with me.  Changing transports bridged this perceived performance gap with regards to the digital glare between the Bryston and the multibit...but seeing the multibit costed 60 bucks and made in China....