So, after watching Sandhu's interview with Rob, it's very clear that given Rob is making a new reference DAC, the DAVE is obviously not the best he can do; there are definitely improvements and new things he has learnt over the past 8+ in DAC design, new digital features and architectural improvements he's made and that he can definitely do a better job with the power supply and regulation, RF filtering, improve noise performance (because Qutest and TT2 have better noise performance than DAVE), and bring UHD DSP into the mix and update the FPGA from that old Spartan 6 to an Artix UltraScale+.
I expect a trickle down from the Reference DAC into a "DAVE 2".
To be fair, DAVE has the best transient resolution, and you can tell by the HiFiNews lab report, measuring distortion alone: "was able to resolve a vanishingly low 0.000007% THD at 1kHz and 0.00008% at 20kHz"
It's just that its noise floor, even if it's just a steady hiss, is too high giving it a lower SINAD.
Also something was wrong with the DAVE unit ASR measured, the channel mismatch and highly variable Channel 2 (SINAD vs time) was an issue. There are also PSU issues.
Also something was wrong with the DAVE unit ASR measured, the channel mismatch and highly variable Channel 2 (SINAD vs time) was an issue. There are also PSU issues.
There are a surprising number of ASR reviews that seem to find different measurements for each channel. Obviously it’s not the equipment or method though.
I think every reviewer should have to review a product before given any measurements...a site like ASR which is an embarrassment looks at measurements and decides a products worth before even listening to it...I have seen too many of their reviews to take them seriously
Also something was wrong with the DAVE unit ASR measured, the channel mismatch and highly variable Channel 2 (SINAD vs time) was an issue. There are also PSU issues.
I think every reviewer should have to review a product being given any measurements...a site like ASR which is an embarrassment looks at measurements and decides a products worth before even listening to it...I have seen too many of their reviews to take them seriously
Honestly the debate would be put to rest if someone..., anyone..., was able to differentiate a $100 DAC vs $20,000 in a controlled test. I live for that day.
Honestly the debate would be put to rest if someone..., anyone..., was able to differentiate a $100 DAC vs $20,000 in a controlled test. I live for that day.
Am not so sure that the debate would be put to rest if someone was able to differentiate a $100 DAC vs $20,000 in a controlled test. You can always rig a controlled test yourself - if you live for it .
The question is why is it so important for you to know if someone else can hear the difference between different DACs. If you hear no difference and there are no other ethical or quality aspects that differentiate them, then it must be better to buy the cheaper DAC.
Honestly the debate would be put to rest if someone..., anyone..., was able to differentiate a $100 DAC vs $20,000 in a controlled test. I live for that day.
Nothing makes a difference if it's measured well. Measured data is static and can't be manipulated so it fits all use cases. It's all about transparency and we all have same taste. People actually should grab wireless beats and EQ to whatever they like, dummies
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
.
