[Sonic77]

 
Yes the speakers suppress depth perception. But I am not looking for the ultimate depth, but for it to be transparent enough to expose differences. Fortunately, its very easy to hear minute changes in depth perception, certainly for a trained listener. Indeed, the brain tends to exaggerate, in an AB test one will sound flat as a pancake the other much deeper, but the actual change is actually very small.
 
This is fortunate, as we have no control over the recording chain, and the loudspeakers - this is one of the attractions of doing the pro ADC, that will just leave the microphone and loudspeaker not under my control. Depth perception is a small signal non-linearity problem, and this is an electronics problem, not so much a transducer problem.
 
Yes depth is about making it more holographic. One of the benefits of getting this right is with movies; film production spend considerable sums on recording, and they spend a lot of effort getting depth cues into the soundtrack. It really adds to the experience by having a convincing depth perception.
 
But there is more too it than convincingly portraying depth; when you can hear depth cues, you can also perceive other small details too. But its an easy way to assess - something sounds 40 feet away, against something that sounds 45 feet away.
 
Rob 

Thank you, I am looking forward to getting my hands on the Dave Dac.

 

[Beolab]

 
Yes the speakers suppress depth perception. But I am not looking for the ultimate depth, but for it to be transparent enough to expose differences. Fortunately, its very easy to hear minute changes in depth perception, certainly for a trained listener. Indeed, the brain tends to exaggerate, in an AB test one will sound flat as a pancake the other much deeper, but the actual change is actually very small.
 
This is fortunate, as we have no control over the recording chain, and the loudspeakers - this is one of the attractions of doing the pro ADC, that will just leave the microphone and loudspeaker not under my control. Depth perception is a small signal non-linearity problem, and this is an electronics problem, not so much a transducer problem.
 
Yes depth is about making it more holographic. One of the benefits of getting this right is with movies; film production spend considerable sums on recording, and they spend a lot of effort getting depth cues into the soundtrack. It really adds to the experience by having a convincing depth perception.
 
But there is more too it than convincingly portraying depth; when you can hear depth cues, you can also perceive other small details too. But its an easy way to assess - something sounds 40 feet away, against something that sounds 45 feet away.
 
Rob 

@Rob Watts have you compared the DAVE with other high end DAC's + 13.000 Euro during your developing process, and what is your honest judgement and conclusion of how it compares, if you don't name drop any brands, just sound / musicality wise ?

 

[Mython]

 

  I have a question Rob Watts, when you did listening tests, did you try different types of speakers? I own Magnepan 3.7i and those are different from cone speakers, so I was wondering, did you try different speakers and did that make a difference in depth perception?
I think my Magnepans give some serious depth to music just on their own.
Also, is "holographic sound" the same as depth in your opinion, or are they referring to two different things?
Thanks.

Yes the speakers suppress depth perception. But I am not looking for the ultimate depth, but for it to be transparent enough to expose differences. Fortunately, its very easy to hear minute changes in depth perception, certainly for a trained listener. Indeed, the brain tends to exaggerate, in an AB test one will sound flat as a pancake the other much deeper, but the actual change is actually very small.
 
This is fortunate, as we have no control over the recording chain, and the loudspeakers - this is one of the attractions of doing the pro ADC, that will just leave the microphone and loudspeaker not under my control. Depth perception is a small signal non-linearity problem, and this is an electronics problem, not so much a transducer problem.
 
Yes depth is about making it more holographic. One of the benefits of getting this right is with movies; film production spend considerable sums on recording, and they spend a lot of effort getting depth cues into the soundtrack. It really adds to the experience by having a convincing depth perception.
 
But there is more too it than convincingly portraying depth; when you can hear depth cues, you can also perceive other small details too. But its an easy way to assess - something sounds 40 feet away, against something that sounds 45 feet away.
 
Rob 

 
 
Rob, I'm sure the DAVE DAC sounds quite holographic, from a depth-perception, standpoint, but I'll be rather disappointed if it doesn't offer 'Hallucinatory 3D imaging', because we all know that unless the imaging is 'Hallucinatory', it won't sound real enough.

 

[JaZZ]

  Rob, I'm sure the DAVE DAC sounds quite holographic, from a depth-perception, standpoint, but I'll be rather disappointed if it doesn't offer 'Hallucinatory 3D imaging', because we all know that unless the imaging is 'Hallucinatory', it won't sound real enough.

 
+1. 
 
I'm definitely all for hallucinatory as well. So Rob, take all the time you need for perfectioning DAVE! 

 

 

[Beolab]

So the DAVE does not do any re-clocking like the MSB Analog, it upsample and interpolates instead or?

 

[Beolab]

@Rob Watts

What if :

What if the sky was the limit on the price tag, and you had put in like 8 FPGA processors instead of 4 , and you had the ability to program an even more demanding code without any limitations?

Another cool option on the DAVE would have bin the option to switch on a button and get a mono specced DAVE with a total 8 FPGAś in conjunction.

Or why not place 4 mono DAVEś in a series

 

[jcx]

popular quote - but with problems
 
Quote:

 

  I have a question Rob Watts, when you did listening tests, did you try different types of speakers? I own Magnepan 3.7i and those are different from cone speakers, so I was wondering, did you try different speakers and did that make a difference in depth perception?
I think my Magnepans give some serious depth to music just on their own.
Also, is "holographic sound" the same as depth in your opinion, or are they referring to two different things?
Thanks.

Yes the speakers suppress depth perception. But I am not looking for the ultimate depth, but for it to be transparent enough to expose differences. Fortunately, its very easy to hear minute changes in depth perception, certainly for a trained listener. Indeed, the brain tends to exaggerate, in an AB test one will sound flat as a pancake the other much deeper, but the actual change is actually very small.
 
This is fortunate, as we have no control over the recording chain, and the loudspeakers - this is one of the attractions of doing the pro ADC, that will just leave the microphone and loudspeaker not under my control. Depth perception is a small signal non-linearity problem, and this is an electronics problem, not so much a transducer problem.
 
Yes depth is about making it more holographic. One of the benefits of getting this right is with movies; film production spend considerable sums on recording, and they spend a lot of effort getting depth cues into the soundtrack. It really adds to the experience by having a convincing depth perception.
 
But there is more too it than convincingly portraying depth; when you can hear depth cues, you can also perceive other small details too. But its an easy way to assess - something sounds 40 feet away, against something that sounds 45 feet away.
 
Rob 

depth cues in commercial music and especially movie soundtracks is "painted on" from multiple mic feeds, microphones nearly never in "real" positions vs the "soundscape" being portrayed
 
 
and the whole effort is deliberalty "artistic" - exaggerating some effects/elements that do help with real world sound perception but usually pushing them to cartoon/caricature level - really has no one here read up on Foley?

 

[Beolab]

Request

@Rob Watts

Rob you mentioned that the DAVE deliver 6,75 Volts, but what about the current power (Amps) of the headphone output measured in what impedance / Ohms ?

Then want to know the watt spec @ 50 Ohms if its possible to inform us ?

 

[AFWannabe]

A lot has been revealed in this thread about the state of the art digital implementation of the DAVE, however, the analog implementation is in my humble opinion, at least as important as the digital in a DAC.
So perhaps Rob Watts could lecture us about topics like power supply, topology and components of the analog outputs, pre-amp vs no pre-amp, etc?...
Thanks.

 

[Sonic77]

https://www.facebook.com/chordelectronics/videos/vb.110747222358641/665711883528836/?type=2&theater
 
I don't know if you have seen Mr. Rob Watts DAVE presentation, but it is very informative.
 
 
Prototype Dave in action, not a fan of those speakers.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-32HucXPLA

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Rob
Can you give an ETA on sign-off yet?

 

[Beolab]

Request

@Rob Watts

Rob you mentioned that the DAVE deliver 6,75 Volts, but what about the current power (Amps) of the headphone output measured in what impedance / Ohms ?

Then want to know the watt spec @ 50 Ohms if its possible to inform us ?

The power spec of the DAVEś headphone output cant be a secret, or can it @Rob Watts ?

 

[esimms86]

esimms, modern music with overdubs still has image placement (provided the phase is intact.) the images are just more localised than say an orchestral recording. Dave is unlikely to project a Hammond organ or lead guitar too far away but that is unlikely to be the intention of the producer. I would expect Dave to reproduce exactly what is in the recording but I would not expect Dave to falsely image more closely a recording that has been recorded at distance (as other dacs currently do) based upon Rob Watts explanation of its character. It's all about the truth I would say.

Judging by comments of other listeners, if there is a sound booth ambience in the vocal recording you will likely hear it. If an ambient microphone as well as a close proximity mic has been used on an acoustic guitar you will likely hear it. The placing in the soundstage will be decided by the panning on the mixing desk for the original take and the added reverb (if any) If it is not there then it isn't in the recording and that's not the fault of the Dac. Of course Imaging is not the only consideration for buying Dave. It has more to it than that. Musicality and emotion are two aspects of the presentation that are important to me. In my opinion the goal of hifi performance should be to 'move' the listener emotionally in the same way live performances do. If you can achieve that then many other aspects of hifi will naturally be enhanced too. I get the impression already from the comments of listeners that Dave is moving us further down that path.

DaveRedRef-III, thank you for your very well thought out reply. I am not trying to blame DAVE for honestly portraying what's in the recording but, rather, simply trying to point out that said honesty might not serve all recordings/genres equally well. Worst case scenario may be some 1970's Pop music with a recording like, say, Led Zeppelin II with it's intentionally over the top mix of close mic'ed guitar, multi mic'ed drums and heavily artificially reverbed vocals(plus absurd panning of instruments and voices). Additionally, close mic'ed Pop music with an orchestra overdub with an obvious different sense of space would be another example.

BTW, thank you for the kinds words for my guitar. It's a 13 string harp guitar built by Allan Beardsell in Canada(www.beardsellguitars.com). It was the first guitar of it's type that Allan ever made and I believe he may have made 4 more over the ensuing years. There are many other HG's in existence made by other builders. If anyone is interested in investigating further I would suggest checking out www.harpguitars.net

 

[esimms86]

Rob Watts talks about how well suited DAVE is to hearing the audio portion of movies. While I can understand his point, I sincerely doubt that you'll find more than a handful of people worldwide who will spend the cash for a DAVE-centered 5.1 multichannel DAC setup.

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

esimms86
Good choice of example - Led Zep II my favourite LZ album. When I get my Dave Dac I will certainly give LZ a listen. Btw I don't know if you have it but their Mothership remastering is very good imo. I like Jimmy Page's mixes tbh.