[Christer]

What is an intona and MP-u1?

Hi, not sure about the Intona, galvanic isolation I guess?But the MP-u1 is a battery powered psu that works quite well with Qutest and at least in my system delivers a slightly smoother, fuller and warmer SQ than the stock wallwart. But it is a bit inconvenient to use since it only runs for about 2-3 hours before a recharge is needed. And it take about three hours to fully charge again.
MP stands for Musical Paradise and it was a product sold in Asia where I bought mine together with my Qutest.
With Qutest alone at first before mscaler and Wave Storm BNCs I felt it essential to use all the time.
Cheers

 

[Reactcore]

An awful lot has been learnt over the past couple of years - with some extraordinary findings, of which I will be able to talk about (hopefully) later in the year. But one thing I have definitely confirmed is that as you go higher in sample rate the benefits from increased tap length diminish markedly; 768 kHz does seem to be the sweet spot for recordings, so future more advanced and costly M scalers will still be at 705/768.

hm i always thought doubling the taplength from a certain quantity means doubling the samplerate as seen on current MS.

One needs more samples to come closer to the actual transients, where infinite samples is best (thats analog)

Or is there a specific reason you chose 384k as a output for 0,5M taps and 192k for 250k taps?

So can we say 1M tabs might not be enough for predicting and recreating all 768k samples totally accurate? And we might need more to fully utilize 768k?
Ofcourse Davina will prove this..

Actually i can't imagine there arent any 768k ADC's already being used for studio recording to test this theory.

 

[Jon L]

Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage." Oh, well...

 

[elira]

Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage." Oh, well...

The qutest is an amazing DAC.

 

[Rob Watts]

hm i always thought doubling the taplength from a certain quantity means doubling the samplerate as seen on current MS.

One needs more samples to come closer to the actual transients, where infinite samples is best (thats analog)

Or is there a specific reason you chose 384k as a output for 0,5M taps and 192k for 250k taps?

So can we say 1M tabs might not be enough for predicting and recreating all 768k samples totally accurate? And we might need more to fully utilize 768k?
Ofcourse Davina will prove this..

Actually i can't imagine there arent any 768k ADC's already being used for studio recording to test this theory.

The comment about doubling the tap length with sample rate is correct about the M scaler, but it's not a universal principal. With the M scaler it's always one filter doing one job - 1M taps at 705/768k. So for 352/384 only half of the samples that are created by the filter are being used - the rest discarded, so the number of taps actually used is halved. If one was to design a 352/384 only filter then it could be 1M taps (although memory requirements would be larger).

Alas analogue also suffers from timing errors too; the 50kHz bias (sometimes higher frequency on modified reel to reel) use on tape effectively modulates the timing of transients. I have often thought that the soft sound from tape is also down to this bias - it's not just the distortion from tape. But even a simple amplifier will degrade transient timing, particularly if it has HF distortion. This problem is huge for digital, but regular analogue is not immune from it.

There are 768k pro ADCs available today, and I have heard some test recordings.

 

[Christer]

Apparently, the $15K DCS Bartok DAC sounds "just like Qutest with slightly better soundstage." Oh, well...

Hmm, I have never auditioned the Bartok, but if the music samples he used around the 8 minute mark where it started when I logged in to the YT review ,is the type of music he generally uses to judge SQ with, his take on SQ is completely irrelevant to me.
I do not waste my time with reviewers whose music choices are largely irrelevant in a HIFI context.
Electronic synthetic pop rock noise tells VERY little if anything about what a dac or any other HIFI product sounds like with well recorded acoustic music .
I stopped watching after those two examples.
But nevertheless, quite interesting to note that he apparently rates it as basically the same as Qutest at a tenth of the price of a Bartok.
I chose Qutest over both TT2 and Dave for its reasonbly good value for money in this crazily overpriced digital world, when used with an Mscaler.
The Mscaler raises the total prize considerably.
But it is imho an essential thing to add.
Cheers CC

 

[Reactcore]

The comment about doubling the tap length with sample rate is correct about the M scaler, but it's not a universal principal. With the M scaler it's always one filter doing one job - 1M taps at 705/768k. So for 352/384 only half of the samples that are created by the filter are being used - the rest discarded, so the number of taps actually used is halved. If one was to design a 352/384 only filter then it could be 1M taps (although memory requirements would be larger).

Alas analogue also suffers from timing errors too; the 50kHz bias (sometimes higher frequency on modified reel to reel) use on tape effectively modulates the timing of transients. I have often thought that the soft sound from tape is also down to this bias - it's not just the distortion from tape. But even a simple amplifier will degrade transient timing, particularly if it has HF distortion. This problem is huge for digital, but regular analogue is not immune from it.

There are 768k pro ADCs available today, and I have heard some test recordings.

Ah so thats why 250k on 192 has the same delay as 1M while on white.
I found this while switching DBNC-Qutest vs optical on my amp.

What was your impression of those 768 ADC's?

Will Davina make use of a pulse array for taking samples to eliminate jitter?

 

[Ragnar-BY]

Electronic synthetic pop rock noise tells VERY little if anything about what a dac or any other HIFI product sounds like with well recorded acoustic music .

+1

I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.

 

[Arniesb]

+1

I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.

He strikes me as the guy who have must have different opinion about every topic even though he is factually not right...

 

[Christer]

+1

I like to watch @GoldenOne channel. Videos are very informative and well made. At the same time, when it comes to sound and sound quality, I often have a completely opposite opinion.

Oh, I did not even notice who the reviewer was I just logged out again after those irrelevant musical samples used.
Cheers CC

 

[Reactcore]

Oh, I did not even notice who the reviewer was I just logged out again after those irrelevant musical samples used.
Cheers CC

My theory about electronicly computed music is that the used synthesizers place all the transients exactly on the samples on which it is artificially created.

Since the WTA filter is there to recover transients between samples it won't change anything on computed music like it does on mic recorded.
Hence why i hear no difference.
Even with MS added.

I do think that the pulse array technology with its low noisefloor brings benefits with this music type too.

 

[Rob Watts]

Ah so thats why 250k on 192 has the same delay as 1M while on white.
I found this while switching DBNC-Qutest vs optical on my amp.

What was your impression of those 768 ADC's?

Will Davina make use of a pulse array for taking samples to eliminate jitter?

The 768k recordings sounded reminiscent of an M scaler - extended bass with precision and a cavernous soundstage, with good instrument separation and focus. But it was by no means perfect though.

Sure the ADC will be pulse array based, just like the DACs. Indeed, mathematically an ADC is the same as a DAC but with analogue integrators and quantizers - a DAC has digital integrators and quantizers. The tricky bits are maintaining stability with analogue integrators, and the decimation path, as aliasing makes huge differences to the performance.

 

[The Jester]

With Chord’s amplifier presence in some well renowned studios Is there any interest in the Davina project from anyone in the recording industry yet ?

 

[Rob Watts]

Yes I get nagged a lot from pro people - why is it taking so long! I am starting to sound like George RR Martin on when Song of Ice and Fire series (Game of Thrones) will get finished...

 

[The Jester]

Lol,
Good to know we may all hear some Davina ADC goodness ..