R2R RIP or Resurrection?

[71 dB]

If you like music however, get a good quality R2R DAC.

Let me tell another bad joke: If you are a Star Wars fan, get a R2-D2 DAC.

 

[bigshot]

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/do-solid-state-amplifiers-sound-the-same.973009/page-6#post-18197674

Another good one with another good reply.

 

[JamoBroGuy]

Wake me up when a 3D holographic soundstage, lifelike timbres, layered mids, textured bass etc show up on a graph.

The reason those things don’t show up on graphs is because they’re not qualities of the transducers/electronics, they’re qualities of the music you’re listening to.

For example, why don’t say car enthusiasts argue endlessly that BHP, 0-100kph times, top speed and various other objective car performance measurements are all useless because we all drive differently?

Measurements don’t tell us anything about the car’s soundstage or transient response, we all drive differently.

 

[sygnus21]

I’m not sure what your system is doing but your R2R DAC is an electronic device, it has no concept of “fun” and cannot be “fun-loving”, it reproduces no more (and potentially less) detail than a cheap DS DAC, it cannot be “lively” and it also has no concept of notes or weight (and notes can’t have “weight” anyway). In addition, it should not get warm or, if you’re talking about frequency response rather than actual temperature, do you have any reliable evidence that your Denafrips has such poor fidelity? Incidentally, in case you somehow weren’t aware, audiophile marketing materials/videos are not reliable evidence, they’re pretty much the opposite.

See that's the difference between you and I - I see things one way, you see them another. Fine. But whether you agree or not is irrelevant to how I feel about my gear. I stand by my comments, as I'm sure you do yours.

Peace

 

[bigshot]

Anthropomorphism

 

[Diet Kokaine]

The reason those things don’t show up on graphs is because they’re not qualities of the transducers/electronics, they’re qualities of the music you’re listening to.


Measurements don’t tell us anything about the car’s soundstage or transient response, we all drive differently.

Gaslighting in this science forum never ends.

 

[colonelkernel8]

If you like graphs, go with a chip DAC. Graphically they all sound the same, or so I'm told.
If you like music, go with a good R2R DAC.

What the hell does this even MEAN?

I'm getting the impression that you're one of those people who's so caught up in their own delusions that evidence doesn't actually mean anything to you.

 

[gregorio]

See that's the difference between you and I - I see things one way, you see them another. Fine.

I see a DAC as an electronic device, that performs actions and has properties according to science/engineering. You apparently see your R2R DAC as some sort of magical cyborg device with feelings and perception (anthropomorphism as bigshot stated) and as more detailed and apparently having horrifically poor fidelity but have been unable to produce any reliable evidence to support your claims/assertions. It is of course “fine” for you to see things however you want and believe any old marketing nonsense/fallacies you choose. However, as your way of seeing things is contrary to the facts/science (and even common sense), then it is NOT “fine” to post it as fact, especially in a science discussion forum!

But whether you agree or not is irrelevant to how I feel about my gear. I stand by my comments, as I'm sure you do yours.

What you feel about your gear is irrelevant because. 1. DACs do not feel anything and do not perform their function according what you feel and 2. This is a science discussion forum, not your personal forum to express whatever you feel about your gear and assert it as fact. It is regrettable that you made such nonsense comments/assertions in the first place and even more regrettable that you’re standing by them!

G

 

[sygnus21]

 

[evanft]

I keep saying this, but I'll say it again. R2R DACs are like high-end watches. They don't actually do anything better, but they're cool. Tube amps are similar, IMO.

 

[BS5711]

I keep saying this, but I'll say it again. R2R DACs are like high-end watches. They don't actually do anything better, but they're cool. Tube amps are similar, IMO.

Agreed, the difference is that nobody "perceives" that a high end watch keeps better time because it costs 100 times the price.

Gaslighting in this science forum never ends.

Presenting a counter argument is not gaslighting. The use of incorrect terminology is also rife in SS forums, generally by those who are just trolling and use brief remarks that they think make them look clever.

 

[old tech]

Gaslighting in this science forum never ends.

Non science in this science forum never ends either.

 

[Diet Kokaine]

Deleted:

This crap is not worth my time.
Enjoy the Science section and your 200 dollar DACs.

 

[BS5711]

People have all sorts of "perceptions" about apparent sonic traits of audio gear but "perceptions" are not the same thing as "observations".

Those "perceptions" might very well be their "experiences" but that also does not make them "observations" of something that is real.

Blindly ignoring science and human psychological traits in favour of trusting potentially faulty "perceptions" sounds more like a cult to me.

---

EDIT:

" Deleted:

This crap is not worth my time.
Enjoy the Science section and your 200 dollar DACs "


Thank you, much appreciated

---

 

[theveterans]

Wake me up when a 3D holographic soundstage, lifelike timbres, layered mids, textured bass etc show up on a graph.
Like I said earlier.... if you like graphs, get a chip DAC. (Cheaper the better, so you can feel arrogantly smart on audio science forums)
If you like music however, get a good quality R2R DAC.

My Yggdrasil MIB R2R DAC has 119-120 dB SINAD BTW and so is Holo Audio May KTE R2R DAC