[KoshNaranek]

Wow. You really don't understand how this all works. Based on your logic, if two different DACs measure the same they will sound the same. Well, that is simply not the case. Measurements on a spec sheet mean very little when it comes to how a DAC sounds. Do you even understand how the digital to analog process works in a DAC? Some DACs upsample and some don't. Some are Delta Sigma and some are R2R (what Schiit calls "multibit"). Most DACs use some kind of filter or filters. There are hundreds of different DAC chips each with its own way go doing the conversion. Many of these digital filters completely destroy the original samples and output approximations based on the algorithms in their filters. Some of these filters alter the samples and their time domain. Companies that write their own filter code have unique output that is different than other companies.

I am sure that I am missing other important differences as well.

If what you thought was reality, there would be one or two $2 DAC chips that everyone used.

I find that Prem Rana Autari plays bamboo flute especially well

 

[rnros]

...However, exotic explanations of digital processing can make a person hear things that don't exist. If you think you are listening to anything other than the original signal + noise + distortion, it isn't I that don't know what I am listening to.

Or maybe, lack of knowledge can make a person believe things that aren't true.

Agree with @johnjen and @winders, and my own ears.

 

[rlow]

And...we're back to the subjectivist vs. objectivist debate again...boring.

Please read Jason's post on this:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/sch...obable-start-up.701900/page-690#post-12447731

Now let's move to other topics...like what the heck is Schiit coming out with this week!!!

 

[pctazhp]

And...we're back to the subjectivist vs. objectivist debate again...boring.

Please read Jason's post on this:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/sch...obable-start-up.701900/page-690#post-12447731

Now let's move to other topics...like what the heck is Schiit coming out with this week!!!

Thank you. This debate has been going on for decades and it's always the same old thing. So boring. And inevitably the debates always spiral down to personal attacks. Jason's handling of this issue is, in my opinion, masterful.

 

[Robert Wortman]

Wow. You really don't understand how this all works. Based on your logic, if two different DACs measure the same they will sound the same. Well, that is simply not the case. Measurements on a spec sheet mean very little when it comes to how a DAC sounds. Do you even understand how the digital to analog process works in a DAC? Some DACs upsample and some don't. Some are Delta Sigma and some are R2R (what Schiit calls "multibit"). Most DACs use some kind of filter or filters. There are hundreds of different DAC chips each with its own way go doing the conversion. Many of these digital filters completely destroy the original samples and output approximations based on the algorithms in their filters. Some of these filters alter the samples and their time domain. Companies that write their own filter code have unique output that is different than other companies.

I am sure that I am missing other important differences as well.

If what you thought was reality, there would be one or two $2 DAC chips that everyone used.

By definition anything that deviates from the original signal is either noise or distortion. I am an engineer and a well read audio enthusiast. I understand what goes on inside a DAC better than most. That doesn't change the fact that, whatever the internal architecture, anything that isn't part of the original encoded signal is either noise or distortion. It is what appears at the output that matters. If you want to say that there are forms of distortion that aren't measurable, OK. That seems to be the general audiophile hypothesis. The idea that measurements mean nearly nothing is wrong. If there are amp or DAC designers that don't measure their designs, they are charlatans and no one should buy their products. Why does Schiit measure their stuff and publish the measurements? The ADC conversion that produced your digital file is already an approximation. While I think Mike's MB DAC architecture is more elegant from an engineering perspective, it is far from a given that it is audibly superior. There are many revered D/S DAC's out there. It's OK to buy something because it is a cool design.

 

[Brian D]

Please. Just. Stop.

 

[garbulky]

I think the crux is that there is no dac that has no distortion. Every DAC has distortion. So usually the argument is "well it's pretty low, so it must sound exactly the same. Can you hear the difference between 0.1% THD and 0.0005% THD?"
And that right there is only an intepretation. Let me say that again that's an intepretation or an assumption on how this distortion would sound - usually using DBT testing to back it up. DBT cannot prove there isn't a difference as that is not how DBT works. It can only PROVE a difference not the other way around.

Also note that two measurements don't describe how anything sounds. There are a lot of measurements - most not published or performed - and interpreting them to human perception isn't easy.

I lean towards yes there is a difference, and an important one, but not always in the way you would think. For instance the Gumby had a vertically "bigger" soundstage than my Emotiva DC-1 (delta sigma $500) and a very analog sound. There was a slight coloration on the sound that the DC-1 had that the Gumby did not have. But the Gumby's treble was colored too just in a different way (a more raw sound if you will). The DC-1 provided - surprisingly - better room recorded room ambience and finer resolution of details and was more even handed in the treble. So imo neither won out, but they both did it differently, each edging out the other just in different ways.

The tiny and much cheaper Audioquest dragonfly Red beat out the $400 Emotiva XDA-2 in audio quality but lacked all the inputs the XDA-2 had despite it lacking its own torroidal power supply and getting power from a cheap USB port.
All of these units had "assumedly" inaudible levels of THD and frequency response.

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

OK, now for something completely different.
@Jason Stoddard: Is the Schiit revelation tomorrow a facebook event?

 

[Bikerider1001]

OK, now for something completely different.
@Jason Stoddard: Is the Schiit revelation tomorrow a facebook event?

I thought the introduction was today, the 18th?

 

[HumanFly]

I thought it was yesterday but I`m an optimist
Or maybe not an optimist but slightly pronoid.
Are you all trying to improve my SQ?

 

[slefty]

Everything that is different from the original signal is either noise or distortion. No noise and no distortion means a perfect copy. Whatever other factors you are referring to either produce noise or distortion or they have no effect. Audio isn't magic. If the DAC passes on imperfect information it results in either noise or distortion. However, exotic explanations of digital processing can make a person hear things that don't exist. If you think you are listening to anything other than the original signal + noise + distortion, it isn't I that don't know what I am listening to.

But what "distortion" are you measuring for, and is your number really relevant to all manner of distortion in the digital domain? In the early days of digital and CD, the objecivist-measurement-only folks didn't believe jitter existed, and bringing it up it was controversial. Now it is better understood, measurable and excepted as significant. Just because you can say "distortion" doesn't mean you have any criteria for saying what "distortion" you are hearing or measuring.

 

[landroni]

Everything that is different from the original signal is either noise or distortion. No noise and no distortion means a perfect copy.

Perfect? You must be an incorrigible optimist, and probably forgot about things like the quantization "chop-chop". I had some thoughts on this subject in the past, and still don't have any reasons to change mind.

 

[Clemmaster]

But isn't distortion...noise?

MIND. BLOWN.

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

I thought it was yesterday but I`m an optimist
Or maybe not an optimist but slightly pronoid.
Are you all trying to improve my SQ?

Jason was very clear about the dates.

Hey guys,
One will be two weeks before RMAF, on September 19.
Then, you'll see another new product one week before RMAF, on the 26th.
And finally, at RMAF, we'll have something really groundbreaking.

 

[QueYo]

I put together my audio system years ago. There were high priced DACs at the time, but I ignored them. I was skeptical about an expensive DAC because I figured all they do is read binary values that correspond to an analog value, and we have devices that accurately read binary values all day long. On a more practical level, there was zero chance I was going to buy a $5000 DAC because that was more than my entire budget.

I plan on upgrading my system over the next year or so. I got back in to researching and was happy to learn that there is a company making affordable, quality gear in the U.S. My plan was speakers, amp, pre-amp; I didn't really give much thought to a DAC. But what I read about DACs made me think I needed to hear for myself, so I ordered a Modi Multibit. And it sounds much better and different than the Burr Brown DAC I was using. Not less distortion, not less noise; the basic description would be more separation and resolution of the individual parts. So now I have to add a DAC to my purchase list. I'll probably buy it last and use my MM until then.

I've thought that it would be interesting to compare the sound coming out of each DAC to the same recording through a nice analog rig and see which matches more closely. It would be a challenge to confirm that two recordings are from the same master; and I don't have a nice analog rig; and I know which one I like better. So maybe there isn't much point to it.