It never fails: I post on a forum and there is always one guy that wants to start an argument.
Since I can't let forum "bullies" get any traction, I'll respond in detail so that all of you reading this thread get a bit more perspective on the topic.
Glina, I've always said: most audiophile specifications are like bikinis: the important things are not what they reveal but what they conceal
For example, how about tube amps in general?
Absolutely terrible specifications compared to solid-state yet some of the most highly regarded systems in the world use tubes.
How about MOSFETs vs BJTs?
When MOSFETs came out there were all sorts of amps advertising specifications like .0000005% THD, yet now the same companies that were manufacturing amps with MOSFETs have returned to using BJTs that don't measure as good.
And for an example considerably closer to home, the specifications on most modern single-bit DAC chips are considerably better than the specs on any vintage R-2R DAC chip, yet most of the people reading this thread prefer the sound of vintage R-2R DAC chips.
Obviously "measurements" don't tell the whole story.
But to get more specific, I'll tell you about some of the experiences we had with anti-resonance devices this year alone.
A few years ago my company tested several of the most acclaimed anti-resonance feet for under $300 and found that our favorite was the Stillpoints Ultra Mini. The improvement in performance over the EAR Sorbothane feet we put on all our products was notable. Something like 10%. Whatever the exact percentage of improvement, we sold Stillpoints Ultra Mini upgrades to customers for the past couple of years, and all of those customers were thrilled with the improvement.
Fast forward to this year to some time between our exhibits at AXPONA and RMAF...
Tony Landry, the owner of Exit Level Audio amplifiers and my co-exhibitor, was messing with his Mystique v3 DAC and switched the Stillpoints for Iso Cups, one of the anti-resonant products he's liked from Herbie's Audio Labs.
Keep in mind that Tony considers our stock Mystique v3 DAC to be the best DAC he's ever heard and that Tony's system is one of the best I've ever heard regardless of price (beats any $250K system I've heard at an audiophile show).
The improvement using Herbie's Iso-Cups over Stillpoints Ultra Minis was notable.
Then I purchased several of the Herbie's products to compare, including different material "balls" for inside the Herbie's Iso-cups.
When we switched from the "black acrylic" balls to the "moss quartz" balls there was another notable improvement in performance.
Frankly Tony and I were shaking our heads, rolling our eyes, and exclaiming things like "What!?!?!?!?" when we heard how much of an improvement it made to chang the materials the "balls" were made out of.
Then we compared our Mystique v3 DAC with and without a Herbie's Sonic Stabilizer on top (audiophile top weight)...once again an notable improvement.
Then we compared one vs two of Herbie's Sonic Stabilizers on top...a notable improvement that had Tony and I once again shaking our heads and exclaiming "What!?!?!?"
Since then we've had several people from the Santa Fe Audio Society over to hear some of the comparisons. All we would do is play the comparison with the Herbie's Sonic Stabilizers: none, one, and two. 100% of the audiophiles that heard our demo were blown away by the improvement in performance. Most of them ended up ordering the same Herbie's products we were using.
So based on that, we had roughly 4X "What!?!?!?" improvements in performance with anti-resonant products this year alone - based on feedback from a few dozen audiophiles I would estimate each of those improvements to be about 5% - so I'm estimating a total of 20% improvement.
Now add to that the improvement the Sorbothane feet we've been using made on our chassis, and the technology we use to lower the resonance in our chassis (2-piece, 1/8" thick, rigid, polymerized aluminum), and that's where I get the other 10% of the 30% claim I originally made. After thinking about it I would say that claim of 30% is on the conservative rather than exaggerated side.
Is it quantifiable a 30% improvement in performance? No.
Did I average and add up the percentage improvement estimated by several dozen audiophiles to get that number? Yes.
So now I'll respond to your last poke where you stated: "makes me question you actually know anything about that device" in reference to the Audio Note DAC.
To begin with, I have the utmost respect for Audio Note, but anyone that has been an audiophile for any length of time knows that they are a "flavor" and that the Audio Note sound leans toward the "hear no evil" and "sweeter" side of the spectrum.
And anyone that knows the manufacturing side of the audiophile industry knows that most of the so-called Audio Note components (oil caps, transformers, wire, connectors, etc) were not made by Audio Note in house, but rather sub-contracted to highly regarded manufacturers that specialize in those products (such as Jensen for their oil caps).
And anyone that is an engineer and/or designer of high-end audiophile gear knows that there have been several advancements in wire, capacitors, connectors, dielectrics, etc. over the past three decades since the PCM-63 was king and that Audio Note DAC was originally manufactured.
I have no doubt that the modern Furutech and Eichmann low-mass RCA connectors perform better than what Audio Note used 30 years ago.
And there is a very wide range of purity and performance from different brands/types of pure silver wire. Stranded vs single conductor...oxygen free vs OCC silver...and don't even get me started on different dielectric materials.
I have no doubt that the cotton dielectric 24AWG single conductor OCC silver wire we use (made by VH Audio) would perform better than whatever silver wire was used 30 years ago to make that Audio Note DAC.
And then there's the Audio Note silver foil in oil coupling capacitors (I believe they were made by Jensen). They were considered among the best-of-the-best 30 years ago but are currently considered by most to be over priced and under performing. Even Audio Note has changed their design over the past three decades.
I have no doubt that modern coupling caps, such as the V-Caps CUTF, Deulund Cast copper or silver, and Mundorf silver/gold foil in oil would all perform better than 30-year old silver in oil Audio Note coupling caps. I've personally tested all of those coupling caps and I've read a few in-depth cap shoot outs online. Every one of those in depth online reviews gave the highest ratings to the three caps I mentioned above and every one of those reviews gave mediocre ratings to the older Jensen and Audio Note silver in oil caps. So apparently my opinion of the vintage Audio Note coupling caps is far from unique.
Of course that's not even mentioning switching the coupling capacitors for amorphous core output transformers made by Lundahl (about $500/pair) or Teramoto (about $1,000/pair). Either one of those would perform better than any of the coupling caps I mentioned. FYI, Exit Level Audio used the Lundhal transformers in the Annapurna headphone amp we used in our award-winning exhibits from 2017. Once again, my opinion of the performance of these component parts is far from a unique one.
So Glina, unless you've had a similar 4+ decades of professionally custom building and upgrading vintage electronics as I've had, and unless you have first hand experience with all of the high priced boutique audiophile component parts I mentioned, you're only going to embarrass yourself making the statements you made
And with that I'll be signing off for a while...even if Glina posts another provocative post directed at me I won't be responding.
Anyone with questions on anything I mentioned feel free to PM me.
FYI, Yildiray and I are already holding PM discussions