1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

What a long, strange trip it's been -- (Robert Hunter)

Discussion in 'Mike Moffat (Baldr)' started by baldr, Oct 13, 2015.
First
 
Back
445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454
456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465
Next
 
Last
  1. JohnBal
    Wow. 48 hours and this thread devolved into a ragged mess of distortion and s/n. Please wake me from this nightmare and allow me to leave the sound science forum and wander back to Baldr's thread.
     
  2. bosiemoncrieff
    I'm aggressively ignoring the sibilance, have no fear. Also, I wonder if there could be like a "-5db" feature for people whom you want to turn down without muting entirely—perhaps showing, at random, every fifth or eighth post.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
    artur9 likes this.
  3. Don Hills
    Given the thread title, you shouldn't be surprised.
     
  4. garbulky
    Well a few points. Good grief, this thread has devolved in to attacks on both sides!
    - So does bob's graph ALSO point to a TEN BIT resolution? Does anybody know how to read this and say?

    Because if it does, that means Armir's DAC is likely functioning fine. Which would mean this is a concerning result.

    - What is the claimed bit resolution for the bifrost? Does anybody know? I hihgly doubt it's ten bits by reading Baldrs statement. I assume it's at least 16 bits.

    - Yes test setup matters. This "it's all relative" business needs to stop. Just tell us or at least link to the place where you do. I mean you don't have to. But then you realize you are a just another person on the internet with little credibility. Schiit are the manufacturers and actual designers of DACs so even without their own test setup posted, they have more credibility than a hobbyist.

    - No manufacturers aren't obligated to post their findings - even if it's in their own best interest or people are outraged.

    - Inaudibility. Well you can't pick and choose. I hear multibit "mission critical" and a tiny improvement in the timing filter and for some reason preserving original samples make a world of difference audibly - without providing proof.... (which is fine.) I am a subjectivist after all and I can definitely buy that multibit and timing and bit identical filters are somehow better sounding.

    BUT.... then we can't turn around and say anything below "-xdb" which just so happens to be where glitches in said DAC happen is totally inaudible. I mean there's got to be consistency. When do you decide to trust statistics and say "oh that's not possibly audible. There've been tests done! No reason to get any better " and when do you trust subjectivity "multibit is totally audible! I heard it and so did my mom" even though no tests have been done to prove so?
     
  5. liamo
    Which makes me wonder how much value one attributes quality of vocals compared to orchestration. How much can I forgive or credit one with the other? Thinking aloud. I was pleased with the vocals but was honestly concentrated more on the orchestra. I assume one would hope it all to be seamless and maybe it is with a more trained ear.
     
  6. bosiemoncrieff
    The more you listen to Wagner, the more you tune out the orchestra in bad recordings, which you tolerate for the singers alone (with the exceptions of Furtwängler, and the Szell Act 1 of Walkure from i think 1935). Bodanzky is fast and banal. Leinsdorf is fast and businesslike, but you're listening for Melchior, Flagstad, Lawrence, Lehmann, and Schorr. Stiedry, by and large, is irrelevant.

    Ferdinand Franz is an underrated Wotan, IMHO.



    Listen to that act from beginning to end, but the Siegmund heiß ich especially. He sings it like Wagner had written it for him the previous night. Breathtaking.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
  7. bobsherman
    Great stuff Mike. This is what makes you and your Schiit rise to the top!

    thanks
    Bob
     
    omniweltall and liamo like this.
  8. madwolfa
    Bifrost Multibit clearly demonstrates full 16 bits of "resolution" by measuring ~93dB of the dynamic range. Just because it's not perfectly linear at the very low end of the signal level (well below -70dBFS) doesn't mean it has less resolution. It's just slightly less precise there (like any other R2R DAC). Also as the signal gets closer to the noise floor, accurate measurement gets more complicated as well.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
  9. garbulky
    That sounds confusing to me. I read about mission critical and total accuracy and how DS DACs can't measure up to the Yggy with all their approximations because it has precision on its side.

    "For MRI diagnoses, doctors don’t rely on the guesswork of “24 bit” or “32 bit” delta-sigma D/A converters. Instead, they choose the bit-perfect imaging of precision multibit DACs, like the Analog Devices AD5791. We chose this same critical technology for Yggdrasil. "
    I'll readily admit that I DO NOT KNOW how to interpret these things. But your explanation of bit resolution sounds unusual to me.

    So is what you are saying is that the two measurements Bob's and Armirs look very similar in terms of bit resolution just varies on the interpretation of bit resolution?

    If that is what you are saying, (and I'm sorry if it isn't), then how is this unit a broken unit and not indicative of a working bifrost? It's either broken and badly measuring or it's the same as another unit whose measurements Schiit didn't seem to have a problem with.

    Now don't get me wrong I'm not questioning whether it sounds good or bad. I'm actually questioning if the two measurements are the same or close to each other because baldr said it's indicative of a broken unit.
     
  10. madwolfa
    Well, thing is - Amir's measurement indicates much worse linearity that Atomicbob's. The linearity on his (Amir's) graph starts to fall-off drastically as early as -58dBFS (and there's staggering 30dB difference between -58dBFS and -80dBFS), while Atomicbob's is perfectly straight down to -70dBFS and then there's only 5dB slope down from -70dBFS to -80dBFS. That's what lead Mike to believe there's something off with the measurement or something wrong with the test unit itself.

    I think equating the DAC's linearity with its resolution is a bit misleading.There might be a relation, but it's not as straightforward. It's more about precision (under certain conditions) than anything else. At least this is how I see it. Unfortunately I can't comment on anything else as I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough on this topic. I hope people like @atomicbob himself could chime in and make it more clear.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
    sam6550a and ToTo Man like this.
  11. madwolfa
    Compare this:

    [​IMG]

    To this:

    [​IMG]

    And tell me there's no difference?
     
    sam6550a and sublime9 like this.
  12. garbulky
    I think I understand what you are saying. So if I'm reading this right the two measurements are NOT the same at least on the graphs. That was my confusion. Sorry that I said that you were saying the measurements were the same.
     
  13. garbulky
    I honestly can't say either way. They look different but I don't know as I dont have experience. Thanks for clearing it up.
     
  14. madwolfa
    And that's the point. Most people don't know how to interpret things. It just kinda looks bad (especially compared to DS DACs), so it must be bad. And then it's taken out of context and used by some other people to peddle their agenda (with unknown intent).

    Measurements should always be viewed within context and from a correct perspective. No design is perfect and R2R DACs have their inherent limitations. There's always a compromise. Mike chose better sounding (to his ears) design over something that measures perfectly (but "sounds like ass") and I fully trust his judgement. If someone is not OK with that - there's a ton of DS DACs out there to choose from.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2018
  15. artur9
    The cats and VU discussion belong on the other thread. (Please, please, please keep them there!)

    Dunno enough about opera to really have a favorite but I think Cecilia Bartoli might be it for me.
     
    Turdski, decodm and bosiemoncrieff like this.
First
 
Back
445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454
456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465
Next
 
Last

Share This Page