[Scott_Tarlow]

Dual dac doesn't mean its better if it isn't implemented right fyi.

 

[PiSkyHiFi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott_Tarlow /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dual dac doesn't mean its better if it isn't implemented right fyi.

They would have to do something explicitly incorrect since Wolfsen themselves say the device has 120 dB S/N in mono mode and 117dB S/N in stereo mode.

This basic idea is to separate the channels to eliminate interference, which means they really would have introduce more noise externally to make it worse.

 

[Philski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PiSkyHiFi /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the HiFiMan uses the best DAC available full stop, although someone may be able to point to a better one, I couldn't find it.

The jury still seems to be out, but the Sabre DAC has received a lot of praise lately.

 

[PiSkyHiFi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philski /img/forum/go_quote.gif The jury still seems to be out, but the Sabre DAC has received a lot of praise lately.

hmmm.... yes, the specs on that are just amazing - its about time someone introduced a completely jitterless design, I always thought it must be possible - These guys are confident they have isolated it completely by slurring the input timing and using a state machine to clock out a sample into an isloated clock circuit allowing for errors in input timing to be eliminated.

With such detail though, even they admit that to get the benefit, you would need to use a 24 bit signal. I believe that this DAC or the best Burr Brown PCM1704U-K would be equals in the 16 bit 44.1 KHz realm since the sound would then depend on op-amps and remaining circuitry choices.

One would hope that there is an equivalent jitterless 24 bit ADC to match.

Thanks for the link, darn good read.

 

[tds101]

Who cares WHAT we all like - it's you that needs to be happy w/your rig. Go w/what pleases you - simple as that.

 

[foreverfi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott_Tarlow /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dual dac doesn't mean its better if it isn't implemented right fyi.

Any products hype with what their expensive components are applyed is indicating they are not confident on their own audio technology or skills. This is why no any hi end audio maker boast what components they have used.

One components can contribute less to the final sound quality.Any improper
supplementary circuit design will damage the contribution of any advanced single one components. This is common sense.

You know, one player is make up about 300 components. To propaganda with only one or few components to prove their perfect sound quality is baseless.

Further more, If some marketing departments just want to attract the attention of the customers, and ask the technical department to apply the improper parts, the final result will be wrong. Some parts is not suitable for protable players for the powerful supplying issue. For example, the engine of airplane is powerful, if it is used in a car, it will be a disaster.

To the specialist, more new components applying means more risk. before the vast market proved, to buy a "advatage components" player means to take the huge risk.

 

[qusp]

power supply is easily as important as the dac used as all the top dacs are pretty great these days; although I dont need 24 bit to notice the difference between PCM1794A and sabre 9018/9012. that and the 2604 is hardly the last word in opamps. i'm interested to give it a listen, but I think the hype is just that. 2 x dacs will make a very slight difference in DNR but I believe there are other much more important things to get right first.

to the OP, as far as your rig is concerned; ti'm sure it sounds pretty good actually. but there are certainly more than the 2 you mention that would better it. I have more than 2 myself that would.

but who cares what we think

 

[BrahmaBull9813]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qusp /img/forum/go_quote.gif power supply is easily as important as the dac used as all the top dacs are pretty great these days; although I dont need 24 bit to notice the difference between PCM1794A and sabre 9018/9012. that and the 2604 is hardly the last word in opamps. i'm interested to give it a listen, but I think the hype is just that. 2 x dacs will make a very slight difference in DNR but I believe there are other much more important things to get right first. to the OP, as far as your rig is concerned; ti'm sure it sounds pretty good actually. but there are certainly more than the 2 you mention that would better it. I have more than 2 myself that would. but who cares what we think

Hmm. Can you please elaborate on the HM-801? Is there better out there? I'd want to know because I really want the best possible portable rig without too much clutter.

I've matured from my Cowon's sound by now. iPod would sound trashy to me and Cowon's pretty much put me down to a base expectation of audio quality. I'm nearly ready to make an investment in the range of the HiFiMan. If that's the best possible DAP with the best possible output. I don't want to be presumptuous and assume that the player sounds great because of the hype and because it's a very expensive only-audio player.

If you can provide me with more knowledge with what I should know about audio fidelity versus equipment, I would appreciate it.

 

[kchui999]

For a portable setup, the Cowon is a great player that outputs some excellent sound quality. I definitely prefer my old x5 to the ipod i'm using right now with a pair of shure 420's.

 

[simoyoung]

you should try HM-801 or sony pcm-d50.the two rigs all have the ultimate music playback.PX100? forget it.

 

[qusp]

I dont own one so I cant comment and going by spec is a dangerously presumptuous thing to do in such a subjective area. problem with the HM801 FWIR is it presents quite a bit of hiss with sensitive headphones. this rules it out for me in its current form, unless I use it with another amp or an impedance adapter, which kinda defeats the purpose. all the same i'm considering it, but I would like to hear one first before taking that step, as I already have a pretty superb sounding rig that happens to be based around VERY sensitive custom IEMs