1. Absolutely! The other problem is that in today's world, where digital audio technology was effectively perfected beyond the limits of audibility quite a few years ago, boutique audiophile manufacturers have no where to go, no upgrade path which brings us closer to audible perfection because that's not only already been achieved but is now achieved routinely at a tiny cost. At bulk trade prices, an audibly perfect DAC chip costs about $1.50! Pretty much the only direction audiophile manufacturers can go, if they are to stay in business and charge more than a very modest amount for their digital audio products, is to lie, to misrepresent or dispute the facts, science and engineering. The result is an audiophile product which, in it's attempt to differentiate itself from cheap products, does something differently and ends up either not achieving the basic standards of engineering that cheap products achieve or, actually improves upon the basic standards but those improvements are inaudible.
2. Yep, the problem so often in the audiophile world is one of relative scale. What does say -200dB really mean and how does it relate to the real world? In the digital realm we can have and calculate any arbitrary low level down to minus infinity dB but back in the real world, where we have to convert those numeric values into an analogous electrical current and then an acoustic sound wave, those digital numbers/values are completely un-convertable even in theory! Sure, we use 64bit processing for mixing audio but there's two good reasons for that: 1. Pretty much all CPU chip manufacture today is based on a 64bit architecture, so it's cheaper to employ 64bit for the significant processing required when mixing than some lower bit depth which would still be sufficient. 2. Again scale! A consumer DAC has 2 channels of digital audio, relatively modest processing requirements for those two channels and therefore digital noise artefacts which should be well below audibility (assuming basic competent design), even at relatively low bit depths. 64bit processing maintains digital noise artefacts well below audibility in any commercial mixing eventuality and any commercial mixing eventuality includes some feature film workflows which can employ up to 1,200 or so digital audio channels/paths, plus numerous processors on many of them. Distortion/Noise artefacts down at silly numbers (-200dB and beyond) are therefore valid in commercial mixing as we could be compounding those artefacts many thousands of times but of course, this is an entirely different scale to stereo consumer playback!!
1. IMHO, a "more adult response might be to" learn some basic facts and apply some simple logic rather than swallowing hook, line and sinker whatever nonsense an audiophile product designer come up with to get you to buy that product.
2. Unweighted, that DR figure equates to or is poorer than the 124dB I mentioned above. This means, as 0dB is the highest possible value in digital audio, that the Dave is potentially capable of resolving down to somewhere around -124dB. But, that -124dB limit of the Dave is roughly 6,300 times higher than the -200dB noise/distortion Rob Watts claims to be hearing. So, in order for him to even potentially be hearing what he claims, he must obviously be using some other DAC with a massively better dynamic range than the Dave! Oh dear, to admit that is not great from a Chord marketing perspective is it? Not to worry though, there is no DAC which is 6,300 times better than the Dave, there's probably none even 2 times better and that's why what he claims to be hearing is utter nonsense. Note that we arrived at this obvious conclusion with just a basic fact or two (the DR spec of Dave plus an understanding of what it means) along with some simple logic. Nothing which is beyond even an average school child, let alone an adult!
3. The more "adult response" might have been to try and understand why you found some of the comments offensive and why they were posted. At the very least, an "adult response" IMHO, would have been to ignore those particular comments/posters but still open your mind to some of the others and some actual facts, rather than steadfastly remaining close minded to anything other than marketing BS and a demonstrably false belief in the accuracy of your perception. However, you're obviously unable to open your mind and/or unwilling to face the uncomfortable truths that those actual facts represent, which incidentally is another classic example of what I mentioned previously; accusing others of what audiophile themselves are most guilty of. So while you unsubscribing from this thread is not IMO an "adult response", it is somewhat understandable, if somewhat lamentable.
G
