iamthegruffalo
New member
Coll said:Heard them many many years ago but not recently, Im sure they would be just right for me but the problem is cost, wife hates me spending on the equipment.
Change wife option to be invoked there!
Coll said:Heard them many many years ago but not recently, Im sure they would be just right for me but the problem is cost, wife hates me spending on the equipment.
oldric_naubhoff said:I guess you're right. but in case of different digital filters there isn't any single perfect one. some do some things better, others do other things better. going by your logic this leaves me with conclusion that all digitally reproduced music must be nothing more but distorted version of the original no matter which DAC you use to reproduce it.
busb said:Yes, if you define distortion as any deviation but increased gain is a desriable distortion by that definition. Many will consider distortion as unwanted frquency domain artefacts that can be harmonically related or IM-based. I tend to think of frequency response variables as just that. The other type of distortion I dislike is amplitude distortion heard on far too many pop recordings caused by gain compression set too high leading to volume modulation.
busb said:The 1st DAC I heard at home was an early Bereford - it better my Rotel CDP by a pretty small margin. Before I bought my M-DAC, I used the DAC in my Panasonic plasma - it demonstrated that even basic DACs can sound quite acceptable. A friend brought round an R-PAC that had a noticeable mid-bass lift & far less detail. The same friend bought the Audiolab but sold it back to 7O's for £1k5's worth of NAD M-51 which is a good step up from mine when plugged into my system.
how much better DACs can be, I can't say but I guess better. Some state that DACs sound almost identical - I don't agree.
slice said:busb said:The 1st DAC I heard at home was an early Bereford - it better my Rotel CDP by a pretty small margin. Before I bought my M-DAC, I used the DAC in my Panasonic plasma - it demonstrated that even basic DACs can sound quite acceptable. A friend brought round an R-PAC that had a noticeable mid-bass lift & far less detail. The same friend bought the Audiolab but sold it back to 7O's for £1k5's worth of NAD M-51 which is a good step up from mine when plugged into my system.
how much better DACs can be, I can't say but I guess better. Some state that DACs sound almost identical - I don't agree.
I had the bushmaster and liked the sound, thought it was an improvement. However the source choice went wrong under warranty ; in fairness it was repaired free of charge. More recently I began to resent the extra faff of of dealing with an extra box, turning it on, pressing the selector up to 4 times to change source etc (yes, I know this isn't exactly a listening issue). Last week the source choice system started to misfire again, and I found myself resorting to using an old cd player excluding the dac, and enjoying the simplicity of it. I think I'm reaching the view that an amplifier should be the one stop shop for source selection, and will just choose my next amplifier from those that have built in dacs.