Audio Note DAC 4 or 5. Just how good R they?

[tuga]

I agree but are they poorly measuring and badly built?

The reason I combine listening and measurements, and do my best to learn how to correlate the two, is to end with the endless tailchase of randomly selecting gear for tasting in hope that I will get a lucky strike (a bit like playing battlesip); it helps me to take some control over my upgrading decisions, saving time and money. I don't enjoy listening to different equipment just because, I have a reasonable idea of what I want and my methodology helps me to get there quicker.

But you don't need all that, just going with your ears is perfectly fine.

 

[tuga]

And, from years of doing this dance, I am getting good at relating measurements and topology with my preference.

I happen to prefer "accurate" but my approach would be as effective if I preferred "euphonic". I still listen like anyone else, I don't keep something just because it measures well.
It has to measure and sound good.

 

[S-Man]

I prefer OS setting. NOS sounds like an Audio Note kit DAC I owned - with an NOS chip and no filter. It was pleasant sounding, but everything played through it sounded like a Van Gelder jazz record from a bygone era. It overlayed both musical nuance and recording's house sound with it's own euphonic color.

I don't miss it at all.

I've only heard AN stuff at shows, but each time it has had the same characteristic sound - somewhat compressed in dynamics and frequency range, with a thick/fruity midrange. The audio equivalent of drinking chocolate with 4 tsp of sugar!

Their dems tend to be well attended (or perhaps it the same people who stay all day?), so some obviously like sweet drinking chocolate.

 

[Hooch500]

My own experience is with a Lampizator and then an ANK 4.1 I built. Just before these I had a Meridian 508.24 which to my ears didn't justify the hype, I then bought a Dax and used the Meridian as a transport - better but still preferred vinyl. It was the early days of Lampizator, mine wasn't particularly expensive, made up with hard wired components before his circuit boards were available and using an unknown DAC chip.

The upshot was I started to listen to a lot more CD's. I had NS1000's at the time which really hide nothing in the chain. Previously there was that flat one dimensional sound, with the Lamp there was a more believable version of events, to the point I stared to prefer it over vinyl. The ANK initially sounded disappointing, but for whatever reason it improved gradually over the next couple of weeks to the point it was clearly better than the Lamp.

I'm about to enter the world of streaming, looking at the Matrix x - the other end of the spectrum as far as tech goes, with startling figures from the latest Sabre Pro chip and cutting edge implementation and connectivity. It will be interesting to hear the differences as it also has a coax out included in its many features.

 

[S-Man]

I built a Lampi SRPP I/V converter for my CDP using the 6N16 miniature tube about 10 years ago. I went back to the standard OP27 I/V.

Although Mr Lampi himself pronounced my speakers "almost perfect, I would just like them to be 2 feet higher" when he heard them at one of the Wigwam shows. So he's obviously got very golden ears!

 

[irb]

Who dissed who first? Go back. There was no reason for him to comment. I don't judge stuff based on an audio show experience. A lot of quite excellent gear has sounded pretty awful at audio shows - including the stuff I own and like. Soundlab turned up at a show and they booked the wrong room - a tiny room for their massive speakers and they sounded awful. Stuff happens.

I guess you're right, Richard - you weren't the first one in this thread to be rude about the gear others like. Maybe I should have had a go at other posters.

However, I'm a (retired) school teacher: "he was rude first" never impressed me much as an excuse.