advertisement


Stereophile reviews consist of two entirely separate entities, the subjective ‘review’ and John Atkinson’s measurements.
Keith
 
I suppose one could read the measurements & stats all day long, but how many people would buy a dac purely on those without listening to it? I wouldn't!

Where are you going to go to listen to a cheap DAC? I recently bought a Topping D50s just so I could find out what they sound like. It sounds very good, I’m not sending it back.
 
The Stereophile reviewer I'd assume given they said it......

In what way is that information useful to anyone but the writer?
Taste is definitely not universal, we all have one and it's more likely to be different.
I could say that I prefer vinyl in spite of its shortcomings but that doesn't mean other people will to. Just as I like two sugars with my Darjeeling, no milk.

No idea but you cannot link to a review and only take on board the bits you like.....

Of course you can, although I agree that it is crucial that one makes .
People can choose to trust the reviewer's taste-driven opinion in spite of poor measurements, or they may ignore the reviewer (which is all I do) and focus on the objective data (I even ignore the conclusion at the end of the technical assessment because it often dismisses serious shortcomings for character).

Magazines live off advertising not subscriptions.
Producing negative feedback can lead to loss of revenue, restricted access to equipment in the future or even a lawsuit...

And, as mentioned, we all have our own taste and are free to prefer whatever we fancy.
 
In what way is that information useful to anyone but the writer?
Taste is definitely not universal, we all have one and it's more likely to be different.
I could say that I prefer vinyl in spite of its shortcomings but that doesn't mean other people will to. Just as I like two sugars with my Darjeeling, no milk.



Of course you can, although I agree that it is crucial that one makes .
People can choose to trust the reviewer's taste-driven opinion in spite of poor measurements, or they may ignore the reviewer (which is all I do) and focus on the objective data (I even ignore the conclusion at the end of the technical assessment because it often dismisses serious shortcomings for character).

Magazines live off advertising not subscriptions.
Producing negative feedback can lead to loss of revenue, restricted access to equipment in the future or even a lawsuit...

And, as mentioned, we all have our own taste and are free to prefer whatever we fancy.

I'm not entirely sure why you started down the road of quoting me as I merely responded to Purite who initially shared the review. He did so as it berates the Audio Note's measurements and that was the purpose of sharing it however I simply also pointed out that despite the reviewer berating its measurements he actually liked listening to it.

Whether you want to agree or disagree with the review, with me or with Keith's intent I couldn't care less and nor was I suggesting anyone else should too.

What I DID highlight was the bit about the reviewer liking the kit despite its poor measurement as that was the bit Keith didn't mention.
 
Indeed, but that has nothing to do with distortion...

Even though "loudspeakers produce magnitudes more distortion than any amplifier, DAC or phono stage will produce..." we can still hear differences between electronic equipment.
With this I mean that you cannot use the former to condone high levels of distortion in electronics because they're clearly audible. Besides one can use currently accepted audibility thresholds to infer whether distortion is audible when analysing measurements.

The question in my view is whether "euphonic distortion" should be condemned and this is where freedom of choice collides with objectivity.
It may not be good engineering but should we ban high-distortion / lower-fidelity equipment when there is obviously a significant apetite for "euphonic" sound?

I believe that there's space for such equipment but the facts about the technical shortcomings must always be clear and availble/provided, sort of like a "try at own peril" warning. In other words, know the downsides then suck-it and see.
I say this from personal experience, having once jumped on the NOS DAC, the chip-amp, the single-driver, etc. bandwagon due to ignorance and lure in by mystic aura that surrounds these so-called "highly-musical" apparatus.
 
What I DID highlight was the bit about the reviewer liking the kit despite its poor measurement as that was the bit Keith didn't mention.

I understood that and used it to further substantiate my point about the worthlessness of subjective reviews.

I wasn't responding to your views on the subject.
 
I guess you picked the wrong NOS Dac and chip amp, tuga. Mine measure well.

Which DACs are those?

My first NOS DAC was a Shigaraki and it was indeed poor in most aspects of performance. I was using single-drivers at the time and listening mostly to vintage jazz so the downsides weren't particularly obvious.

I am currently using a reasonably recent DAC in NOS mode but I'm feeding it upsampled and filtered Redbook; it measures and sounds better.
I'm actually upconverting everything to DSD128, filtering and noise-shapping on HQPlayer.
 
Where are you going to go to listen to a cheap DAC? I recently bought a Topping D50s just so I could find out what they sound like. It sounds very good, I’m not sending it back.

I expect it will do - but have you heard an AN DAC (or alternative high end ish type DAC) in comparison?
 
Well this thread certainly isn’t turning out to be what I had expected. As usual quite a few people who are commenting either don’t agree with the principles of Audio Notes design philosophy or haven’t heard an Audio Note DAC. It begs the question why they would bother answering. I guess they want everybody to know their belief system because it’s so important.

Anyway, everybody has their own opinion so steering this thread in the right direction I would request that anybody who has had Audio Notes DAC 4 or 5 please share your feedback. It would not only serve as an interesting read but could potentially lead into a future purchase.

Btw measurements as a tool can be informative but I would certainly not base my judgement of an audio component on measurements alone. I personally think that’s ridiculous.
 
Well this thread certainly isn’t turning out to be what I had expected.
Happens all the time.
As usual quite a few people who are commenting either don’t agree with the principles of Audio Notes design philosophy or haven’t heard an Audio Note DAC. It begs the question why they would bother answering.
So, you seem to suggest that

1. Threads like this should turn out to be what you expected.
2. Only those agreeing with AN's philosophy are qualified to comment

Surely you've heard of echo chambers?
 
Raises head above parapet.

OK. I have a DAC5 (long story). I've had it some time and I keep it because it gives a better (truer?) rendition of vocal and instrumental times and textures, and more insight into how instruments are being played than anything else I've heard. I've had a number of much more modern and well regarded DACs in the house, including one in the study system I'm listening to now, but none approach the DAC5 for musical communication.
 
Raises head above parapet.

OK. I have a DAC5 (long story). I've had it some time and I keep it because it gives a better (truer?) rendition of vocal and instrumental times and textures, and more insight into how instruments are being played than anything else I've heard. I've had a number of much more modern and well regarded DACs in the house, including one in the study system I'm listening to now, but none approach the DAC5 for musical communication.
Not strictly ‘better’ by any metric but you like it and ultimately that’s what is important.
Keith
 
Happens all the time.

So, you seem to suggest that

1. Threads like this should turn out to be what you expected.
2. Only those agreeing with AN's philosophy are qualified to comment

Surely you've heard of echo chambers?

Fan clubs?
 
Btw measurements as a tool can be informative but I would certainly not base my judgement of an audio component on measurements alone. I personally think that’s ridiculous.

What about people's opinions leading to a future purchase?

If you are judging fidelity or technical competence there's no alternative but to measure performance.
For preference one has to listen.

Simples.
 


advertisement


Back
Top