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!
The Stereophile reviewer I'd assume given they said it......
No idea but you cannot link to a review and only take on board the bits you like.....
You get used to Keith’s ASR Measurement Bombs randomly dropping in threads; quite quickly given his endless supply.No idea but you cannot link to a review and only take on board the bits you like.....
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.
Indeed, but that has nothing to do with distortion...
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 guess you picked the wrong NOS Dac and chip amp, tuga. Mine measure well.
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.
Audial S4. I linked to measurements in my review. (Amp is a Temple Audio Bantam One).Which DACs are those?
Happens all the time.Well this thread certainly isn’t turning out to be what I had expected.
So, you seem to suggest thatAs 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.
Not strictly ‘better’ by any metric but you like it and ultimately that’s what is important.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.
It's OK - I've been patronised by masters of the craft so skilled you don't even realise it's happened till days later. That was a blunt and feeble attempt in comparison.Could you be any more patronising?
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?
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.