advertisement


dCS Bartok DAC review on YouTube - GoldenSound

Agree totally, I still sub to a couple hifi mags but learned long ago to try stuff out for myself. Forums help too, they weren’t around when I was getting into Hi Fi, it was mag reviews and word of mouth :)

In my view, forums and the web can help with practical issues (setup and operation) but with selecting not so much.
Ask for a 2-way monopole standmount speaker recomendation and from each poster you'll get a different reply. Some will even suggest floorstanders, others dipoles or even headphones... Surely they can't all be right.
 
In my view, forums and the web can help with practical issues (setup and operation) but with selecting not so much.
Ask for a 2-way monopole standmount speaker recomendation and from each poster you'll get a different reply. Some will even suggest floorstanders, others dipoles or even headphones... Surely they can't all be right.
It’s just a hobby, I find others opinions interesting to read even if things usually end up OT or in a bun fight/willy waving contest or troll fest. Far too often people try to “win” a thread or post just to stir the pot. All IMHO obvs :):)

Messing about on pfm beats watching the news and getting depressed, especially at present.
 
In my view, forums and the web can help with practical issues (setup and operation) but with selecting not so much.
Ask for a 2-way monopole standmount speaker recomendation and from each poster you'll get a different reply. Some will even suggest floorstanders, others dipoles or even headphones... Surely they can't all be right.

The normal form on PF is when you ask for a recommendation what gets recommended is whatever the recommender is using, on topic or not.:D
 
It’s just a hobby, I find others opinions interesting to read even if things usually end up OT or in a bun fight/willy waving contest or troll fest. Far too often people try to “win” a thread or post just to stir the pot. All IMHO obvs :):)

Messing about on pfm beats watching the news and getting depressed, especially at present.

You could always watch the cricket Angus.:eek:
 
All print reviews and monetized review channels are just marketing, on forums you have to filter out flavour of the month opinions and ceaseless box swappers. Different owners want different things, it's a scale between I like what I hear, and, it measures good I'll take it warts and all. The PQ to Serge scale as its called...
 
Do almost all other DACs run non-MQA streams through MQA filters?

Many do. A few years ago almost all did. It the least expensive way to implement MQA, apparently. A couple of companies have even decided they like MQA and implement only MQA filters on their output. It's one of the reasons reviews of comparisons of MQA vs PCM might often be biased as both the MQA and PCM are being run through MQA specific filters. Unfair advantage MQA.

There are now more components on the market that differentiate between the two, but it's a good thing to check when buying MQA capable equipment. Especially since we don't know if MQA will even be available in a few years. (For all practical purposes it's only available at Tidal, and Tidal's new pricing, as well as market position, lead me to think either Tidal, MQA, or both won't be around soon).
 
If you post a negative review of the Bartok on some forums it gets deleted by the admins, that's because a lot of them have shares in dCS hence why everybody thinks they're so good.
 
If you post a negative review of the Bartok on some forums it gets deleted by the admins, that's because a lot of them have shares in dCS hence why everybody thinks they're so good.

Unless you have documented proof of that, what you are saying is libellous. Do you have such evidence?
 
You don't quite understand how it works do you. He has to name a specific person or organisation, which he didn't, other than dcs, and he made no claim to their involvement.

Had he named specific Individuals or an organisation which he belived acted in a certain manner because they had shares in dcs then it would be libelous. Had he stated dcs were involved in this through their actions it would have been libellous, but he didn't.

But feel free to have a personal snipe at me again if it'll make you feel better about your lack of knowledge on what constitutes defamation.
 
Just watched this video as I was curious as to why it had resulted in an eight page thread. The first thing that struck me is I don’t think he cited a single recording that didn’t sound like it had been cobbled-up in ProTools or Logic and then brickwalled at the mastering stage. I heard nothing that I’d personally use to assess timbre or dynamic capabilities (e.g. jazz, classical etc). The second was it looked like the top of the ‘r’ of the word ‘Power’ on the dCS faceplate had rubbed off, which is absolutely inexcusable, let alone on a piece of kit costing as much as a decent car!
 
Just watched this video as I was curious as to why it had resulted in an eight page thread. The first thing that struck me is I don’t think he cited a single recording that didn’t sound like it had been cobbled-up in ProTools or Logic and then brickwalled at the mastering stage. I heard nothing that I’d personally use to assess timbre or dynamic capabilities (e.g. jazz, classical etc). The second was it looked like the top of the ‘r’ of the word ‘Power’ on the dCS faceplate had rubbed off, which is absolutely inexcusable, let alone on a piece of kit costing as much as a decent car!

Agreed Tony.

Another so called reviewer quoting "build quality second to none". This just shows what limited experience he has of high-end audio. The build of that DCS is little different to my Quad FM4. Having said that, he is probably right in what he says about its sound, as I have never heard any music sounding great coming from a system with a DCS product as the digital source.
 
Last edited:


advertisement


Back
Top