End Game Digital (2023)

[tuga]

Least crappy.

The problem with "best" (or "least crappy") is that it's a listener-dependent, subjective attribute. Some people prefer an Audio Note or Lampizator, others a Meitner or Chord, others still an SMSL or a Topping.

That in turn makes recommendations very tricky unless the OP makes a very detailed description of his preferences and those replying clearly understand what he is after.
It's also why most press reviews are useless...

 

[Purité Audio]

That may be true with caveats but astonishingly ignores human factors.

Least crappy.

A dac will only sound ‘different’ if it adds audible distortion, the addition of which will be visible in the measurements.
@John Philips I completely understand the attraction of a smart looking piece of kit, but it is foolish to expect that high price guarantees better sound quality, which you can confirm from their respective measurements.
Keith

 

[paulfromcamden]

The problem with "best" (or "least crappy") is that it's a listener-dependent, subjective attribute. Some people prefer an Audio Note or Lampizator, others a Meitner or Chord, others still an SMSL or a Topping.

Sure. Was just a general question really why some well regarded pro audio converters don't seem to attract much interest from hi-fi peeps. Good point about RME, just wondered why we don't hear much about Antelope, Dangerous, Burl etc.

 

[paulfromcamden]

A dac will only sound ‘different’ if it adds audible distortion, the addition of which will be visible in the measurements.

My overriding impression of the Bomber converters is that they really do sound a lot more 'analogue' than most. We're talking about the deliberate inclusion of some 'nice' and subtle distortion artifacts, but there's also something smoother and more natural‑sounding about the top end, while the bottom end is very tightly controlled but still larger than life, and the mid-range gives the impression of being slightly more expansive and dynamic than expected. None of these subtle characteristics were revealed in my bench tests, but they add up to a very nice style of presentation that addresses the 'sterile' nature of ultra‑clean digital systems rather well. First and foremost 'musical' rather than 'transparent' converters, they have a kind of tape‑like ability to handle transients in a very flattering way, and the power to make a mix sound glued together in a way that I usually associate with top‑flight analogue systems.

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/burl-b2-bombers

 

[Purité Audio]

I believe Antelope suffered from some software issues, but that was a few years back.
Keith

 

[tuga]

My overriding impression of the Bomber converters is that they really do sound a lot more 'analogue' than most. We're talking about the deliberate inclusion of some 'nice' and subtle distortion artifacts, but there's also something smoother and more natural‑sounding about the top end, while the bottom end is very tightly controlled but still larger than life, and the mid-range gives the impression of being slightly more expansive and dynamic than expected. None of these subtle characteristics were revealed in my bench tests, but they add up to a very nice style of presentation that addresses the 'sterile' nature of ultra‑clean digital systems rather well. First and foremost 'musical' rather than 'transparent' converters, they have a kind of tape‑like ability to handle transients in a very flattering way, and the power to make a mix sound glued together in a way that I usually associate with top‑flight analogue systems.

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/burl-b2-bombers

Seems like they're targeting the wrong crowd...
Why would a pro audio engineer wish to monitor his work/mix through a DAC which 'colours' the output?

 

[paulfromcamden]

Seems like they're targeting the wrong crowd...
Why would a pro audio engineer wish to monitor his work/mix through a DAC which 'colours' the output?

You'd have to ask a pro audio engineer : )

Could imagine where this might be useful if you're bringing digital sources into an analog workflow, cutting digital files to vinyl, or just want something that will sound really good to the client even. Some discussion on Gearspace with various opinions and uses: https://gearspace.com/board/high-end/446697-burl-b2-dac-2.html

Anyways, that aside it just sounds like the kind of thing some audiophiles would like but I've never seen much discussion. Maybe it's old hat. The Bombers have been around for a decade.

 

[tuga]

Anyways, that aside it just sounds like the kind of thing some audiophiles would like but I've never seen much discussion.

I agree with that bit.

 

[Alex S]

Measurementalists seem to inhabit a rather dull, dismissive, Chinese supplied world but each to their own.

 

[gustav_errata]

Electrical components are entirely characterised by their measurements, there is no magic sauce.
Keith

As a demonstration of the veracity of this statement, pease reproduce for us the electrical circuit diagram of your favourite DAC using only measurements of its output as a guide. Thanks in advance.

 

[Dave H.]

You'd have to ask a pro audio engineer : )

Could imagine where this might be useful if you're bringing digital sources into an analog workflow, cutting digital files to vinyl, or just want something that will sound really good to the client even. Some discussion on Gearspace with various opinions and uses: https://gearspace.com/board/high-end/446697-burl-b2-dac-2.html

Anyways, that aside it just sounds like the kind of thing some audiophiles would like but I've never seen much discussion. Maybe it's old hat. The Bombers have been around for a decade.

I’m more a listener than a producer but I have been involved in recording and mastering quite a few albums, and in the studio colouration is the last thing you want. Even if it makes the client happy in the mixing room, it’d have the opposite effect as soon as they listened to the recording anywhere else.

For home use I’m at the other end of the spectrum - IME lots of equipment that other people apparently think is great sounds thin and bright to me, so I often actively want a coloured sound at the warm/thick end of the spectrum.

But for making a recording, especially during mastering, you really need to know where flat is. From the sounds of that review I’d quite like to hear a Bomber for home use. But I’d hesitate to use it in a production context.

 

[iansr]

IME "expensive", "lots of effort" and "better" don't automatically go hand in hand either. Observation tells me that good marketing arranges for that disconnect to be exploitable.

The digital transport parts of a streamer have a simple function:

• manage a library of digital audio sources.
• have a means for the user to select a source.
• have a means to deliver an accurate data stream from that source to a DAC with low enough noise that the DAC can ignore.

Effort is required to do these but IME there is no particular difficulty that necessitates "expensive" and IMHO there is no "better" once you have achieved the above.

The digital transport parts of a streamer are elements of the digital chain where IMHO the "end game" basis (phrases used by the OP) is too transitory to justify "expensive", so I do not buy digital transport on that basis.

A good DAC is likely to be less transitory these days if someone wants to buy as "end game" or "expensive". But the Chord DAVE story shows that "state-of-the-art" is still somewhat transitory (but it was an excellent DAC when I heard it and it remains so).

Exactly. A significant proportion of the outfits making hi fi gear and accessories are not much better than charlatans. A high price is absolutely NO guarantee that you are buying a well engineered bit of kit built with top quality components. Choose your manufacturers very carefully and spend your money wisely.

 

[Purité Audio]

Measurementalists seem to inhabit a rather dull, dismissive, Chinese supplied world but each to their own.

Not sure the xenophobia is necessary Alex, DACs are digital to analogue converters, if they do not add audible artefacts they are transparent.
To be convinced one has to perform unsighted level matched comparisons for yourself, it is revelatory, and allows you to spend money/effort/time on the parts of the system that really can bring a tangible improvement in sound quality.
Keith

 

[chartz]

My end game digital is the Philips CD100. How about that?

 

[PhilofCas]

My end game digital is the Philips CD100. How about that?

Isn’t that a start game digital product?

 

[Alex S]

Keith, as I’m sure you know, my China comment has nothing to do with xenophobia and everything to do with human and workers’ rights. I choose not to buy Chinese hifi regardless of how well it measures. Others look at the graphs and buy on price.

We make our own personal choices and yes, I do own Chinese manufactured goods. I don’t think that necessarily makes me a hypocrite, I do what I can. These thought processes also make me sympathetic to companies like dCS.

 

[Allan Probin]

To be convinced one has to perform unsighted level matched comparisons for yourself, it is revelatory, and allows you to spend money/effort/time on the parts of the system that really can bring a tangible improvement in sound quality.

I think @camverton had it exactly right earlier in this thread (or at least it reflects my personal experience as well)

I personally find that I respond differently when concentrating on the sound, when making comparisons, to settling back, forgetting the sound per se and enjoying the music. I have found the differences small when concentrating on the sound but large when listening to music, which does rather leave one as prey to some who “believe” they sound the same!

I’ve done unsighted level matched comparisons between DAC’s and it’s true that under these conditions it is very difficult to identify differences. However, over longer periods of time, when not doing direct comparisons and in a relaxed frame of mind, characteristics do emerge. I don’t think it’s a case of sighted biases emerging when no longer listening blind, it’s more likely, I think, differences that the brain detects by some form of time related ‘pattern-recognition’ that isn’t currently in our measurement tool-kit.

 

[chartz]

Isn’t that a start game digital product?

It is. Perfect forever. A truly seminal product.
Joke aside, CD was really a masterful piece of engineering, player and disc, and it’s incredible that these early Dutch/Belgian players still work perfectly, and frankly sound rather good, 40 years later.
Kudos as they say in the US of A.

 

[Alex S]

It has been proven time and again that double blind testing puts the brain under significant stress (and tedium), calls for listening to sound not music, and is not really a better method for choosing hifi than any other.

 

[chartz]

I like that. Listening to early digital is a nice experience and reading the 1983 British press reviews make me smile today. So much bias.