Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
I don't want to get drawn into a personal battle with you on every thread.
MDAC First Listen (part 00101000)
- Thread starter fusion5
- Start date
- Status
I don't want to get drawn into a personal battle with you on every thread.
misterdog
Not the canine kind
Bob, the comment was not aimed at yourself. I apologise that you saw it thus.
You have been both balanced and honorable in your viewpoint and it would be sad if after all this time you had to leave the project.
I'm sure John will find a solution.
John is doing his best as always to keep everyone happy, even at his own cost.
Not many people are this selfless.
For a long time now I have wondered how all the features that WE have asked for could be fitted into such a small enclosure.
The FWC allows for many exiting added extras, after all one of the biggest problems with our hobby is the listening space and DSP I believe goes a long way to correct this.
There are factors of this project that I am not entirely happy with.
Time and cost creep.
I believe however that at the end of the day to get a world class product for relatively little cost will be worth it.
That wasnt personal, it was about your disrespect and dismissal of others valid opinions in service of your own selfishness. But that is the last I will say.
And I'm sorry that you thought that- it never occurred to me. All I was saying was "Even if somebody is doing this, it really doesn't affect the outcome."
Cheers
Bob
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
No selfishness on my part. Everybody will gain from FWC one way or the other. You know that but are choosing to be inflammatory for its own sake. That is personal.
John,John the diplomat? Thank God I'm not dealing with anyone whos fingers on that big red button!
I know whats best for the project (cost aside) thats to go for the FWC - I can then remove the compromises I've made to squeeze the PCB into the MDAC2 chassis - it grates me to cripple the design after spending 4 years developing it - or maybe its more correct to say I can make a better design in the FWC.
For sure I could release it as originally planned in the MDAC sized chassis - but come say 6 months down the line once I completed the MDAC2 project obligations and then release a FWC design, MDAC2 owners would feel cheated!
I just don't see how I can make each camp happy
If its just simply a case of the solving the salvaged units problem, then we could simply spread the cost of the 34 salvaged units across the 200 MDAC2's we will produce - but some members are saying they simply cannot live with the size of the full width case even if this means a lessor quality unit (not a huge difference, but the FWC will be better).
There is a small costing saving by going direct to the FWC, for instance we would not need to engineer a new rear panel for the MDAC chassis....
The problem is the roots of the project started back in 2011, and I now have possibility open which where not available back when the project was first conceived - over time there has been a natural "organic" growth.
So the real question is those who STRONGLY oppose the FWC chassis - is it due to the complication of owning a salvaged units or simply due to the increased size even if this means compromising performance?
For what it's worth I vote 100% for FWC. Even if it so happens it costs more and takes longer; this is HiFi we hang our hat entirely on quality.
Chris.
Hi John,
I do not need or want the extra bells and whistles Fusion FWC DAC will have.
My aim was to have the best possible DAC in convenient MDAC casing.
That's why my first choice was for the L1 PCB for which I bought a donor MDAC. As I already have a Fusion MDAC, the PCB at cost option was an attractive one.
Cheers,
Johan
PS I haven't decided yet (or voted) if I will leave the project if FWC will be the only option. That will depend on total costs for FWC. But as I don't really need FWC I'm leaning towards leaving. That saddens me in a way because I'm sympathetic to all the good work that's being done here.
and yet we have some people clearly saying they wont gain from it. Sometimes what you say beggars belief. You seem to hear want you want to hear which is obviously in your own interest.
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
Selling that MDAC Fusion of yours will probably more than cover the extra cost.
Why would I want to sell a DAC that I'm happy with?
Gosh this thread has been busy (and somewhat heated) over the last day or so.
Personally I'm quite happy to pay for the full width option as, to me it's the best option from a technical view point as it removes the 'micky mouse' external psu and the limitations of the original MDAC front panel / back panel etc.
I'm happy to go along with whichever payment option John decides on but would prefer to simply pay the extra as a lump sum when the project is ready.
As mentioned by others it also gives me a spare DAC that I can use elsewhere or sell if I need to.
Personally I'm quite happy to pay for the full width option as, to me it's the best option from a technical view point as it removes the 'micky mouse' external psu and the limitations of the original MDAC front panel / back panel etc.
I'm happy to go along with whichever payment option John decides on but would prefer to simply pay the extra as a lump sum when the project is ready.
As mentioned by others it also gives me a spare DAC that I can use elsewhere or sell if I need to.
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
Because this http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2042612&postcount=245 happened to coincide with my wishes as stated in my post
That does not help anyone because the reality is very different from how it was more than a year ago.
It is called progress!
timola
pfm Member
+1
It seems some of us understand how low cost the LAKEWEST FUSION DAC is being offered to us and some just don't or refuse to get it.
Many have spelled out clearly the thinking required to reach a rational conclusion that even a school child could figure out....repeatedly....apparently with little result....I think we need to just stop helping now.
Some are thinking about cost/compensation only without looking at the big picture.
I'm really pleased that most recent posts have been by people who appreciate JohnW, his work, commitment and wishes for this project.
I am for the FWC, but from a personal view point, I see this an even a bigger leap of faith in John...but... what I do know from personal experience, is that my MCAC1 sounds a lot better out of the original case (will the even more crammed together MDAC2 boards be so affected?), the original power supply is suspect (I have the MCRW one, which makes a significant improvement to my MDAC1) and the power board capacitors can be suspect. I would also benefit from the mini-dsp room correction DSP and ability to release a fully functioning MDAC1.
I can absolutely see the positive side with the latest turns of this Ad Hoc project.
I also fully understand those that see the latest 180 degree turn not meeting their expectations as has been set out, no need for uncalled comments.
Myself I'd like JohnW to spend some time responding on my previous post below (I know I'm repeating it) since for me these are the core questions to be answered upon.
I have no doubt that the Fusion DAC will meet the SQ design goal.
@JohnW,
Changing subject to a (hopefully) more positive and forward looking one.
Can you detail the Fusion DAC (ex MDAC2) project schedule, pls include functionality where applicable:
1. Digital PCB
2. HQ PSU
3. ADC
4. FPGA
5. Chassies including front & back panel
6. miniDSP
7. Software development
8. Testing & Error fixing
9. Production details
10. Whatever I forgot to include ....
A summary of the total Fusion DAC cost would also be good to have here.
Maybe also detailing the role of the miniDSP company in the project, will they be project managing the project as of now?
/Cheers
Lars
I also fully understand those that see the latest 180 degree turn not meeting their expectations as has been set out, no need for uncalled comments.
Myself I'd like JohnW to spend some time responding on my previous post below (I know I'm repeating it) since for me these are the core questions to be answered upon.
I have no doubt that the Fusion DAC will meet the SQ design goal.
@JohnW,
Changing subject to a (hopefully) more positive and forward looking one.
Can you detail the Fusion DAC (ex MDAC2) project schedule, pls include functionality where applicable:
1. Digital PCB
2. HQ PSU
3. ADC
4. FPGA
5. Chassies including front & back panel
6. miniDSP
7. Software development
8. Testing & Error fixing
9. Production details
10. Whatever I forgot to include ....
A summary of the total Fusion DAC cost would also be good to have here.
Maybe also detailing the role of the miniDSP company in the project, will they be project managing the project as of now?
/Cheers
Lars
- Status