advertisement


What does it take to get rid of the digital haze?!

Gosh..... My digital sound has never been clearer or more transparent..... Soncoz sgd 1 dac...... £400.
At a far higher price, the audionote dacs are ace.
 
 
PhilDick said:
You do hear people referencing the "digital haze" from time to time. What the f*** is it? Is it another of those terms I don't understand like prat or musical?
Click to expand...

It is absolutely essential that audiophile words do not refer to anything real in the sense of being identifiable and quantifiable by measurement. If they did then people would check and what is going on would be revealed for what it is. If you go back to the very first audiophile/subjective reviews in the 70s where the reviewers were still learning how to write "subjective" reviews there was a tendency to make one or two statements that could be used to check the honesty of the review. For example, about the last thing I read before dropping all interest in home audio for 30 years was an early "subjective" review of the LP12 in which the reviewer claimed that this magical record player enabled him to hear previously unheard instruments but then made the major mistake of naming the track and the instrument. I didn't have the record but my mother did and playing it on her modest Pye music centre the named instrument was straightforward to identify.

Now I don't trust my recollection and would like to see a copy of that review. The record I am fairly sure was by Roberta Flack, no idea of the track and the instrument I think was stringed. I also seem to recall something about mishandling records by scattering them unsleeved over the floor not making a difference to the magical abilities of the record player. It is possible this was in a different review though because at the time there was a marketing push to turn the LP12 into a magical record player rather than the decent but not particularly notable one that it had been for the previous few years. Is this ringing any bells with anyone?
 
I think you just have to wait and hope it wears off ...

Digital haze, all in my brain
Lately things they don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why
...
Digital haze, all around
Don't know if I'm comin' up or down
Am I happy or in misery?

With obvious apologies to Jimi ...
 
Last edited:
h.g. said:
It is absolutely essential that audiophile words do not refer to anything real in the sense of being identifiable and quantifiable by measurement. If they did then people would check and what is going on would be revealed for what it is. If you go back to the very first audiophile/subjective reviews in the 70s where the reviewers were still learning how to write "subjective" reviews there was a tendency to make one or two statements that could be used to check the honesty of the review. For example, about the last thing I read before dropping all interest in home audio for 30 years was an early "subjective" review of the LP12 in which the reviewer claimed that this magical record player enabled him to hear previously unheard instruments but then made the major mistake of naming the track and the instrument. I didn't have the record but my mother did and playing it on her modest Pye music centre the named instrument was straightforward to identify.

Now I don't trust my recollection and would like to see a copy of that review. The record I am fairly sure was by Roberta Flack, no idea of the track and the instrument I think was stringed. I also seem to recall something about mishandling records by scattering them unsleeved over the floor not making a difference to the magical abilities of the record player. It is possible this was in a different review though because at the time there was a marketing push to turn the LP12 into a magical record player rather than the decent but not particularly notable one that it had been for the previous few years. Is this ringing any bells with anyone?
Click to expand...


I remember the early '70s. For a record deck all that was important was correct speed, rumble, wow and flutter. Arms had to be as light as possible and cartridges have high trackabiity. I stopped listening to my 401, SME3009 and Shure V15 III, it was boring. Cue Linn LP12 which was much more dynamic.

I remember that cleaning the dust off of records was not recommended, the heavier arms and MC cartridges cleaned the records. Certainly with the LP12 and Ittok clicks were almost banished.

Back on topic early CDs in the '80s sounded thin, cloudy, pinched with instrument decay in distinct steps - using Quad ESLs, It was 1994 before I heard a CD player that I was prepared to buy.
 
I'll be honest since this is an interesting discussion.
When I recently got a new amp with high clarity I tried a few DACs with it... my Micromega MyDAC which has been perfectly fine as a source before, a Teac UD-H01 with 2 LM4562 fitted, and a Topping D10 with LME49720NA .
It wasn't until I tried using the D10 as a USB > SPDIF into a Meridian 203 DAC that I realised that all three were not great. The Meridian was much smoother in the top end, and while it lacked a bit in bass punch and top end detail (maybe) to some of the other options, it lacked some high end distortion or noise (or inaccuracy of some kind) that the others seemed to introduce, and very noticeable with my amp and speakers.

In my other system I have an MDAC and I'm happy with these two DACs for now - while I could undoubtedly upgrade one or both I would rather spend the money on music or festivals or maybe other equipment for the value provided.

One day I may demo a higher end DAC but hey. So I do think there is something to this 'haze' if you can hear it with your equipment. Bear in mind that as your system improves source quality becomes a bigger factor so you need decent releases too.
 
I hate digital haze it wrecks some music, (and improves garbage)
For a experiment I used a reverse RIAA stage the fed the signal into the MM input this improved the sound considerably. And also made a very tight 20Hz to 20KHz filter we also fit this circuit on our expensive pre on a phono socket marked CD/F.
I will put circuit on DIY, I managed to fit it all in a PHONO ext plug.
Alan has tried it and Lasse in Sweden with good results.
Using SMD bit it is cheap to make a simply version.
We use 1% Caps and 0.1% Resistors in the pre and polycarb caps to boot.
You will need for each channel 4 of10nF caps , 100R, 97.6K and a 7.5K resistor's.
 
A dentist’s drill? I’ve never had that in any set ups, from Pi Dac hats to fully fledged external dacs. Seriously, maybe Tinnitus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top