I thought we had established that we are not "losing detail" until
you've shifted over 4 bits but raising the noise floor out of the DAC
(so the quietest sounds get closer to it or even in extreme cases,
below it - although you can still hear them). Personally I reckon you
can lose 4 more bits th
I think that when used as digital transports, any audible differences
between the Touch and SB3 must certainly reflect the jitter-sensitivity
& noise-susceptibility etc of the DAC(?)
For instance, I recently had a chance to play with a Touch alongside an
SB3 and a separate transport - all into a
mswlogo;543330 Wrote:
> ...At 80 (on the new Transporter scale) you are not attenuating a
> "normal" range for volume control... Dropping down to 80 is not really
> a legit range to test... with that test you probably only lose a little
> over .5 bits... If you only drop 10dB it would be difficul
agillis;543375 Wrote:
> DACs use a combination of oversampling, analog and digital filters, and
> a few other trick such as low loss coupling caps, op amps, etc. To
> create their unique "Sound".
>
> Have you tried other DACs? Maybe there is another one that is more to
> your liking.
a change o
magiccarpetride;543352 Wrote:
> I understand what you're saying, and in theory, I tend to agree. My only
> reservation is this: previously, when I would upgrade a component in my
> audio chain, the improvements would invariably be overwhelming on all
> accounts. Like when I switched form CD playe
One huge thing to watch out for is ones perceived notion/belief of how a
new piece of gear should sound because somebody else said its a great
DAC or the best DAC for the money. It could very well be that for the
reviewer or even a good friend, but then not end up that way for you.
One issue is w
stone;543249 Wrote:
> the Beresford Caiman is not particularily good at eliminating jitter?
The Caiman has no reclocking, afaik.
But the differences between transports is not just jitter. There is
also noise and there may be other distortions.
--
Themis
SBT - North Star dac 192 - Croft 25Pre
magiccarpetride;543312 Wrote:
>
> Now, everyone claims that Caiman needs some serious burn in before it
> can be judged fairly. Maybe that's the case here as well. I left it on
> repeat, in the hopes that the burn in will eliminate this overly
> pronounced politeness in the playback.
Mine took t
HOnestly...give it time...
Another thing to consider is that teh sound of the caiman is easily
tweaked using different opamps etc.
But dont even think about that till after a couple of months! :)
--
Gazjam
Gazjam's Profi
Mnyb;543332 Wrote:
> You have "to get used to" the new sound use it (or any component) for a
> week or two then compare.
>
> The Brain is remarkable you get somehow "conditioned" to the system you
> use every day.
I understand what you're saying, and in theory, I tend to agree. My
only reservat
Mnyb;543341 Wrote:
> By condition I mean you tend to grow "like" the old sound , nothing
> about comparing .
> When you change a thing even for the better, it can take a while to get
> used to if the difference is big.
>
> Sound memory is very short to weed out the detailed differences you
> sti
Great example of why you want ALL your dynamic range.
This IS Marching bands and Brahms lullaby in the same tune, BUT NOT AT
THE SAME TIME !!
http://softronix.com/pictures/levelperfect/poco%20allegro.jpg
--
mswlogo
XP > Cat5 > Transporter/DuetController > SPDIF > Meridian G68 > DSP6000,
DSP5
bhaagensen;543339 Wrote:
> OP, I appreciate your writeup on the matter. As true as the judgements
> may be to you, it is however suffering from not including very much
> information in terms of point(s) of reference. I.e. the relevant
> "conditions" under which your subjective judgements are made
bhaagensen;543337 Wrote:
> I'm not disagreeing with anything - but curious as to how this argument
> works. Seems to me that the 2. assertion implies that comparisons
> [between different gear] becomes less "reliable" after a while. On the
> other hand, at this point in time a real-world-realisti
OP, I appreciate your writeup on the matter. As true as the judgements
may be to you, it is however suffering from not including very much
information in terms of point(s) of reference. I.e. the relevant
"conditions" under which your subjective judgements are made. IMO.
--
bhaagensen
--
Mnyb;543332 Wrote:
> You have "to get used to" the new sound use it (or any component) for a
> week or two then compare.
>
> The Brain is remarkable you get somehow "conditioned" to the system you
> use every day.
I'm not disagreeing with anything - but curious as to how this argument
works. Se
You have "to get used to" the new sound use it (or any component) for a
week or two then compare.
The Brain is remarkable you get somehow "conditioned" to the system you
use every day.
--
Mnyb
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +Meri
Phil Leigh;543289 Wrote:
> The point is that (using 0-100 scale) volume 70 = 15dB of attenuation =
>
> SNR decreased by 15dB from 96dB to 81dB.
>
> You need to put that 81dB SNR into perspective:
> 1) you won't hear the extra noise at normal volumes at normal listening
> position - even playing
Hi,
in my experince the Dacs sound is still changing up to six weeks after
plugging it in...seriously.
Works great with the Touch.
If your liking the sound just now, just wait.
Also, the Dacs very upgradable, see here for lots of opinions on the
Dac.
http://theartofsound.net/forum/forumdisplay.p
It's kind of ironic for a "caiman" to lack "snap" :-)
(sorry couldn't resist)
Give it a couple of weeks - see if your brain burns in (seriously)
Avoid snap judgements... (doh!)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
To
OK, finally received the long awaited Holly Grail DAC (arguably the best
bang for the buck currently on the DAC market). Many people from many
walks of life are gushing about Caiman, so I had to give it a try.
First impressions: right out of the box, sounded bigger than anything
I've heard so far
stone;543249 Wrote:
> So what you're saying is that the SB3 is a quite jittery digital
> transport and that the Beresford Caiman is not particularily good at
> eliminating jitter?
>
> I'm asking because i have recently bought a Caiman and is planning to
> mate it with my SB2.
>
> I would be be
mswlogo;543211 Wrote:
> If you are correct on that 0 - 40 scale being 1.25db then that test
> shows it's way worse than I ever anticipated.
>
> Volume 30 would be - 12.5dB attenuation. (2-Bits). And you're down to
> 88dB dynamic range on the table in that test. You lose 1.25bits of
> dynamic ran
stone;543249 Wrote:
> So what you're saying is that the SB3 is a quite jittery digital
> transport and that the Beresford Caiman is not particularily good at
> eliminating jitter?
>
> I'm asking because i have recently bought a Caiman and is planning to
> mate it with my SB2.
>
> I would be be
Gazjam;541422 Wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> One thing ive noticed about the Beresford is that it can show up
> differences in whatever is fed into it quite easily..
> For instance my Touch is obviously a much better digital transport than
> my SB3..sounds very much better.
>
> Gaz.
So what you're saying
Phil Leigh;543167 Wrote:
> Just to clarify a couple of things:
> 1) on the old 0-40 scale, each step was 1.25dB
> 2) on the current 0-100 scale, each step is 0.5dB
> 3) on the 0-100 scale no bits are irretrievably lost from the 16
> originals until the 16th (LSB) bit is shifted below the 24th (LS
26 matches
Mail list logo
