Topping and SMSL with ASR Punking Us on DACs?

About iFi sticking to 1793 chip and never making a device with the flagship PCM1704. And oh if these posts are deemed off-topic they can be (re)moved...

Spoiler

For many good reasons I never employed them. And not because I do not know how to use them. I have built testers with these, various ESS and AKM and more and spend time maxing out available SQ.

Now IF I where to use this kind of chip, I'd use the DSD1796 instead, which uses software control and offers DSD compatibility or the PCM1792 which does exactly the same for a few cent less but lacks the "DSD label on the chip.

The PCM1794 is PCM only, hardware control and suited to DIY (and glorified DIY) use. The actual DAC Core is the same among all devices, except PMC1794 is crippled by the hardware only interface.

Past that, why do you think the PCM1792/94 etc. would give a meaningful improvement over DSD1793 (for example)?

Note that to use it needs:

1) A LOT more current - possibly a problem in a portable device
2) An added I/V stage external to the chip, that gives plenty of chances to mess up and which draws more extra current

And please do not quote the "better" SNR/THD etc. numbers, they are meaningless.

You can not perceive the 0.003% 2nd Harmonic (-90dB) at 0dBFS from the DSD1793. Especially not through the > 0.1% 2nd Harmonic found in pretty much any headphone, IEM and speaker at 95dB SPL, which would be -20dBFS, I am sure you do not want to know about any "hearables" HD levels at 115dB SPL which would be 0dBFS.

Nor should the -115dB(A) SNR (which the DSD1793 delivers according to Mr. AP2 in my circuit fairly consistently) trouble you the least. A 115dB SNR means you would hear absolutely nothing with peak SPL's at 115dB presuming you can find a "0dB" noise environment to listen in!

I usually get dangerously close to a laughing induced heart attack when I read reviewers lyrically waxing about how using this hyper-something DAC chip with this huge SNR gave them the "blackest background to the music"...

I'd be by far more worried about the noise from the blood in my ears, my listening room in general even with the isolation from IEM's or closed back headphones and most importantly the noise in the recording system used to record the music I listen to, long, long, long before I worry about the DSD1793 numbers.



Going for a chip that has better technical spec is pointless in the real world and incurs costs in terms of battery life and BOM cost, which I feel are better applied elsewhere.

Past that, I tend to find the DSD1793 (& PCM1793) have a quality (sonically) that I have so far not gotten from "better" chips, for better or worse, so I tend to favour these now "old" chips.

Now improving Headphone Amp SNR (not so much THD though) is worthwhile, because no matter if you use a digital or analogue volume control, especially with IEM's the self noise of this amp can be very limiting.

For example the OP1656 you mention has around 0.5uV noise (or -126dB re 1V) , if (big if) used in an otherwise noiseless circuit, while a MAX97220 in an optimum real world circuit has around 3uV noise (or -110dB re 1V).

If used with a high sensitivity IEM (say 130dB/1V ballpark like Andromeda's) the OPA1656 in a otherwise noiseless headphone amp will have a background noise of 4dB(A) absolute, while the MAX97220 in the real world would have 20dB(A) absolute noise. Both are normally low enough to be no problem, especially with music, but the MAX97220 would have a little his noise whereas the OPA1656 would be (theoretically) silent.

Real circuits will add more noise, I normally try to keep the degradation in noise from resistors etc. to less than 3dB, but lower noise means lower resistance which in turn means higher distortion, beyond a certain point dramatically so. Having a 50k volume control (standard and common value) will have a worst case self noise of 2uV (in the -6dB setting). Even with the MAX97220 this exceeds the no more than 3dB worse noise criteria, so everything is a compromise.

Coming the long way around back to our DAC IC, where would be money, effort and current be better spend?

With the Headphone Amplifier or the DAC? Mind you, if you can guarantee that using a PCM1792A, charging more for the unit, having less playback time on battery and accepting a "different" (to my ears not better) sound will mean I sell 10- times as many units, I'm all for it.

More on OPA1656

Spoiler

If you actually did a blind audition you might find others to be subjectively preferable. I think depending on specific location used, higher slew rate devices sound better, so OPA2156 is to my ears preferred to OPA1656.

But the differences are really small, compared to the days when audio gear was full of TL07X (brrrhhhh, these are awful) and NE5532 if you were lucky (if not, much worse) and switching to a (by todays standard pedestrian performance) OPA2604 (etc.) made a huge audible and measurable improvement, never mind OPA627.

I think now Op-Amp choice comes down to current consumption, noise, cost, package size and what is the Op-Amp du jour everyone raves about or what you have auditioned to be good or where you like brand/colour of case.

I love mil spec op-amp's in metal can's with gold plated leads, they look super premium (and are priced accordingly). Back when OPA627 where still available in this package I used them everywhere.

I remember rebuilding recording studio mixing desks with these, literally 100's of these in the early 90's in London, throwing out 100's of TL07X and 5534 and removing many now unnecessary coupling capacitors etc... Even "latter day" Neve consoles that used the NE5534/NE5532 he helped design it way better, mind you, I never tried to convert any of the old discrete Neve's to IC's, that's just sick.

I usually did a pair of input channels first with a skeptical studio owner looking over my shoulder. Of course, the high grade mil spec parts impressed them no end, but once they compared the two rebuild channels to the stock ones they were generally fire and flame to get as much of their desks rebuild as possible, subgroups, master channels and inputs despite the fact that the rebuild cost often exceeded resale value.

On the other hand, if it was at all possible to buy a new desk with similar sound quality levels the price was astronomic. Studios live and die on the quality of sound of their desks, even to this day.

Watch the Docu-Movie "Sound City" one of these days if you have time...
https://mediaverse.plex.tv/movie/sound-city

Thor

 

@Baten

Thanks for sharing these. Makes a very interesting read indeed!!!

 

Finally get a chance to hook up the ifi pro idsd to my 2.2 speaker set up tonight - listened to the Lady Blackbird deluxe album

I was not expecting much improvement from this dac upgrade from the NEO since I use the exact same hqplayer digital filter and modulator set up for the PRO and the NEO, since for the past few years I’ve been reading from ASR claiming there is “no sound” in a dac, a $100 dac will sound the same as some boutique dacs costing 100x more based on measured performance…….

I was merely hoping to add a bit more tube magic to the sound. Was I wrong!!!! The sound is at least a couple notches up and I am only using solid state output stage of the PRO IDSD dac!!!!

Warmth and neutrality is retained from the neo but the sound is much more refined and much more detailed retrieved!!!

All dacs sound the same???? Fcuk that!!!

 

Amir is a moron. Period.

well actually let me rephrase that.

I think he actually is super biased, and has a personal attitude while conducting ‘ science’
That’s not science at all.

For all here who have created research papers , you know that there is always a section on bias in the paper. His is off the charts.
Not to mention his methodology is shady most of the time and not consistent.


I know this might sound odd. But shame on him , giving scientific measurements a bad name.

The scientific community is always looking to disprove itself and keep searching.

Amir thinks science is dogma and presents it that way.

i can’t wait till someone who is a real scientist discovers new measurements to unlock what quantifies sound in certain components.

He can stick to his SINAD which is already useless.

Science is supposed to be open minded and open to discovery.

 

I mean if I had technical electronics knowledge I would be super interested in discovering what in a circuit or DAC circuit can be quantified into sound.

not just rest on a few measurements which are old just to push an agenda.


Zero scientific curiosity.

 

From a non-ASR forum, it sounds like @GoldenOne is trying to create an objective system to describe/define how DACs can sound different. Kudos to him. And Kudos to @purr1n for his GONAD charts to try to describe how amps interact with real headphone loads.

Unfortunately, there is zero commercial value in trying to prove which kilobuck devices are truly phenomenal vs. snake oil. A site like ASR that paints a pretty picture that SINAD=good, people will latch on to that simple message. Who really wants to spend $2-3k (or even higher) on a DAC if a $100 one will be "just as good". Same with amplifiers.

 

It's been established that SINAD is of limited utility, a crude measure, maybe akin to evaluating the outcome of a battle strictly on the basis of casualties, without looking at the larger context of a campaign or a war.

ASR and Head-Fi are the opposite sides of the coin of bad faith. Head-Fi is a gigantic collection of confirmation biases. Pick any piece of equipment and I'm fairly certain you will find someone giving it a rave review. Meanwhile, critical thinking is subject to underhanded censorship of opinions that threaten the revenue stream.

ASR reminds me of those OG Star Trek episodes where one religion/ computer has been controlling society for thousands of years until Kirk destroys it in a fit of regime change. SINAD cannot be questioned because that would threaten the revenue stream.

At this point, Head-Fi exists to make money and ASR is a grift.

 

I’m pretty sure ASR was created to boost the Chinese hifi industry and specifically Shenzen.
Their site is pretty much an echo of Amir’s preaching at Amirtown ( older members will get that reference. Lol)
And all their marketing is exactly that. The newest highest SINAD or whatever other measurement from Amir’s measurements suite.

I’m just waiting for when they reach the point when tech won’t allow them to really get higher.
I mean what will market when they can’t get a higher SINAD number ? Or get lower jitter?
How will they sell their next product?

Some are already using discreet output stages because they want to sell to people who want that. But that sometimes will give you lesser numbers.

i think eventually they will paint themselves into a corner.

 

There has already been a subtle shift in Topping’s marketing towards using subjective descriptions of how their equipment sounds. I think that they are aware of the fact that they have milked the SINAD cow for all it was worth. The name of the game now is adding buzzword features while raising prices every time a new revision of their product is released.

It will be interesting to see where ASR will go from this point now that they have accomplished their stated mission of bringing awareness of the importance of SINAD über alles. If the assumption that certain elements within the ASR acted as marketing agents for Shenzen audio manufacturers is correct, they will have the rewrite the SINAD narrative to some degree and pivot towards some new pseudoscientific argument to sell more of these products.

At this point in time, the main focus of the ASR seems to be mocking expensive audiophile products from non-Chinese manufacturers, such as PS Audio, Chord, Audioquest and Shunyata. This obsession with what they call snake oil could be a concerted effort to desensitize their members to high prices of audio products in general. What they are effectively saying is : "look at this snake oil someone is selling for 4-6k. You should not feel bad about spending $800 on this new Topping DAC. “

I also find it fascinating to see how they have actively stopped reviewing any of Schiit’s non-ASR friendly gear since Schiit made an effort to pander to them. In the past, the ASR leaders enthusiastically criticized the performance, engineering and reliability of any of Schiit's multibit or tube gear. It’s almost like there is some kind of truce between Schiit and ASR, which is what further makes me even more suspicious about the purported noble goal of bringing awareness of snake oil in audio to the masses.

 

To be fair (I’m not an ASR fan) Amir did like the Mojo 2 and Hugo 2. They both measured well. He skewered the Dave based on price. He doesn’t universally pan pricy products. The mola mola DAC and matrix products are examples.

He has no noble goal. His goal is to shill Shenzen product. If a competitor happens to fall within his arbitrary guidelines, he’ll recommend it. Maybe. He’s already painted himself into a corner. I’d be curious about how he will pivot, but frankly I don’t give a shit. His forum is like the old Jerry Springer/Maury Povich shows. You can’t help but watch the train wreck.

 

If things at ASR start heading south in a dramatic and entertaining way, I'd like to know so I can go watch lol.

 

This conversation is heating up since Thorsten Loesch has started challenging the ASR leadership:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ything-or-nothing.29062/page-244#post-1423980

 

I would like to know the story behind the fuses

 

What, you'd like to know what all the fuss is about?

(sorry, couldn't help myself)

 

Most are on to Amir and his BS army of shills.

it truly was the worst thing to happen to audio on behalf of anything remotely scientific.

im sure most here and in the audio world WANT more scientific measurements and data to be able to quantify sound more accurately.

Amir made it dogma for such a pathetic purpose.

but it looks like it will be coming to its end soon

i mean all cults just implode on themselves eventually.

im sure the infighting will get worse and worse on that site as long as it goes on.


Anyone who is truly intelligent won’t be able to stay on there. And it shows.

 

Maybe then it is the coincidence that something made with discreet parts has had more time in engineering an output stage that actually sounds good?

Aren’t discreet parts usually capable of a higher slew rate?

I’ve just not heard any DAC which sounds really good and have a nice hefty soundstage and weight with op amps.
Some have sounded ok. But that’s about it.

I would really like to know more of the benefit of discreet vs op amps

 

Please stop formatting your thoughts like its Twitter.

 

Huh?

social etiquette 101.

some people on these forums are so funny.
Telling others what to do.
Lol. Sheesh.

thank god you are around or I would be able to make it in life.

I’ll let you in on a little secret. I could care less what you think of my posts.
You mean nothing to me.
Lol