ECdesigns

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

5 hours ago, bodiebill said:

 

But you did hear a difference?

So then personal taste again comes in.

What I also tried to say is that I find it difficult to compare DACs at this level in an absolute/linear way, i.e. in terms of better and worse.

 

Short of organizing a blind test with a few hundred listeners, all of our comments can be seen to reflect personal tastes -  hard to argue otherwise. Moreover, if different DACs cannot be qualified then there is no point in us discussing them here in the first place 😁 

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

@bodiebill you should read this: http://www.high-endaudio.com/philos.html#Rel

 

His conclusions:

 

"Audio is not like wine or food tasting. It is a scientific and technical attempt to perfectly recreate a previous (musical) event. It is engineers and technicians that by and large design and build audio components, not Master Chefs.

 

Because it is still (and may always be) "imperfect", there will be unavoidable subjective elements within its pursuit, but there are existing objective and fundamental standards (the original recordings and "live music"), even though they are a moving and nebulous target. This can never be true with "wine and food tasting".

 

There is a huge difference between a subjective description of imperfect music reproduction and a subjective response to imperfect music reproduction. That vital distinction must never be blurred."

 

And finally (don't take it personally):

 

" Anyone who claims that there has been no true progress in home audio reproduction, and/or that virtually all components have an equal potential to reveal the reality and essence of "live music", subject only to "taste" and matching, is either highly misinformed, ignorant, a liar, a coward or an incompetent. Take your choice". 

 

[bodiebill]

11 hours ago, hopkins said:

@bodiebill you should read this: http://www.high-endaudio.com/philos.html#Rel

 

His conclusions:

 

"Audio is not like wine or food tasting. It is a scientific and technical attempt to perfectly recreate a previous (musical) event. It is engineers and technicians that by and large design and build audio components, not Master Chefs.

 

Because it is still (and may always be) "imperfect", there will be unavoidable subjective elements within its pursuit, but there are existing objective and fundamental standards (the original recordings and "live music"), even though they are a moving and nebulous target. This can never be true with "wine and food tasting".

 

There is a huge difference between a subjective description of imperfect music reproduction and a subjective response to imperfect music reproduction. That vital distinction must never be blurred."

 

And finally (don't take it personally):

 

" Anyone who claims that there has been no true progress in home audio reproduction, and/or that virtually all components have an equal potential to reveal the reality and essence of "live music", subject only to "taste" and matching, is either highly misinformed, ignorant, a liar, a coward or an incompetent. Take your choice". 

 

Thanks Stéphane.

I am afraid the scientific / objective approach is over my head. I know when I do or do not like an audio setup SQ wise -- especially after having experienced it for a few consecutive days -- but I do not imagine being able to prove that I am right saying so. I do not have to build these devices, I am just a user.

If you say you like how the PD sounds (and you said so on many occasions, as I did as well), isn't that subjective also? Is that no longer allowed here? Why do we have to prove anything? I value the experiences that are shared in this thread. For scientific proof (if at all possible) wouldn't something like www.diyaudio.com be a better place?

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

I am sorry our "experience" and assessment of the powerDAC is so different. Perhaps the next model (S) will be simpler to evaluate. Until then... 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

3 hours ago, bodiebill said:

 

Thanks Stéphane.

I am afraid the scientific / objective approach is over my head. I know when I do or do not like an audio setup SQ wise -- especially after having experienced it for a few consecutive days -- but I do not imagine being able to prove that I am right saying so. I do not have to build these devices, I am just a user.

If you say you like how the PD sounds (and you said so on many occasions, as I did as well), isn't that subjective also? Is that no longer allowed here? Why do we have to prove anything? I value the experiences that are shared in this thread. For scientific proof (if at all possible) wouldn't something like www.diyaudio.com be a better place?

 

You may have read that link too quickly. There is no need for science in all this - we are not talking about theory, but reality, and reality is "unique" - there are not muliple realities...

 

Judging the ability of an audio system to reproduce a recording is something everyone should be able to agree upon, provided we are "objective" in our attempt to do so (and by objective I do not mean that we need to resort to science). 

We can "prefer" a system with more bass, but we should be able to agree that a given system does produce more bass than another, and we should all be able to know which of the two systems is more accurate. If that is not the case, then there is no point in discussing anything on an audio forum. 

 

Having "preferences" does not mean we cannot agree on an "objective" description of a component's performance, and there is no need for science in order to do so. 

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to audio components, we cannot evaluate them on their own, they need to be used within a system, and the system will change the results. We do not all have the same systems. 

 

That being said, I have to admit that your descriptions of the powerDAC in your system leaves me a little confused.

 

On the one hand you say  that the powerDAC puts a "veil" on the recording, a pleasant one, but still a veil. I understand by this that it is not completely "transparent"? You also seem to indicate that the powerDAC is a little shy on bass (unlike the Pegasus), and "smooths" out the harsh treble of baroque music recordings. But you also mention that the powerDAC has good "sonority" and ability to reproduce piano accurately - yet a piano is an instrument with a very wide range. 

 

I do not have a Pegasus DAC to compare the powerDAC, but as I mentioned before, my comparisons to other DACs (Terminator, Audiomat Tempo 3, the DA96, and à few lesser DACs) left me with different impressions, and very clear ones. 

[Vincent des Champs]

4 hours ago, hopkins said:

We can "prefer" a system with more bass, but we should be able to agree that a given system does produce more bass than another, and we should all be able to know which of the two systems is more accurate.

How do you know which of the two systems produce the ‘most accurate amount of bass’ since we do not have a benchmark - at least I don’t - ?

[numlog]

It would seem like that in theory but listen to as much different music as possible and it will start to become clearer which is closer to the truth through averaging, a direct reference is best but isn't an absolute requirement imo.

 

Also flat frequency response is pretty much guaranteed for any DAC now, there are not really an actual difference in 'amount', it is distortion creating either a sense of exaggerated bass or ( more commonly) lean/anemic bass, it is easier for your ears to pick out complex errors like this within music compared to a simple difference in volume.

[Henley]

9 hours ago, hopkins said:

I am sorry our "experience" and assessment of the powerDAC is so different. Perhaps the next model (S) will be simpler to evaluate. Until then... 

And who made you the Tzar of EC Designs?

[numlog]

 If I was too vague about not needing a reference: Hearing 1 track wont tell you a lot, neither will 2, after 100 you may start to notice recurring patterns, these are the characteristics of the DAC and you obviously want them to be as few, slight and unobjectionable as possible. Preference comes into play but from this process the errors of the DAC should be clear without a reference (of course you are limited by your listening ability)

[bodiebill]

6 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

You may have read that link too quickly. There is no need for science in all this - we are not talking about theory, but reality, and reality is "unique" - there are not muliple realities...

 

Judging the ability of an audio system to reproduce a recording is something everyone should be able to agree upon, provided we are "objective" in our attempt to do so (and by objective I do not mean that we need to resort to science). 

 

We can "prefer" a system with more bass, but we should be able to agree that a given system does produce more bass than another, and we should all be able to know which of the two systems is more accurate. If that is not the case, then there is no point in discussing anything on an audio forum. 

 

Having "preferences" does not mean we cannot agree on an "objective" description of a component's performance, and there is no need for science in order to do so. 

 

Unfortunately, when it comes to audio components, we cannot evaluate them on their own, they need to be used within a system, and the system will change the results. We do not all have the same systems. 

 

That being said, I have to admit that your descriptions of the powerDAC in your system leaves me a little confused.

 

On the one hand you say  that the powerDAC puts a "veil" on the recording, a pleasant one, but still a veil. I understand by this that it is not completely "transparent"? You also seem to indicate that the powerDAC is a little shy on bass (unlike the Pegasus), and "smooths" out the harsh treble of baroque music recordings. But you also mention that the powerDAC has good "sonority" and ability to reproduce piano accurately - yet a piano is an instrument with a very wide range. 

 

I do not have a Pegasus DAC to compare the powerDAC, but as I mentioned before, my comparisons to other DACs (Terminator, Audiomat Tempo 3, the DA96, and à few lesser DACs) left me with different impressions, and very clear ones. Tot

 

You hit the nail on the head when you say that "when it comes to audio components, we cannot evaluate them on their own, they need to be used within a system, and the system will change the results. We do not all have the same systems."

This is a given and unavoidable, so for me the "unfortunately" that you put before this sentence does not apply. 

I think in audiophile history there has never been consensus on one single component, let alone an absolute truth. Putting the PD on an altar does not further our 'objective' perception of its qualities.

How about we continue this conversation after having listened to each other's setups?

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

27 minutes ago, Henley said:

And who made you the Tzar of EC Designs?

 

That seems like a pretty aggressive and unnecessary comment. 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

1 hour ago, bodiebill said:

 

You hit the nail on the head when you say that "when it comes to audio components, we cannot evaluate them on their own, they need to be used within a system, and the system will change the results. We do not all have the same systems."

This is a given and unavoidable, so for me the "unfortunately" that you put before this sentence does not apply. 

I think in audiophile history there has never been consensus on one single component, let alone an absolute truth. Putting the PD on an altar does not further our 'objective' perception of its qualities.

How about we continue this conversation after having listened to each other's setups?

 

 

 

Yes, the difficulty is to evaluate "imperfect" components in "imperfect" systems. Hence this is why we spend a lot of time swapping things around, listening in different systems, etc. 

I believe we can still make sense of all this and reach "consensus" on equipment. If you do not think so, as you seem to indicate, then can I ask you this: why are you contributing to this thread?  Why did you bother giving your opinion about this product here in the first place? What is the point of discussing all this on an audio forum? 

 

In my opinion, it is worthwhile, and possible, to find good (or even exceptional) audio products in the mass of mediocre products out there. If we don't try to, then we may find temporary satisfaction in a system, but chances are we will be making compromises. 

[bodiebill]

30 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

Yes, the difficulty is to evaluate "imperfect" components in "imperfect" systems. Hence this is why we spend a lot of time swapping things around, listening in different systems, etc. 

I believe we can still make sense of all this and reach "consensus" on equipment. If you do not think so, as you seem to indicate, then can I ask you this: why are you contributing to this thread?  Why did you bother giving your opinion about this product here in the first place? What is the point of discussing all this on an audio forum? 

 

In my opinion, it is worthwhile, and possible, to find good (or even exceptional) audio products in the mass of mediocre products out there. If we don't try to, then we may find temporary satisfaction in a system, but chances are we will be making compromises. 

 

Simple: I am interested in other experiences, and happy to contribute mine. I learn from that, not by following any (nonexistent) consensus, but by finding my own way. Striving for 'consensus' even makes me suspicious as it has the risk of pigeonholing and limiting our openness to new experiences.

 

I admit this has all become a little too vague or philosophical, so perhaps we could continue this offline in order not to bore the others?

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

What do you want to continue offline? 

There is a point at which we lose steam. And yes, this is getting very "vague" and I am having a hard time following you. Let's take a break and we can contribute any time we have something new to add to all this. 

[Vincent des Champs]

Hi,

 

I don’t know what the goal is of this thread, but I must admit I don’t feel like attributing any longer since the energy has become more negative every post.

 

For now: everybody that has a PowerDAC enjoy it to the fullest and everybody who hasn’t one yet: GET ONE ASAP! 😍

 

Happy listening

 

Vincent

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

1 hour ago, Vincent des Champs said:

Hi,

 

I don’t know what the goal is of this thread, but I must admit I don’t feel like attributing any longer since the energy has become more negative every post.

 

For now: everybody that has a PowerDAC enjoy it to the fullest and everybody who hasn’t one yet: GET ONE ASAP! 😍

 

Happy listening

 

Vincent

 

The point of a thread is to exchange on our experience and share information. When our experience and assessments diverge, we have to accept discussions and the idea that our opinions can be challenged. There is nothing wrong with that. We can learn things and progress. 

 

But if we engage in discussions, make claims and provide theories, while at the same time undermining the possibility of any agreement or convergence, because we consider everything to be "relative", subjective, and contextual, then you are right, things become pointless and frustrating - at least for me. 

[numlog]

With the amount of shills in this hobby, and people with vastly different amounts/types of experience, discussion online is rarely productive, mostly misleading.

 

[Superdad]

6 minutes ago, numlog said:

With the amount of shills in this hobby…

Wow. As a sponsoring manufacturer on this forum I can tell you that while we have a lot of vocal fans here and elsewhere, we have no shills ever.  “Shill” is a very strong word—with a specific meaning involving what amounts to fraud—so I would think your accusation would be rather offensive to most of the members here.

Can’t understand why you would equate people sharing enthusiasm for a product/brand with shilling.

[tapatrick]

11 hours ago, Henley said:

And who made you the Tzar of EC Designs?

10 hours ago, hopkins said:

That seems like a pretty aggressive and unnecessary comment. 

I agree with @hopkins completely unnecessary and aggressive. Is @mordante as OP aware of this?

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

9 minutes ago, tapatrick said:

I agree with @hopkins completely unnecessary and aggressive. Is @mordante as OP aware of this?

 

 

No worries. Mordante's last post was 2 years ago, but there is no need for any "moderation" at this stage. I'm sure I annoy some as much as they annoy me.

[numlog]

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

Can’t understand why you would equate people sharing enthusiasm for a product/brand with shilling.

I cant understand why you are taking this as a personal attack or that you think I'm saying everyone is a shill.

 

[Bram1103]

11 hours ago, Vincent des Champs said:

Hi,

 

I don’t know what the goal is of this thread, but I must admit I don’t feel like attributing any longer since the energy has become more negative every post.

 

For now: everybody that has a PowerDAC enjoy it to the fullest and everybody who hasn’t one yet: GET ONE ASAP! 😍

 

Happy listening

 

Vincent

I have an appointment with ECD later this week to listen to their PowerDac S1 direct connected to their open baffle speakers. They will also demonstrate the PowerDac R with their tube power amps together with the open baffles. They want to let me hear the difference between the two systems. 

 

ECD is very very positive about the PowerDac S1

 

I will send an update of this experience.

[Superdad]

8 hours ago, numlog said:

I cant understand why you are taking this as a personal attack or that you think I'm saying everyone is a shill.

 

I don't take it as a "personal attack" at all.  But I do think it insulting to the membership at AS to cast such an aspersion with no evidence. Not only is not everyone a shill but I am not aware of ANY shills active on this forum--certainly not in this thread.

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

23 hours ago, Henley said:

And who made you the Tzar of EC Designs?

 

I should have replied that I will be glad to take a break from this thread and not have to deal with idiotic comments like this any longer 😅  The person who "upvoted" you also deserves a crown! I wanted to share my enthusiasm for ECD's products, but I am sick of dealing with all this BS.  People who are curious and open to new ideas will be able to understand and appreciate the work of ECD on their own without the need for a babysitter. 

[yogibear]

9 hours ago, Bram1103 said:

I have an appointment with ECD later this week to listen to their PowerDac S1 direct connected to their open baffle speakers. They will also demonstrate the PowerDac R with their tube power amps together with the open baffles. They want to let me hear the difference between the two systems. 

 

ECD is very very positive about the PowerDac S1

 

I will send an update of this experience.

Looking forward to your impressions. I wish PD S2 was also available for exact same comparison. S2 should really shine with their OBs. And am particularly curious on how it compares to combo of PD R plus tube amps driving the same OB. 
 

Not sure what are the specs on the amplification part of S2 and particularly the harmonics.