Jump to content
IGNORED

Did a $79 Behringer mastering interface just outperform the iFi DAC2?


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
39 minutes ago, esldude said:

I'm repeating myself, but it won't get any shot.  Fair or otherwise.  Regardless of any sound difference, it would have to be a tremendous huge improvement for recording people to forego easy editing, processing and creating that is possible with PCM and minimum to non-existent with DSD.  There work would be easier to return fully to analog tape than it would be to work in DSD if they insisted on keeping it DSD from start to finish.

 

Or you could mix analogue and DSD (i.e. Blue Coast Records), but then you will be using analogue as an effects box.

I am not condemning the creative use of analogue warmth but it does have an impact on signal "purity"(?) if that's what you are aiming for.

 

Another question in my view is whether or not the musical programe justifies the use of a potentially more accurate minimally mic'ed, unprocessed DSD workflow.

This is something that would of course not be feasible with studio recordings as most are impossible to produce with DSD, and to be blunt a lot of the material doesn't really justify it anyway (i.e. teenage pop, dance, electronic).

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

You are missing the point: The measurements simply put the product into the "Should try it out".

 

That is also my modus operandi.

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, Kelly said:

Let me preface this by saying that I am not making any claims to technical expertise ... BUT it would not surprise me if the iFi was a particularly poor measuring device. The iFi/AMR philosophy is to playback all material in native format within the hardware as much as possible (hence they were the innovator in introducing a truly affordable, true DSD playback device.) They are very open that doing things in this manner doesn't always lead to the best measurements, as simple techniques like upsampling can dramatically improve some measurements. They philosophically seek to avoid this as much as possible in their implementations.

 

So my question for those more knowledgeable about these things, if the iFi is indeed processing these signals at a native rate, and the Behringer is processing at upsampled 192khz would that, explain the difference in measurements?

 

Have you had a look at Sphile's measurements of the iDAC?

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/ifi-audio-idac-amp-iusbpower-usb-da-processor-amp-outboard-power-supply-measurements

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...