Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro MQA

[Miska]

18 hours ago, 57gold said:

nor do I know that what he is measuring is all the "important stuff"

 

It is not...

 

[Miska]

24 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

What’s missing?

 

To some extent that was discussed, but then I got fed up and ignored the whole site. They think that as it is now is all that matters, except that nobody can hear it, so it doesn't matter. So I'm not sure what they are trying to achieve.

 

[Miska]

20 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

As I understand it, you’d want to see  much wider bandwidth measurements up to, say, megahertz range. That might be useful and can be interesting, but hardly negates the poor measurement results in the audible range, as is, for example, the case with TotalDac. Would you agree?

 

There are lot of possible measurements, but given the welcoming of first ones I talked about I didn't even bother with anything more.

 

When I demonstrated some improvements in audible range, the response was that it didn't matter because they think nobody can hear it. Or at least I would need to prove it with DBT. Yet they make big noise about much smaller differences in their measurements without extensive DBT about those ones. In any case their measurements only skim the "audible range". Reminds me of 70's amplifier measurements where companies were showing great THD figures while people were wondering why they sound so bad. Until the reason was later found out.

 

I don't comment about TotalDac, I have never heard nor measured one. (or Matrix for that matter either)

 

[Miska]

1 minute ago, asdf1000 said:

I think main thing is he just wants to know something (DAC, amp) is not broken from a design perspective...

 

i.e. does it actually meet the manufacturer’s own performance claims...

 

I think that’s a nice check to have.

 

Better than not having ?

 

For that, just OK/NOK would be enough. Now they have DAC rankings based on THD+N figure. And some people then buy DACs based on that figure.

 

[Miska]

Just now, asdf1000 said:

If it means manufacturers see it and try to improve measurements so they go to a higher “ranking”, that’s not a bad thing for end consumers?

 

Most manufacturers will ignore it though. And improving results for this single measurement to improve ranking on this list can be counterproductive. It is just like anything else tested on single parameter, be it car tires, cars or audio equipment. And for example they test the DAC only with single input format.

 

[Miska]

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

That would be a mistake, the ranking chart is probably more for entertainment than for actual purchasing advice.

 

Unfortunately it seems to be used for such though...

 

3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

But for those who know a little about measurements and how to interpret them, the site offers a lot of information often not available elsewhere.

 

For me, I don't find much useful information there. But if it is useful for someone, then the site certainly serves it's purpose.

 

[Miska]

13 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

What would be a better set of measurements that would be useful to you?

 

Similar to what I usually post.

 

In addition, I've now started to measure TIM on DACs too, it's been forgotten for too long.

 

[Miska]

59 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

But if we’re talking about this SINAD ranking, I do see an informal trend that the highest SINAD DACs also tend to do well in other measurements too...

 

It seems (just looking casually) that it takes good overall engineering competency to get a SINAD above 110dB...

 

SINAD (aka THD+N)... Within constraints of those tests... Those measurements don't tell for example how good performance the DAC is capable of when driven in a different way. But even looking at those measurements at ASR, the DAC in question wasn't so special.

 

For example I personally rather take modern AKM DAC chip than ESS Sabre, no matter how good 1 kHz THD+N figure someone squeezes out of ESS.

 

[Miska]

5 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

Why?

 

Is it because of the 'ESS Sabre IMD hump' that ASR has highlighted?

 

Or mainly because of 'DSD Direct' feature?

 

Mainly because of DSD Direct feature which allows getting proper performance. ESS modulator has some unfixable annoyances, for example related to it's ASRC/DPLL, as it's DSP cannot be bypassed completely, so the performance is more capped.

 

ESS digital filter has at best only about 100 dB attenuation, so it's reconstruction accuracy is really equivalent of about 16.5 bits. But that can be fixed externally.

 

[Miska]

10 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

AKM is better in this regard?

 

Not with digital filters, it is the same. Both of course can be used with external one. But AKM has no ASRC/DPLL related problems. I prefer DACs that can be used as D/A converters, without built-in DSP. Otherwise their performance is capped by the DSP...

 

I'm very happy with my discrete DACs now though, both T+A and Holo Audio. I will also try Denafrips when I get around ordering one.

 

[Miska]

Just now, Le Concombre Masqué said:

and FPGA I guess?

 

FPGA/CPLD is just plain programmable logic, so it doesn't have any performance as such. It totally depends on what goes there and what is around, since FPGA itself cannot be a D/A converter alone.

 

Most discrete DACs use FPGA/CPLD as a basis, because some digital logic is needed to make it happen and those programmable logics are a neat way to put it in a compact package that can be modified later.

 

 

P.S. I'm not criticizing ESS or Matrix as such, just the out of proportions hype ASR is making around SINAD ranking, based on single measurement result at single input format... IMO, it gives wrong kind of picture, performance and sonics are much more complex topic.

 

[Miska]

5 hours ago, opus101 said:

Even the very latest AKM DAC (AK4499) has only -100dB stop-band rejection. Also note it uses an equi-ripple filter. These are known to exhibit pre-echoes - see a paper on this by Julian Dunn.

 

Just like ESS... But equiripple doesn't have anything to do with that. You can also have minimum-phase equiripple filter that of course doesn't have pre-echo. Or any intermediate-phase one for that matter...

 

AKM also has minimum-phase (short delay) filters available on the chip, plus "low-dispersion short-delay" filter.

 

But I personally stay away from any DAC chip digital filters.

 

[Miska]

12 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

Noted but as I noted above, it appears (informally) that those DACs with SINAD above 110dB also do well in most of the other measurements he does...

 

I just don't agree about that...

 

[Miska]

Hmmh, what is SBAF?

 

I do a lot of measurements and I consider myself pretty objectively driven. But still it takes me just couple of hours of ASR to get fed up. Where 131 dB SINAD is very superior to 128 dB SINAD. But -40 dB dB ultrasonic images are of no issue compared to -140 dB ultrasonic images. Nobody needs to prove why SINAD difference at that level makes great difference, although without breathing between it is stated that nobody can hear difference beyond 60 dB SINAD. But no proof is enough to show that correlated ultrasonic images matter. Especially little thought is given to correlated vs non-correlated errors. Oh well....

 

[Miska]

11 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

Source:

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php

 

At quick glance, half of the site seems to be about Schiit

 

[Miska]

16 hours ago, plissken said:

I remember the ASR PS Audio Perfect Wave thread.

 

Honestly Miska you and Amir are both really bright and capable engineers. Amir is able to account for his approaches and even admit when he's been in error.

 

I vaguely remember that thread, although it is not really interesting one and cannot remember anymore what it was about. I don't have any particular interest on any PS Audio gear (I don't own any and I'm not really interested to own any, just doesn't fit my requirements).

 

Not sure what you are hinting. I'm not referring in particular to Amir, he's not particularly active talking there. There are many other people who post much more there. I tried to contribute some of my measurements on the forum, but instead got attacked because the results weren't what they wanted/expected. And it is not really possible to discuss anything there either. So in the end everybody is happier when I stay away.

 

[Miska]

20 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Miska - I hope you really do some TIM measurements.  Not sure if you'll find anything with DACs, but...

 

I've done some so far... The four high level tones are the test signal, everything else is distortion.

 

In this respect, PCM vs DSD doesn't make much difference, since the behavior is mostly driven by analog stages.