ASR Audio Science Review forum YouTube Channel

[semente]

22 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

 

I respect your comment. Pricing is not something I brought up in this discussion though.

 

So it's 'problem' of a different kind, for some people.

 

Technical performance, the Chord stuff is very very good (not only because Chord marketing says, but 3rd party measurements). Just like some much more affordable products too.

 

 

Some British manufacturers are able to generate quite a fervent yet blind religious support: Naim, Audio Note, Harbeth, Chord.

Hats off to their outstanding salesmanship abilities!

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

Some British manufacturers are able to generate quite a fervent yet blind religious support: Naim, Audio Note, Harbeth, Chord.

Hats off to their outstanding salesmanship abilities!

 

Some of the Chord fans are really "loyal".

 

Salesmanship is one thing but the below kind of engineering performance is not exactly common:

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-dave-da-processor-measurements

 

and more affordable:

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-qutest-da-processor-measurements

 

Note, other than the comments section, no $ is discussed on these pages.

 

ASR found Qutest to be state of the art also. Just like Rob Watts own APx555 measurements show too.

[Currawong]

Much of the argument about measurements would be negated if people actually knew how much processing went into most music, including adding distortion. 

 

The discussion of brand fans is interesting. Personally, I'm a fan of designers and companies that make products with the honest intent to enjoy music, even if the different approaches can be very contradictory. For example, I could readily see myself owning both Audio Note and Chord gear at the same time.

[MarkusBarkus]

2 hours ago, Currawong said:

The discussion of brand fans is interesting.

...maybe we will see the audio version of the kid peeing on the Ford or Chevy logo stickers. It would be funny to see Beemers and Porches (fill-in your fav) with stickers on the back: Piss on Chord. Piss on Naim (fill in your fav)...with the kid pissing on the logos. Get a real audio "war" going!

[JoeWhip]

How about piss on vinyl, will that work too? Asking for a friend.

[Miska]

19 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

Yes I followed this case too at the time. It's similar to the Chord Mojo I myself shared... But the Mojo case had much less ugly back-and-forths. Plus the Mojo had detailed APx555 plots shared by the designer on the product's release... well before Amir measured... 

 

Now though, Schiit are sending products to Amir and publishing their own AP plots (I personally value the latter more).

 

Mojo at least goes to my list of worst DACs I've had... :D That's why it lives in the desk drawer.

 

It is also model example of bad modulator design with massive amount of idle tones, etc. I don't know about other Chord DACs, since you won't see this kind of stuff in ASR measurements since they on purpose don't measure such things.

 

It also has worst USB interface implementation I've seen.

 

Certainly doesn't make me want to spend my money on more expensive models.

 

[fas42]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Mojo at least goes to my list of worst DACs I've had... :D That's why it lives in the desk drawer.

 

 

 

Ahhh, that's why it got this review, then, https://www.whathifi.com/au/chord/mojo/review?

 

... As we all know, measurements tell us everything important about the subjective performance, right? ... 😜

[asdf1000]

8 hours ago, Miska said:

 

Certainly doesn't make me want to spend my money on more expensive models.

 

Your experience is your experience of course. I definitely respect that.

 

But this kind of reasoning is like someone saying they will avoid Schiit's newer and more expensive DACs (that measure well) after seeing Modi 1 measurements ;-)

 

You've seen JA's Chord Dave and Qutest measurements.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-dave-da-processor-measurements

 

and more affordable:

 

https://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-qutest-da-processor-measurements

 

8 hours ago, Miska said:

It also has worst USB interface implementation I've seen.

 

Not to turn this into a HQPlayer thread but I agree when upsample to PCM705/768, it's a disaster. I've written that to you before.

 

No such issues at lower sample rates, in my experience.

 

And no issues at any sample rate with Hugo2, in my experience. According to Rob, Hugo2 has a more advanced output stage (to drive headphones) and measures better than Qutest...

 

Personal subjective preference only - I don't like HQPlayer with any Chord DACs. I much prefer Rob's WTA filter doing everything.

 

I love HQPlayer with my RME ADI-2 FS DAC (V2) in 'DSD Direct' mode, as you know. Very nice. 😎

 

Back on topic, RME ADI-2 FS DAC measures state of the art by ASR.

 

And RME themselves share detailed measurements themselves, both in the user manual and over on ASR Forum.

 

 

[semente]

8 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Ahhh, that's why it got this review, then, https://www.whathifi.com/au/chord/mojo/review?

 

... As we all know, measurements tell us everything important about the subjective performance, right? ... 😜

 

Not everything. Which is why we need more and better measurements.

Some people enjoy lesser technical performance but an equal number of people enjoys higher fidelity. It's a matter of personal preference, which is why it's called subjective performance.

[mevdinc]

8 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Ahhh, that's why it got this review, then, https://www.whathifi.com/au/chord/mojo/review?

 

... As we all know, measurements tell us everything important about the subjective performance, right? ... 😜

Well, I wouldn't trust the findings of Whathifi that much, after all, they voted Tidal as the #1 streaming service and put Qobuz at #5 or #7.

[Miska]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

Ahhh, that's why it got this review, then, https://www.whathifi.com/au/chord/mojo/review?

 

... As we all know, measurements tell us everything important about the subjective performance, right? ... 😜

 

WhatHifi "review" results depend mostly where the product is from, etc. The most useless "reviews".

 

[Miska]

6 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

You've seen JA's Chord Dave and Qutest measurements.

 

But not the measurements I'm talking about.

 

6 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

But this kind of reasoning is like someone saying they will avoid Schiit's newer and more expensive DACs (that measure well) after seeing Modi 1 measurements ;-)

 

Loki (the DSD DAC) measured pretty fine.

 

But I'm not interested in their multibit DACs. Not because of ASR measurements though.

 

6 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

Back on topic, RME ADI-2 FS DAC measures state of the art by ASR.

 

Yeah, my RME ADI-2 Pro's too, with the bundled SMPS, but especially when running in DSD Direct mode, or quite good also at 705.6/768k rate. But not so great with 44.1/48k inputs.

 

And also the EVGA NuAudio card measures and sounds very nice running at DSD256. Also running from the big Seasonic PSU (SMPS too).

 

[asdf1000]

2 hours ago, Miska said:

But not so great with 44.1/48k inputs.

 

Hmmm here you says 44.1k input is "not so great".

 

But previously you said it was "extremely well performing" and "already good" 😉 which is more in line with RME's own measurements and ASR measurements.

 

In the end not a big deal though because I do love it (personal preference / subjective) in DSD Direct mode fed DSD256 for HQPlayer

 

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/30492-any-experiences-with-rme-adi-2-pro-dac/?do=findComment&comment=904136

 

[Solstice380]

I didn’t read those two statements as being opposing or contradictory.  Originally, “either... is massively better than 44.1” indicates what the more recent one says, “44.1 is not so great”.  But interpretations can vary!  😜

[asdf1000]

2 hours ago, Solstice380 said:

I didn’t read those two statements as being opposing or contradictory.  Originally, “either... is massively better than 44.1” indicates what the more recent one says, “44.1 is not so great”.  But interpretations can vary!  😜

 

Yes possibly mis-interpretation on my part... but the measurements provided by RME and ASR both show even with only PCM44.1kHz input, it is an "extremely well performing DAC".... performing better with DSD256 (in DSD Direct mode) as Jussi has shown. 

 

Good thing about having more 3rd party measurements sources (I forgot Archimago did detailed measurements too) is we have more information to make an informed & reasonable conclusion i.e. even with only PCM44.1kHz input, it is state of the art... within the audible band of 20-20kHz....

 

If one wants to tell RME, Amir and Archimago that their measurements with PCM 44.1kHz input is "not that great" with the RME ADI-2 FS DAC, well that would be an interesting discussion.

[Miska]

20 hours ago, asdf1000 said:

But previously you said it was "extremely well performing" and "already good" 😉 which is more in line with RME's own measurements and ASR measurements.

 

In the end not a big deal though because I do love it (personal preference / subjective) in DSD Direct mode fed DSD256 for HQPlayer

 

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/30492-any-experiences-with-rme-adi-2-pro-dac/?do=findComment&comment=904136

 

 

IOW, read the entire paragraph. It is good if you disregard the built-in digital filters.

 

Quote

but the measurements provided by RME and ASR both show even with only PCM44.1kHz input

 

Because as usual, they use the measurement gear to fix many faults of the DACs.

 

Quote

f one wants to tell RME, Amir and Archimago that their measurements with PCM 44.1kHz input is "not that great" with the RME ADI-2 FS DAC, well that would be an interesting discussion.

 

I have, many times. Regarding many other DACs too. But if one wants to stick to certain selected limited views of things...

 

[pkane2001]

4 hours ago, Miska said:

 

IOW, read the entire paragraph. It is good if you disregard the built-in digital filters.

 

 

Because as usual, they use the measurement gear to fix many faults of the DACs.

 

 

I have, many times. Regarding many other DACs too. But if one wants to stick to certain selected limited views of things...

 

 

Jussi, I assume you're still talking about measurements up to 100MHz here and the ADC antialias filter removing these components, correct? Do you have a frequency plot for RME ADI-2 FS for this range at 44.1KHz showing the defects you're describing?

[Miska]

11 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Jussi, I assume you're still talking about measurements up to 100MHz here and the ADC antialias filter removing these components, correct? Do you have a frequency plot for RME ADI-2 FS for this range at 44.1KHz showing the defects you're describing?

 

Mostly 5 MHz bandwidth is enough for the analog filters. But yes, I have posted those both here and at ASR.

 

But overall, measuring any DAC with analyzer having a brickwall filter at 20 kHz is just fallacy, because you are using the analyzer to reconstruct the signal, not the DAC. When making measurements you should always make sure the measurement gear is not affecting the signal you are measuring. And if that happens, at least document how.

 

[asdf1000]

38 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Do you have a frequency plot for RME ADI-2 FS for this range at 44.1KHz showing the defects you're describing?

 

First image is at 353kHz?

 

I believe these images cause distortions within the audible band? 

 

And feeding ADI-2 higher sample rates reduce measured distortions within audible band @Miska ?

 

 

 

 

[Miska]

14 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

First image is at 353kHz?

 

I believe these images cause distortions within the audible band? 

 

You can see that the D/A conversion accuracy is about 9-bits.

 

14 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

And feeding ADI-2 higher sample rates reduce measured distortions within audible band @Miska ?

 

Yes, depending on your associated gear.

 

[asdf1000]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

You can see that the D/A conversion accuracy is about 9-bits.

 

That's where the debate (from others qualified, not me) comes. 

 

If looking at 400kHz bandwidth yes, the D/A conversion accuracy is about 9-bits.

 

If looking at 300kHz bandwidth (still huge !?) the D/A conversion accuracy is greater...

 

But I've seen your fights with others about this already, so no need to rehash here. They're around the place for people to search and read.

 

I happily upsample to DSD256 in DSDD mode anyway, with this particular DAC.

[Miska]

39 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

That's where the debate (from others qualified, not me) comes. 

 

If looking at 400kHz bandwidth yes, the D/A conversion accuracy is about 9-bits.

 

If looking at 300kHz bandwidth (still huge !?) the D/A conversion accuracy is greater...

 

"looking at XXX" bandwidth -> limiting bandwidth -> modifying the signal you are looking at. If you look at reduced bandwidth, you need to take note of anything that falls outside of it too. Only if you know that there won't be anything beyond it, you know that you are looking at unmodified signal.

 

For example. If you have 20.5 kHz 0 dBFS tone, but you are only looking at 20 kHz bandwidth, you'd think there is no signal at all.

 

[asdf1000]

14 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

"looking at XXX" bandwidth -> limiting bandwidth -> modifying the signal you are looking at. If you look at reduced bandwidth, you need to take note of anything that falls outside of it too. Only if you know that there won't be anything beyond it, you know that you are looking at unmodified signal.

 

For example. If you have 20.5 kHz 0 dBFS tone, but you are only looking at 20 kHz bandwidth, you'd think there is no signal at all.

 

 

Yes noted. But 20.5kHz is right at the border of what many people generally consider the audible band.

 

But in the case of RME ADI-2 DAC, 300 kHz image is not close to that border. 

 

And even if someone can hear up to 100kHz, 300 kHz is still well outside their audible band.

 

So that's where some people's eyebrows may raise.

 

But if these images being pushed further up results in decreased distortion levels within audible range, then that's a different story. Those are the measurements I haven't seen but I assume those are measurements you have yourself.

 

I don't have any kind of gear to even try to see this myself sadly. Maybe one day.

 

I recall you mentioned it may also be more an issue with certain switching (Class D) amplifiers

[Miska]

21 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

Yes noted. But 20.5kHz is right at the border of what many people generally consider the audible band.

 

That doesn't matter, because it can become very audible in various different ways.

 

21 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

But in the case of RME ADI-2 DAC, 300 kHz image is not close to that border. 

 

And even if someone can hear up to 100kHz, 300 kHz is still well outside their audible band.

 

That doesn't matter either.

 

21 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

But if these images being pushed further up results in decreased distortion levels within audible range, then that's a different story.

 

There are also images at lower frequencies, but how much depends on your filter selection.

 

When the images disappear altogether, at any frequency, and below -144 dBFS, you know you have proper D/A conversion up to 24-bit resolution.

 

For proper D/A conversion of RedBook, you must have all images at any frequency below -96 dBFS.

 

21 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

I recall you mentioned it may also be more an issue with certain switching (Class D) amplifiers

 

Yeah, Hypex and other class-D amplifiers have aliasing, just like A/D converters. But usually they don't have proper anti-alias filters at the input, at most usually 1st or 2nd order low-pass. And if that low-pass has fc of 20 kHz, it has plenty of phase-shift at highest audible frequencies. If the low pass has fc of 100 kHz or more, it doesn't have such phase-shift, but then it doesn't have almost any attenuation at 352.8 kHz.

 

On the other hand, regular analog amplifiers can have relatively high IMD at frequencies like 352.8 kHz. To know about such, you need to measure IMD of the amplifier with for example 351 + 352 kHz test tone. Not the usual 19+20 kHz.

 

 

Now we are still talking just about digital filter tests. But we have not even touched modulator tests yet.

 

[pkane2001]

42 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

That doesn't matter, because it can become very audible in various different ways.

 

 

That doesn't matter either.

 

 

There are also images at lower frequencies, but how much depends on your filter selection.

 

When the images disappear altogether, at any frequency, and below -144 dBFS, you know you have proper D/A conversion up to 24-bit resolution.

 

For proper D/A conversion of RedBook, you must have all images at any frequency below -96 dBFS.

 

 

Yeah, Hypex and other class-D amplifiers have aliasing, just like A/D converters. But usually they don't have proper anti-alias filters at the input, at most usually 1st or 2nd order low-pass. And if that low-pass has fc of 20 kHz, it has plenty of phase-shift at highest audible frequencies. If the low pass has fc of 100 kHz or more, it doesn't have such phase-shift, but then it doesn't have almost any attenuation at 352.8 kHz.

 

On the other hand, regular analog amplifiers can have relatively high IMD at frequencies like 352.8 kHz. To know about such, you need to measure IMD of the amplifier with for example 351 + 352 kHz test tone. Not the usual 19+20 kHz.

 

 

Now we are still talking just about digital filter tests. But we have not even touched modulator tests yet.

 

 

Such high-frequency IMD effects should be easy to detect in the audible range by capturing the output of the amplifier up to 20KHz, rather than at the output of a DAC, wouldn't you agree?