Phasure NOS1 vs. Pacific Microsonics Model Two

[gkoones]

Rather than insult me, tell use. You have one, list the major components, and we can all calculate the cost of goods.

 

As for your intolerance of opposing viewpoints, high end audio isn’t a religious cult, it’s a commercial enterprise. Why should it be exempt from expressions of “caveat emptor”

 

 

[manisandher]

Oh, so that's your mission is it? To cry "caveat emptor" whenever a new product that threatens to enhance the state of computer audio is mentioned... on a site devoted to exactly that?

 

If anything, the NOS1 runs totally counter to the high end audio industry. It has been developed by a music lover for music lovers... and is very, very good value for money (or sound... take your pick).

 

List the major components? No.

 

Mani.

 

[av_passion]

gkoones, you accuse others of insults, yet you disparage someone else's product with little to no knowledge of the effort, cost and components involved in the development of the product. Further, as PeterST has said on a couple of occasions his development of this product is more focused on the pursuit of sonic excellence than it is a commercial endeavor. If you have questions about the product or the components involved, ask them. However, if you simply are making inflammatory comments for the purpose of provoking a response on this forum, do us all a favor and keep them to yourself.

 

 

[blueixus]

The Cost of Goods argument is largely irrelevant.

 

I am sure PeterSt has spent many hours/days/months/years thinking up and designing this DAC, all of which should be factored into the 'Retail Sales Price'.

 

Does gkoones consider this time and intellectual property to be totally without value and that we should all give our time for nothing?

 

[gkoones]

High end audio is part of the consumer electronics industry. It's big yearly show is the CES. (the c stands for consumer). Cost of goods teardowns are a standard part of the review of pretty much every consumer electronic product. Every new iPhone and iPod is subject to one, I don't see Apple complaining that's it's an insult to do a teardown. If anything, the ability to price your product with a higher multiple of price to cost of goods is an indication of the consumer's belief in the value added of the engineering and your brand. It's not an invasion of privacy or a violation of trade secrets, its simply one measure of comsumer value.

 

[Miska]

I am sure PeterSt has spent many hours/days/months/years thinking up and designing this DAC, all of which should be factored into the 'Retail Sales Price'. Does gkoones consider this time and intellectual property to be totally without value and that we should all give our time for nothing?

 

Not exactly related, but the quite interesting part is that many tend to consider this only in scope of hardware, but not in scope of software. However, in many cases development time for software is much higher than for hardware.

 

It is good for everybody to calculate how many units of price X would have to be sold to cover several man years of development time...

 

 

[ted_b]

do the classic "ipod cost of goods" argument. Well, now that you have...it's obvious you know very little about the concept of "cost of goods". In Apple's case, or in the case of any large manufacturer who has committed the resources to large scale manufacturing the economy of (huge) scale is involved, and any tear down of an iPod does not reveal the R&D, the intellectual capital, the cost of physical plant, payroll, marketing, inventory deval, etc. C'mon, really....you think because an ipod's innerds cost $130 and they sell it for $299 that they make $169 pure bottom line profit on each ipod?

 

Peter, I am interested to know how many you think you can build for resale; meaning, if one of us was quite interested what would the lead time reasonably be (not counting shipping).

 

[gkoones]

In the case of hardware products that need drivers or firmware, separating the software development costs from the overall cost of engineer is removing a drop of ink placed in glass of milk, it can't be done and it doesn't matter. Its just part of the fixed cost that has to be amortized over the sales volume. In fact, the design process is often a process of how much functionality to place in hardware and how much to place in software.

 

[Miska]

In the case of hardware products that need drivers or firmware, separating the software development costs

 

No, I was talking about pure software products without related hardware.

 

Its just part of the fixed cost that has to be amortized over the sales volume.

 

It would be interesting to know what kind of volumes you think we are talking about here?

 

I dont know how long it takes to assemble NOS1, but for my own DCA1 it takes me roughly two full working days to put a single unit together, but well, it's not only a DAC.

 

Also component costs tend to heavily depend on volumes.

 

 

[barrows]

your comments are either ignorant, or just plain inflammatory, and are best kept to yourself.

Equating the cost to produce high end audio products, with that of general consumer electronics is just ridiculous. High end audio products are produced in the thousands, (or in Peterst's case, perhaps a few hundred units ultimately). Consumer electronics are produced in the hundreds of thousands to the millions.

The high end audio industry is essentially a cottage industry, producing small numbers of products at a very high quality, and the economies of scale are entirely different than those of the consumer electronics industry.

 

[losingmyreligion]

 

 

Just ignore the BS.

 

Only one way to treat a troll, don't feed it.

 

 

clay

 

[4est]

IIRC, Peter's first run was 12!

 

Clay is right, and this was my fault- sorry...

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

It is a public secret that the cost of parts is around half of the sales price. I ever back put that on my forum somewhere, so it is not a secret at all.

 

For calculations, if needed, we have PCM1704 chips worth of more than your car (this would be gkoones car btw). This not only tells about some stupid value of things, but also that it all includes high quantities in the first place, or otherwise the whole thing wouldn't be affordable to anyone.

 

So, half instead of 10 fold or more.

 

Next, Miska is quite exactly right about two days of assembling. But FYI, "assembling" is about putting ready parts together. Putting them in the case, so to speak.

But to be honest, this excludes quality problems, like things not working, bad THD figures or anything, caused by unknown causes (like a faulty capacitor, whatever).

Lastly, nearly the whole thing is (SMD) soldered by ourselves. And no, this is not included in these two days, nor is it obtained in parts costs of course. But I like to see you do that within another two days, whether you are a prisoned Chinese or not (this hardly makes sense, and will only tell how stupid it is to do this ourselves).

 

The software ? think about maybe one year for this alone, but add a few years to make it "workable". All the trials of obtaining hardware ? think a small car for Firewire attempts I talked about, which really are all in the trashcan by now. So already that.

A DAC like this really should cost 10K at least to cover for this stupid stuff alone. And then I calculate 100 for sales.

Now multiply. Just for fun. That would be 7000 euros more for a 100. The figures match what has been spent. It can't be gotten back by selling even a 10000. Why ? because of those 2 days assembly which are already excluding the soldering of the PCBs.

 

I don't tell this because I'm pittyful.

But it does proove that I am quite crazy, and maybe that it doesn't feel nice to read that someone thinks that this -of course- is all about making crazy amounts of money. So that disturbs a little, and that's why I tell you this. You just don't have a clue (as it seems).

 

Lastly, if not clear already, the cost of the parts is "only half" just because of the quantities bought. So it's also about investments (which phenomenon should tell that it is about earning back whatever factor). Listen to someone like Barrows who also builds a fine DAC. But for himself. What did he say ? 2000 euros or dollars, I'm not sure. But the best parts to be found, and they cost just that. No case yet, no hours charged, and the development was just done by other fools who don't charge these hours. Too much maybe still because of not buying in quantities, but also just 2000 euros. Who cares when you have 2000 euros spare anyway. But now what if that is times 100 just to keep the price down (yeah yeah, the 2000 will drop).

 

Hey, no problem. Let's say it is just business. Anyway I decided for it myself. No complaints anywhere.

But now imagine that it's not much nice to hear what you are telling about this all. Design your own case (instead of getting yourself any cheap looking thing like I would do if it were for myself), go with it somewhere, ask what it costs, and be sure you have it 100% right before giving it into production. If not, you've spent 100x that amount and ditched it. Aha, so you make a prototype. Good. Now ask what that costs. Can you do it in one time ? good again. If not, spend that money another time, or otherwise you will loose a 100 times that money. Of course, you can make 20 only ! But now ask for the difference in price.

Wait, you wanted aluminum. Also good. Much nicer. Start with 6000 for that mall needed and hope you do it allright in one go. If you didn't, spend another 6. But keep your sales target in mind, and see the revenue drop only because you had to spent that other 6k. So rise the price.

And see the sales drop. And ...

 

It's not that easy.

Peter

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guys - gkoones is now on a little forced break from CA. Don't let a troll distract from informative topics such as this.

 

Carry on :~)

 

[1audio]

Its a tape system whose identity escapes me. I'll see if I can find out. They are busy right now, KOJ just won a Grammy for his surround recording of the Britten and they just returned from a successful recording project in Charlotte NC.

 

I would be very reluctant to poke around inside of a Model 2. There are interactions between the line receiver and the rest of the system that might get confused if the receiver is bypassed. The challenge of connecting to it is the dual link requirement. I have been looking at making an interface from the Juli@ to a dual link interface for the Model 2 and its clones. I may have a way finally but need the motivation to actually build them. With less than 100 or so of the model 2 in existence and more than a few in service where the interface isn't needed its a small market. Since this is more hobby than income for me it needs to be fun.

 

[manisandher]

"Its a tape system whose identity escapes me."

 

Yes, it'd be interesting to know exactly what KOJ uses for recording. However, of even more interest to me is how he then transfers from tape to digital. More specifically, which dual-AES interface he uses - is it the Lynx or something else?

 

"I have been looking at making an interface from the Juli@ to a dual link interface for the Model 2 and its clones. I may have a way finally but need the motivation to actually build them. With less than 100 or so of the model 2 in existence and more than a few in service where the interface isn't needed its a small market. Since this is more hobby than income for me it needs to be fun."

 

It's obvious to me that the Model Two itself is a superb converter. Feed it an analog signal, take it through its AD and then DA stage (@24/192) and then compare with the original feed. If your experience is like mine, the original and the AD/DA will sound identical. That's good enough for me.

 

However, I've found interfacing the Model Two to a computer using a dual-AES link more than a little challenging. Neither the Weiss AFI1 or RME AES-32 are perfect. The Mykerinos may come closer (I've never heard it), but it's expensive...

 

Demian, it would be great if you could create a better dual-AES interface for the Model Two than currently exists. What could we do to make it more fun for you to make this happen?

 

Mani.

 

[PeterSt]

The last thing I want is interfering with this. So, let's say I don't. But but but ...

 

As you know the SPDIF out on the NOS1 currently is there as a "gadget". But, also it is there for people to try out my "theories" on a very low jitter SPDIF-out. And, we (you too, Mani) know of at least one customer who tried it for its merits on his Audio Note. He received a totally different DAC (AN) by it ...

So let's say that just works.

 

Now, with your second NOS1 being at the "painter" right today, what would happen (at least for you) if we'd try to make an AES output from it ? It would be 24/192 only (so, no 384). Would that technically work for the Model Two, or does it need 2x 96 ?

 

Don't ask me what it would take and cost to make it (well), and it will be for some further offline communication anyway. But ?

 

Peter

 

[manisandher]

I would be very interested in trying the Model Two being fed by the NOS1, even if it's just a single AES output.

 

But ultimately, I'm looking for an interface that has dual-AES (2x 96) ouputs, dual-AES inputs (for recording) and also a wordclock input so that I can compare slave vs. master. Now of course, if the NOS1 could potentially achieve all this, it would be a very, very interesting proposition indeed.

 

Off topic: So, the "painter" said pink with blue and yellow dots is OK? Excellent.

 

Mani.

 

[1audio]

I hope to have a demo board in a few days that will give the clues to this solution. If it looks like it will work I'll pass along how to do it. If Peter is up to tweaking one and hooking it up to your box (in place of his DAC) that would be the best way to see how they compare. If after all of this his DAC is on a par (what I would expect at least) he will have accomplished quite a lot.

 

I still don't understand how Peter squeezes 384/32 through an I2S port that stops at 24/192 but then he is a magician.

 

[Miska]

I still don't understand how Peter squeezes 384/32 through an I2S port that stops at 24/192 but then he is a magician.

 

At least how I've been doing it is to use one stereo I2S port as a mono port. Then having two I2S ports gives you 384/24. Four I2S ports at 192/24 gives you stereo 768/24.

 

 

 

[1audio]

I see those roadmaps but the Juli@ has one I2S port and one SPDIF port and the driver currently sends the same data to both, with the option to switch off one of them. Other versions of cards with the same ICE1724 chip can do much more but all of those skip the 176.4 KHz sample rate. However there is the potential of grabbing pins on the chip and customizing the driver opening many possibilities. However it may be less work to do that with a USB interface designed from the ground up.

 

[manisandher]

"If Peter is up to tweaking one and hooking it up to your box (in place of his DAC) that would be the best way to see how they compare."

 

Demian, thanks for the offer - I really appreciate it.

 

I can't speak for Peter, but I would certainly love to hook your board up to my Model Two and see how this compares to the NOS1. There are a few logistical issues here (Peter lives in Holland, and I in the UK), but assuming Peter has the time and interest to try this, I'm sure we could work through them.

 

Perhaps it's best to take this off-line - I'll send you a PM.

 

Cheers,

Mani.

 

[manisandher]

"Four I2S ports at 192/24 gives you stereo 768/24."

 

Hi Miska,

 

Is this purely theoretical or have you managed to get this to work? With an ESI card? Of course, I wouldn't expect you to disclose any 'trade secrets', but it would be good to know if it is at least possible in practice.

 

Cheers,

Mani.

 

[Miska]

Is this purely theoretical or have you managed to get this to work? With an ESI card?

 

It was just a generic statement. I've managed to get it work, but not with ESI. I don't even own any piece of the ESI card in question here.

 

 

[PeterSt]

I hope to have a demo board in a few days that will give the clues to this solution. If it looks like it will work I'll pass along how to do it. If Peter is up to tweaking one and hooking it up to your box (in place of his DAC) that would be the best way to see how they compare.

 

But of course I want to try !

And honestly -as I told Mani privatly- I currently wouldn't know where to start at making *this* 2 x 96 into one 192 at the other end. And I didn't suggest a "if Demian would ..." - but I was sure thinking of it. So if you now come up with this yourself ...

Seems great.

 

I'd say, take your time with this (so I have some time left for now :-), and maybe it's best to continue this via email ? Well, if you want, contact sales at phasure.com

 

Thanks a lot,

Peter