Async-USB 24/768 Phasure NOS1 DAC

[AudioCynic]

I can't imagine that Spectral did anything special for their boards. They used one of the design tools available at the time, generated a layout file and got bids from board vendors. What makes you think their requirements were anything special?

 

Having been involved with a number of bay area hardware oem startups, not a single one of them have been foolish enough to do their own boards. In fact, current practice is to use rapid turnaround, as in 24 hour, vendors for prototypes.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

OK Cynic - There's a reason you're hiding who you are. Many people who do the same do so because they would be ashamed to have their real name associated with their comments.

 

It seems like you are stuck in the large company mentality and old school thinking of specific marketing, development, etc... Silos must be intact or it's not a real business.

 

I really don't think you are into audio or anything discussed on CA. You seem to be into raining on parades and ripping on things you think you understand better than everyone. Why are you here?

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Cynic - You couldn't be more wrong about Spectral boards. It's a leading edge company with out a marketing person, let alone department, that doesn't settle for commodity boards that you know so well. You may want to stick with the mass produced world you know instead of wrongly speculating about other items.

 

What's your real name by the way? Why are you hiding?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

By the way, technology used in Spectral's entry level preamp comes from the Mars Rover. Not commodity in my estimation.

 

 

 

[Paul R]

It's off topic Chris, but you know, if there is one single thing I dont like about CA, it is that people can snipe here anonymously. I wish you would turn that off, perhaps allowing only people you vet to be totally anonymous.

 

I don't mind the sniping so much as the anonymous bit.

 

Just my $0.02.

 

-Paul

 

 

[vortecjr]

I was waiting for the review and walked into this mess:)

 

Jesus R

www.sonore.us

 

[AudioDoctor]

how do you propose Chris verifies every single users actual name?

 

Shall I send him a photo copy of my drivers license and a pic of me holding that days local newspaper to be able to post?

 

[Paul R]

First name, Last name, and a real e-mail address?

 

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

but in my case, my email is my real name.

 

So, you prefer an email that is given by an internet provider or an employer versus a free email?

 

All of those things can be faked. I believe Comcast will let me create up to 5 or so different emails...

 

[AudioCynic]

And what technology from the Mars Rover would that be? Its radiation hardening so you can listen to music during an atomic weapons attack or its temperature resistance so you can listen while your house is on fire? Spacecraft avionics tend not to be leading edge components but one or two generations behind. They tradeoff performance for weight, power consumption and ruggedness.

 

No one makes their own boards, everyone farms them out. You want mil spec, you got it, you want lead free, no problem, 10 layers, no problem. The fact is that there's nothing particularly stringent about any audio requirement.

 

Here's yet another of the 100s of pcb vendors. Read and learn.

 

 

https://www.protoexpress.com/content/capability.jsp

 

 

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

If so, I am sure we would all love to hear it.

 

[Audio_ELF]

@Chris

 

With respect what could an audiophile pre-amp possibly have to do with the Mars Rover? That comment came across as a "my dad's gonna beat your dad in" school boy brag and not worthy of a respected "journalist" / technology commentator which is how you (at least to my mind) wish yourself to be seen.

 

Let's face it, my iPhone has more processing power than is onboard the space shuttle: but that is completely irrelevant.

 

Perhaps you should expand on the relevant technologies refered to in that statement or withdraw it as being pointless...

 

Eloise

 

[1audio]

Off the shelf components means different things to different people, COTS, common of the shelf components, is an acronym for the parts used in many military and space craft projects where radiation hardening or environmental extremes are not an issue. Further, discrete transistors are COTS but they can be made to do impressive things.

 

Hardly a week goes by where I don't get a presentation from another "bay area startup" seeking the brass ring. I'm never sure whether getting that brass ring and the VC money is success or the end of success since VC's kill most of their children. Most startups tout some new tech and many push some new chip. Usually that means lots of painful development, three chip cycles and no working parts, even from players with history. Internally, we use the expression "How do you know when a chip vendor is lying? When his lips are moving."

 

It's not the off the shelf parts, but what you do with them that matters. If you are a tier one manufacturer you get access to the latest. That means that you get some support, lots of "yes, that's a bug, we will get to it" responses but little real help. It also means that a year down the road, with no working product, your vendor pulls the plug on your parts and you start over. None of this will make a better product.

 

Fancy cases are superficial dressing to sell to customers who don't understand the content (which describes pretty much all customers for technology products). Given no comprehension of the content customers judge by all they can grasp. Polished aluminium, gold, silver, fancy displays, blinking lights are all tools to attract customers, but have little bearing on the performance of the content. The Phasure is a novel concept and very unusual packaging, probably for a reason. That it doesn't have a $50,000 styling job and $1,500 worth of aluminum casework only means that it won't be taken seriously by those who are too shallow to look past the housing to hear what is inside. Even judging the potential of a product by its price really limits this segment of the market. A really brilliant violinist can get a lot more out of a cheap violin than a bad violinist can from a Stradivarius.

 

Mani represents the best of the audio customer, willing to take a chance on something interesting, even if it isn't polished, pretty or what the "cognoscenti" have blessed. he makes his own decisions based on content.

 

Historically (before Carly) part of the HP Way was to never put down a competitor because they don't have the big resources etc. of a big player. HP understood that big resources don't equal good results, often they mean sluggish response to technological change.

 

HP and Textronix both had in house PCB manufacturing. HP used it because they required gold plated PCB's for reliability, a technology most PCB guys at the time couldn't invest it. Tektronix did because they used really exotic materials. Tek, for a while, took in outside business. That's when I went in with some specific PCB requirements for the Spectral preamps and poweramps. We were one of the few customers who had access (amazing for a 5 person company) but they dropped it all after a while. The material became unobtainable for some reason. It had some properties that were much better than even PTFE.

 

PCB's are pretty common "highly automated standardized commodity low value added" until you need special properties, like PTFE for low loss in high speed data links. Layout is trivial until you try to do something really at the limits and it becomes a manual art, like it always was. The automated tools won't do it.

 

Berkeley Audio is 3 people, Weiss no more than 10 last I looked. Neither are strong enough or sell enough product to get real attention from a semi vendor. Semi vendors need serious volume to do anything. I met with the founder of one recently who told a story of creating a new part that would have a lock on a special capability. They soon discovered that the world market was about 5 wafers. They never made that mistake again. They now are the primary vendor of processors for cameras. The entire premium audio market is in the 5 wafer range, max.

 

The "special instruments and tools" you need to work at the edge of the art quickly prove to be inadequate and an expensive waste of resources. They can help but don't substitute for know how. And they can become the hammer to which all problems are nails, blinding the designer to real issues.

 

Jobs and Woz getting 'preorders" for the Apple 1 happened in a day when an ad in Byte magazine from a total unknown would get cash up front. Many times unable to follow through with actual product. And they were not planning to cater to a hobbiest market, at least not once the VC's got involved. Slim Devices is the closest analog to Apple's startup in the audio biz in recent memory. most audio businesses are not roads to bigger glory and money. Many are always a little above crashing. Or they go the Monster Cable way and move to larger markets and leave the high end behind as they cater to what the larger customer base wants to buy, and its not highest fidelity.

 

 

 

[Paul R]

Actually, the Space Shuttle has quite a bit more computing oomph than our iPhones. ("oomph" is a highly technical descriptive term of course... )

 

But seriously, USB/Firewire/PCI and a few other 'busses" came from military and spacecraft data bus designs. Adapted for mass production of course.

 

And many of those exotic spacecraft components are now considered COTS parts. (That "Commercial Off The Shelf" parts by the way...

 

It does not surprise me at all that audio engineers are adapting technology from spacecraft designs. So long as they don't go back to using Intel 4004 chips.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

 

[Paul R]

Well, I practice what I preach, as all my public e-mail addresses do use my real name. I have a few e-mail addresses that are not public, and whether or not they use my real name is classified information.

 

BUT - I never use those email addresses for registering for public forums like CA. I always use an email address that resolves back to me and me alone, and I don't particularly make it difficult to find that e-mail address.

 

Truthfully, what do you have to hide? Why NOT use your real name? You don't honestly think that anyone who really wanted to "hunt you down" as Peter puts it, would have any real difficulty doing so?

 

No- what prevents that from happening is respect, and some measure of politeness. Your voiced opinions garner you enough respect to deal with you desiring to remain anonymous.

 

On the other hand, should you choose to hide behind some anonymous moniker and snipe, well, that is another thing entirely. Who knows, perhaps you are trying to poison CA to the advantage of some competitor. Who knows how people like that think?

 

Systems like the Well for example, are pretty strict about identifying people who participate there, and moreover, validate it throughly.

 

In a place like CA, I would expect that just having a name and email address publically available would be enough to discourage the riff raff.

 

-Paul

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

@Paul... Not sure where you get your information and mine may be out of date: http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/12/16/intel_coppermines_wont_go/

 

I should perhaps have said less "general purpose computing oomph..."

 

At the end of the day I stand behind my opinion that Chris' comment sounded more school playground than professional journalist (though perhaps he's aiming for a job at News International).

 

Eloise

 

[Mercman]

Who cares what the AudioCynic says. He doesn't have the product, so what the heck does he really know?

 

I'll put my money on Mani.

 

[1audio]

There was a bit of a scandal a few years ago that NASA was scouring the surplus dealers looking for components for supporting the Space Shuttle. They long outlasted their design life and support became an increasing problem. The first flight was in 1981. The systems were already several years old before it took off. The 25 year support would have run out probably 10 years ago. I deal with some new parts where the end of life notice arrives just as the first products are headed for the retail shelves. Technology is moving way way faster now.

 

COTS. (Yes, I was rushing, domestic responsibilities run on a higher priority level.) Commercial Off The Shelf which proved to be more reliable than the tested to failure full mil spec parts, and way cheaper, another scandal from the past.

 

Computing power- early nuclear subs had little more computing power than a premium watch does today. But it was put to good use with very careful programming. Again, its not the parts but what is done with them that matters.

 

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

Damien said... Again, its not the parts but what is done with them that matters.

 

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make - though from the other side!

 

What technology was used in the Mars Rover ("a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder." Well almost.) is completely irrelevant to a Preamplifier except as a bizarre marketing claim: which is ironic when Chris was commenting Spetral were a "leading edge company with out a marketing person, let alone department".

 

Eloise

 

[AudioDoctor]

and to be honest, I never even considered using my real name, I was too focused on what to call myself that it never crossed my mind. If I had to do it over, I would use my name. I see no reason not to, I just never thought of it.

 

I am not afraid of anyone hunting me down, I am sure they would be highly disappointed in how boring I am and leave me alone forever after that.

 

I also am not a psychiatrist and have no idea what is motivating Audio_Cynic or others like him. I do think that those people would do it anyway, and the only way to deal with them is to ban them once discovered.

 

[Paul R]

I worked on the Space Shuttle flight simulator, and also have friends who build spacecraft, though I do not claim to be an expert.

 

I won't argue your opinion, because like my wife, you are usually right. But I will say that I didn't read Chris' comments that way, and the unknown reasons behind Mr. Cynics antics are of far more interest to me. Those antics are certainly not meant to help build a community, or offer insight.

 

-Paul

 

 

[Paul R]

@Demian

 

The grand old GPDCs used in the fleet. I know them and love them well. Still have several programming cards for them, and CMS/CMS-2Q/JOVIAL is still one of my very favorite languages.

 

Kind of out of date now of course, about like a 16/44.1 DAC I suppose.

 

-Paul

 

 

[Paul R]

@AudioDoc

 

Hey George || Ralph || Charlie || Amos || ?????

 

You know of course, when I said "you" I didn't mean you in particular? Apologies if I wrote that so poorly you thought I did.

 

-Paul

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

I didn't think you were calling me out specifically, and I completely understand where you are coming from.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Eloise said:

"With respect what could an audiophile pre-amp possibly have to do with the Mars Rover? That comment came across as a "my dad's gonna beat your dad in" school boy brag and not worthy of a respected "journalist" / technology commentator which is how you (at least to my mind) wish yourself to be seen.

Let's face it, my iPhone has more processing power than is onboard the space shuttle: but that is completely irrelevant.

Perhaps you should expand on the relevant technologies refered (sic) to in that statement or withdraw it as being pointless..."

 

...

 

"At the end of the day I stand behind my opinion that Chris' comment sounded more school playground than professional journalist (though perhaps he's aiming for a job at News International)."

 

...

 

"What technology was used in the Mars Rover ("a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder." Well almost.) is completely irrelevant to a Preamplifier except as a bizarre marketing claim: which is ironic when Chris was commenting Spetral (sic)were a "leading edge company with out a marketing person, let alone department"."

 

 

 

 

Hi Eloise - I really value your opinion and your contributions to CA. Usually you are on top of things and understand far more than the average Joe. This makes me think my point wasn't presented as I intended.

 

The reason I mention Spectral as a company is because it is the antithesis of what the Cynic was claiming. Marketing departments, commodity boards, etc… are the opposite of how Spectral operates. I don't believe Spectral has advertised in the last ten years and the company has no interest in people reviewing its components or even bringing more than a handful of US dealers on board. Talking to Rick from Spectral is an education in and of itself. I talked to Rick about Spectral's boards a few months ago and I was amazed at the fanatical measures the company goes to when designing and procuring the best boards it can purchase. The details of the conversation have since been flushed from my memory.

 

I mentioned the Mars Rover tie-in as an illustration of high end audio components that contradict the Cynic's belief that everyone uses commodity components. It seems people have taken this comment to mean everything except the point I wished to make. My fault though. When I wrote the comment I was on my iPhone on a boat on the Mississippi River and did not have easy access to the data to backup my words. Here are some details about one specific part of the DMC-15SS preamplifier from Spectral that has technology from the Mars Rover.

 

via SpectralAudio.com

 

"The Case for Uncompromising Attenuation

Certain devices in a high-end preamplifier fundament- ally determine the ultimate performance possible in the component. Since a preamplifier basically amounts to an adjustable line amplifier, the role of the volume control or gain attenuator system is especially critical and will have a strong influence over the final sonics of the component. Most of today’s high-end preamps incorporate various digital and IC based attenuator systems to control gain, while a minority still use mechanical controls, potentiometers, switches or relay arrays. In our experience all of these approaches have serious compromises which limit signal transparency, dynamic range, step resolution or reliability. Today, digital based IC attenuators are ubiquitous in modern audio design. But even the most exotic of these digital and solid-state attenuators color the sound in various ways. Spectral engineers have long experience researching digital and DAC attenuators and find that none of these gain controls are really up to the demands of high-end preamp use, let alone for critical recording applications. We find the best relay and switch based resistor attenuators to be much better sonically than any digital control. Unfortunately, they in turn suffer from dynamic range and contact life limitations, more importantly they are not a realistic option when continuous gain adjustment is required. Since digital attenuators are not sonically transparent and stepped resistor attenuator controls have step size, contact life and dynamic range limitation, the ultimate gain control would have to be a continuously variable potentiometer or fader. Unfortunately, no pot or fader currently available is transparent or linear enough for the most critical gain adjustment applications in audio.

 

Spectral Develops the Super Fader Technology

To solve the problems of existing gain control systems Spectral engineers have been working with a leading aerospace contractor. Out of this multi-year effort comes an extraordinary ultra-precision gain control. The Spectral ‘Super Fader’ combines mechanical precision, advanced materials science and unrestricted use of exotic materials to create a level control that behaves like an infinite number of theoretically ideal resistors. Inside, the critical moving parts are precision machined from solid precious metals. These wipers have many surfaces that are spring pressured as a group to contact micro-polished optically flat resistance elements. Exemplary mechanical design and fabrication alignment is used to prevent localized heating from circulating currents. Ultra-pure contact metal eliminates solid-state or junction distortions which occur from plated parts used in other controls. When such precision and material commitments are combined, noise and error in the presence of test signals is immeasurable and other performances are very near to ideal thermal accuracy limits. With polished custom element and ball-bearing construction, there is every indication that this superior performance will remain intact even after 40 million operations. The ‘Super Fader’ potentiometer outperforms all existing gain control systems with virtually infinite service life. We hear a new clarity and transparency, as if a wire has been substituted for the control."