Jump to content

manisandher

Members
  • Content Count

    2515
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About manisandher

  • Rank
    from-first-principles.com

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. WTF? Do people like this really exist? Unfortunately, it seems so...
  2. Yep, I see what you mean. Still, it seems strange that the intermodulation distortion in the analogue circuitry sits exactly at 56 kHz, 66 kHz and 76 kHz.
  3. It looks obvious to me that the spikes at 56 kHz, 66 kHz and 76 kHz are images of the harmonics at 40 kHz, 30 kHz and 20 kHz, respectively. (Much easier to see on @vortecjr's plot.)
  4. Surely the spikes at 66 kHz and 76kHz are simply the images of the 30 kHz and 20 kHz harmonics, respectively? Nothing of interest, as far as I can see. Did you mean ~70 kHz and ~90 kHz? Edit: I was looking at @vortecjr's FFT.
  5. I know @mansr has already pointed this out, but you really should refer to this as 'imaging' and not 'aliasing'.
  6. The 86kHz 'noise' is just the imaging (48+38 kHz) due to the 'leaky' MQA filter. I'm sure MQA would argue that no regular music content would have any signal lying at -10dB at 10kHz. I'm sure something like the 'polynomial' filters in HQPlayer would produce a similar result with a -10dB 10kHz signal. Probably why @Miska recommends against using them. Mani.
  7. No, the renderer seems to be adding the 80kHz content.
  8. You can fool the MQA renderer into thinking that this is an MQA-encoded signal that has been decoded?
  9. A review... for fun? Sacrilegious. But sure. The guy who put the amps together for me made them. I just gave him the specs - a pair of linear 24V/5A PSUs. Mani.
  10. Why not just answer his question, and then perhaps outline how the answer could have been arrived at from the scope shot itself?
  11. As promised... only a year late . My Pass ACA balanced monos are finally up and running. I was hoping to build them together with my two sons, but I just couldn't get my act together. In the end, I asked a local diy guy (who actually built the F5 clones I use in my main system) to build them for me, along with a nice pair of linear PSUs. And here they are: Early days, but they sound bloody brilliant. (Run on the hot side though - not surprising, being class A and all that.) A massive thanks to @Jud for giving the original heads up. Mani.
  12. The original analogue captures (DAC's analogue output -> Tascam DA-3000 -> 24/176.4 files) were undertaken by Mans and myself immediately after the ABX. I took some further captures after Mans left to help in analysis. The Tascam DA-3000 has pretty decent specs and is a well-considered ADC, but seems lacking for the job in hand. The differences in audibility between A and B during the ABX were not down to any obvious differences in frequency response. Mani.
  13. Yep, I still can't explain how I managed to get one wrong . Mani.
  14. No problem... I think it's useful to split this into 2: 1. blind ABX test I wanted the purest path possible during the ABX, so no preamps or splitters. The priority was to ensure the output of the DAC was bit-identical in both cases, A and B. And it was. 2. Analysis Only if the ABX result looked interesting would we bother to capture and analyse the analogue output of the DAC. I scored 9/10 in the ABX (1% probability by guessing alone), so we went ahead and took the analogue captures. Even if we did not take any analogue captures, the result of the ABX would have stood. Mani.
×
×
  • Create New...