Ed Meitner's "ad hoc" designs have always sounded particularly good to me.
Recording labels like Telarc used his ADCs.
Shouldn't every DAC by design sound pretty much identical?
- Thread starter Cosmo-D
- Start date
Recording labels like Telarc used his ADCs.
Retrovert
Addicted Member
The FPGA DAC being discussed is a sigma delta converter design implementated using a DSP built in an FPGA.
Does Meitner use that exact technology? If not, then the discussion is irrelevant.
Recording labels like Telarc used his ADCs.
That's irrelevant. That is an Analog-to-Digital Converter, a totally different technology than an FPGA DAC being discussed. Simply because a designer can make an ADC doesn't mean that a DAC from the same designer is the best design ever.
What Meitner did was not use something off the shelf from the "experts" at AD or TI. Nor that of ESS or AKM.
Last edited:
Retrovert
Addicted Member
So what? The issue was filter stability in FPGA DSP designs, a well-known issue. Again, you have supplied no details about the TOP SEKRET design. I'm not going to debate the merits of unknown proprietary designs with magickal claims and dubious properties. I instead refer you to the many papers and discussions on the subject of the difficulty in creating accurate and stable implementations for sigma-delta conversion in DSPs, and the bandwidth required for such implementation.
It has been my experience, dating back to the late 1970s,. that the signal-processing products from Analog Devices, Burr-Brown, and National Semiconductor, were among the finest in the world, and the engineering expertise was nothing short of amazing. Those products worked exactly as advertised, as did their Philbrick predecessors. I have many of the signal processing and operational amplifier books (scholarly works, not databooks) from Analog Devices and Burr-Brown on my bookshelf, having purchased them in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the electrical engineering and technical writing remain among the finest in the world.
I will say that your snide remark about 'the "experts" at AD or TI" is at odds with the multi-decade reputation Analog Devices has for stellar quality in its signal processing products. It is common for audiophiles to push expensive, boutique products which have claims not rooted in reality, but this is generally nothing more than snobbery and pretension lacking roots in objective, measurable reality.
To you perhaps since you prefer to stay down in the weeds. I take a broader view of this topic.
I really don't understand why you're so argumentative. I haven't made any claims.
I made no snide remarks. I quoted your text. And observed that Meitner chose to go elsewhere with excellent results.
I've heard the CDSA in a superlative two channel system and a CDSD/DAC6SE in a multi-channel system. Pretty close to you on Long Island.
Last edited:
Retrovert
Addicted Member
This is the problem. You continually snipe and make snide remarks.
The OP's issue was why do different DACs have different sounds. I've explained that.
Audioraven
Well-Known Member
If I'm not mistaken dCS uses FPGA in their DAC's. I don't think I would call the Vivaldi an "ad hoc" design.
I observe facts and state my opinion as to the sound of particular designs.
That was pretty much established two weeks ago.
Stay bitter if that's your choice.
You are absolutely correct.
And their stated reason is exactly what has been discussed before:
"The dCS ‘soft’ approach to programmable logic makes it extremely easy for users to update Vivaldi DAC software, whether adding new features, installing performance upgrades or adapting to changes in digital formats."
Last edited:
Before you give up on that HD200 try replacing the belt first and put a drop of 3-in-1 oil on the rails that the drawer slides on. Had this problem with the drawer sticking and not opening and this fixed the problem with my 30 year old Sony CDP-605ESD and it still sounds a lot better than many new DC players I have listened to. They are usually pretty easy to change; on my Sony, I just had to remove the bottom cover and a small protective metal shield that was covering the belts; it was a piece of cake.
You can buy belt for about $10 on Ebay.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Harman-Kar...541154?hash=item1a1fbba622:g:Ht8AAOSwal5YH-x-
Last edited:
Yes a CD should sound like a CD and not like a Vinyl . Thanks a million for that and digital. If my CD player sounded like a record I would throw it in a garbage. We could go on for hours on the Analog VS Digital debate but unless you don't understand SOUND and you are old and maybe drank the cool-aid you know SACD or High def. files are miles better than $30.000 groove grinder. Or Pitiful Portable Picnic Player as it should be called. Not to mention that your Vinyl started ac digital 24/96 or 24/192 recording. Now if it sounds great to someone that's fine. There are plenty of people that believe we never went to the moon and CRT television was better on the eyes.