JezA;376833 Wrote: > AND/OR that the Tact processor, despite the claims of it's manufacturer, > is incapable of remaining uninfluenced by that amount of jitter. So, > either the Tact or the Nakamichi, as I said, is either useless or > broken - or poorly designed or poorly manufactured if you prefer less > inflammatory terms. > > So, take the Tact processor out. Listen again. Difference gone? Then > Marc Levinson can do a better job from the same SPDIF signal than Tact. > Junk the Tact. Same difference? Then it is the Nakamichi that is poorly > designed or manufactured. Junk it. Either way there is no evidence that > "Served music sounds better", just that good engineering performs better > than bad engineering. > > (Incidentally, I have to say I can't understand why you would put a > Tact processor between an SB3 and a DAC - surely you should do the same > processing that the Tact does on your server/pc?, or use the Tact to > pre-process your stored music. If it is so sensitive to jitter, why put > it in the signal path when it doesn't need to be there?). > > What I am challenging more generally is the assumption that if, say, > one $500 speaker cable sounds better in a $10k Stereophile-type review > system than another $500 speaker cable, then one cable is 'better' than > the other and you should buy it. Obviously, Stereophile and it's > advertisers would like you to spend more money, but why not deduce > instead that the amplifier involved isn't worth the (probably vast > amount of) money, since it should be capable of driving a wide range of > loads without being influenced by them. (Assuming of course that the > cables aren't absurd or inadequate electrically, and that the amp > manufacturer hasn't specified a particular brand of cable to use). So, > when you switch one component in a system and notice a difference - it > may point to an inadequacy (broken-ness, useless-ness) elsewhere in the > system, rather than an inherent advantage in the switched component.
I'm having trouble understanding what on earth you are on about: The TACT in this case is doing its digital room correction thing - it is not acting as a DAC. The Nak and the SB are both connected to the TACT via its multiple SPDIF inputs and the TACT is connected to the DAC via its SPDIF output. Therefore the TACT is common to both signal chains and is NOT the source of the difference (although it is helping to magnify the difference). The TACT ASRC is sensitive to jitter. The source with the lowest jitter will sound better. Therefore the SB has lower jitter than the NAK mech. I really don't follow why you can't understand this! By the way, what is broken is a transport that generates jitter and the wretched SPDIF standard which guarantees jitter. As for the TACT vs server-side DRC... server-side DRC was not an option in 2004... and still isn't an option for people using CD players... Next year I will be re-evaluating the Inguz-style solution... -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal...SB3+Stontronics PSU - Altmann JISCO/UPCI - TACT 2.2X (Linear PSU) + Good Vibrations S/W - MF Triplethreat(Audiocom full mods)- Linn 5103 - Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Townsend Supertweeters, Kimber & Chord cables Outdoors: Boombox+Creative Sub (If I remember to turn it on...) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57173 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
