Robin Bowes;560664 Wrote: > On 09/07/10 00:20, richardw wrote: > > > > Super Q...I don't think that post was intended to criticize the > design > > rather suggested it was possible to improve. > > Of course it's possible to improve pretty much any commercial design > as > the original will have had, by definition, several commercial > constraints (component cost, ease of assembly, reliability, stability, > regulations, etc. etc.). > > This is the disingenuous bit: > > michael123 said: > > IMHO, looking beyond its cover, it merely follows one of reference > AKM > > designs with very small changes.. All components there are cheap as > > few cents.. > > "merely", "with very small changes". The implication being that no > thought went into the output stage, and that cheap components are bad. > > michael123 said: > > Not really "ton of engineering", but still good design. > > If you read through previous posts on this forum from the hardware > designers, you will find that in fact a great deal of engineering went > into the design of both the digital & analogue stages. I seem to > recall > that Sean said that he tried several different analogue output designs > but none of them improved on the reference design from the chip > manufacturers. > > Remember, you can't determine the road travelled from the destination > reached. > > R. Yea...I don't get it. I read the post to suggest some of the areas that could be improved on an already crazy good piece of gear that rivals devices way above 10x's it's price.....insulting? Not to me but we all digest differently I suppose...
-- richardw ------------------------------------------------------------------------ richardw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32135 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80282 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
