Mnyb wrote:
Oh no , not that :D this lampizator guy also has a tube driven digital
output :confused: Yes you can use some HF radio tube for such an output
stage ! and ofcourse it's sounds better for unknown or unknowable
reasons you know it's a tube so it has the pixie dust that makes stuff
andy_c wrote:
Don't get me started on non-oversampling DACs!
There's an obsolete chip made by Philips, the TDA1541A, that's become a
fetish item in high-end circles.
Just in case anyone misinterprets your post as meaning that the TDA1541
isn't capable of oversampling, let's just be clear
Mnyb wrote:
Let's measure an audio note DAC voodoo design galore:P and also some
modern home theater amp the complex functionality of those makes
mistakes likly software bugs etc.
Don't get me started on non-oversampling DACs!
There's an obsolete chip made by Philips, the TDA1541A, that's
andy_c wrote:
Don't get me started on non-oversampling DACs!
There's an obsolete chip made by Philips, the TDA1541A, that's become a
fetish item in high-end circles. '_Here_is_but_one_web_page_'
(http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/TDA1541%20corner/TDA1541.html)
devoted to singing its
cliveb wrote:
Forgive me if I've misunderstood your position here, but you seem to be
giving Stereophile some points for bothering to measure the device and
publish the figures.
But: having measured this DAC and discovered how catastrophically broken
it is, the review bends over backwards
Mnyb wrote:
To JA's credit he really bash the product but probably holds back a bit
due to comercial concerns . The truth is any supermarket 50$ DVD player
outperforms it even the revised performance with the other sample .
So actually stereophile is doing well pointing out that it does
and further they risk to upsett more than one brand . one fundamental
myth of high end is that price corelates strongly to soundquality that
you can not get perfection for less than multiple 1000$ . 30k$ dac are
common or 100k$ preamps ?
So i'm surprised that they even dare to say that something
Mnyb wrote:
The really silly part , he fails to see the very obvious solution to why
the subjective reviews and measurments don't add up .
Non blind testing gives any kind of biased results , the overall
conclusion I would do after years of measuring stuff that's totally
transparent to
Many good points gentlemen about JA, and his text commentary around
measurements (including the tendency to waver towards his subjective
review colleagues).
Nonetheless, my hope is that in time as more of the population get it,
and pressure these guys about realistic (objective) evaluation, it's
andy_c wrote:
I bookmarked one of the funnier posts I have seen on just this very
subject. It is '_here_'
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2454.html#post3092791)
(first one, by SY, JC=John Curl in the quote).
That thread mentions an
ralphpnj wrote:
Archimago I know that you live in Canada but here in the US there are no
advertising standards. Basically one can say or claim just about
anything and get away with it. Just watch this video of Dr. Oz basically
telling a US Senate panel to go f*k themselves:
Archimago wrote:
But when they start courting companies like Synergistic, Nordost,
or (for the most part) AudioQuest where the products they make are
either without merit or borderline insane, then we have real problems if
the magazine feels it has to cater to them and put in a good
Archimago wrote:
Well, that sucks! Here in Canada, we do have the 'Advertising Standards
Canada' (http://www.adstandards.com/en/) body which at least one can
easily lodge a complaint on-line. In some of the radio broadcasts, every
once awhile we are reminded that advertising standards are
paulster wrote:
As someone with feet on both UK and US soil, and therefore familiarity
with the Advertising Standards Authority, it's amazing to me what
advertisers in the US can legally get away with. Exactly as you say,
you can make all these fundamentally bogus claims and then simply
ralphpnj wrote:
Here in the US what we get are all kinds of commercials that make very
reasonable sounding claims or very attractive offers only at the very
end of the commercial, whether they are in print, on line, on television
or on radio, there is the fine print which basically voids
Gandhi wrote:
Bury most of your face in pillows and read with eyes half-closed! You
have been warned.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/zanden-5000-mkivsignature-da-converter-2000-premium-cd-transport-measurements
Wow, the measurements of that DAC really suck! A bargain at $15,470! :D
Archimago wrote:
But when they start courting companies like Synergistic, Nordost, or
(for the most part) AudioQuest where the products they make are either
without merit or borderline insane, then we have real problems if the
magazine feels it has to cater to them and put in a good word...
Gandhi wrote:
That thread mentions an absolute goldmine of crazy. Bury most of your
face in pillows and read with eyes half-closed! You have been warned.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/zanden-5000-mkivsignature-da-converter-2000-premium-cd-transport-measurements
andy_c wrote:
Wow, the
darrenyeats wrote:
I'll be sad if Stereophile disappear because they're one of the few
magazines doing measurements as part of their reviews.
My sentiment exactly... The measurements J.A. publishes are why I
subscribe. It would be say if the only audiophile magazine I can find
left at the
darrenyeats wrote:
I'll be sad if Stereophile disappear because they're one of the few
magazines doing measurements as part of their reviews.
Archimago wrote:
My sentiment exactly... The measurements J.A. publishes are why I
subscribe. It would be say if the only audiophile magazine I can
andy_c wrote:
I bookmarked one of the funnier posts I have seen on just this very
subject. It is '_here_'
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2454.html#post3092791)
(first one, by SY, JC=John Curl in the quote).
Exactly my point - while
ralphpnj wrote:
Come on gentlemen please tell me exactly what difference Stereophile's
holy measurements make? If the equipment under review and measurement
sounds great to the reviewer but has terrible measurements then JA (aka
clown in chief) writes some nonsense about how just because the
ralphpnj wrote:
Exactly my point - while Stereophile's measurements may be revealing and
useful to a knowledgeable reader who understands how to read and
interpret them, JA's remarks about how the measurements relate to the
equipment's sound are pure marketing BS.
The really silly part , he
I'll be sad if Stereophile disappear because they're one of the few
magazines doing measurements as part of their reviews.
Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/
SB Touch
darrenyeats's Profile:
andy_c wrote:
There's recently been some entertaining fallout as a result of Sam
Tellig having quit Stereophile. It seems that for many years now,
Stereophile has claimed to have a Chinese Wall between advertising and
editorial departments. A Google search (via '_this_LMGTFY_link_'
Yes, I realize I am preaching to the choir here.
I also read the audiophool forums like Audio Asylum though, mostly for
amusement purposes. Stereophile has been loudly and preemptively
proclaiming this Chinese Wall thing for years, more so than the other
publications. In the audiophool
I try not to use the term audiophool since I don't think that most
audiophiles are fools but rather just misguided. It's quite easy to
become enthralled by those slick high end magazines with their elegant
prose and artsy equipment photos. After all on the surface it seems that
their quest for
There's recently been some entertaining fallout as a result of Sam
Tellig having quit Stereophile. It seems that for many years now,
Stereophile has claimed to have a Chinese Wall between advertising and
editorial departments. A Google search (via '_this_LMGTFY_link_'
28 matches
Mail list logo
