alrainbow said
As I read posts here that seem to kick ps audio in the teeth and this bothers me , I also realize this is the best format for a review .
We all read or at least some here hehehehe. But in doing it it becomes personnel to us as we own ps audio products. And this reaction of protection makes us not accurate either . A example of this is found in the hugo thread on another forum. There claims of the best really did piss me off as such I gave my abrupt view . As though it was my product in jeopardy in comparison. Even though itâs not , As the hugo is below the SQ in every way this still shows a partiality on my behalf. So this is what we are also feeling with this less then perfect review.
Al
Al,
When I read your posts, I keep hoping someone will provide an âAlâ translator.
Theyâre just reviews of simple audio gear, the world is not coming to an end because someone doesnât think the DS is something special.
Rob H. said
Some time ago, I was editing a magazine and providing product testing reviews therein, not stereo related.
Itâs not an easy job at all. You have to be as objective as possible, particularly on the samples you donât favor. Even though you might prefer what youâve been using, you have to drop your biases as much as possible in order to maintain that objectivity. Since I knew the people behind each sample, it was even more difficult to maintain objectivity if they submitted a real POS for testing. Add that to advertising concerns; the advertisers pay the bills, so you try your best not to alienate them.
It became a real study in writing between the lines â to convey your observations as accurately as possible without explicitly telling the readership âdonât waste your time.â
There simply is no replacement for direct experience, in this or any other pursuit. We all seem to know that, and yet we parse and dissect each review as though itâs actually⌠meaningful, or something. (That said, I am happy for Paul & Co. that most of the feedback on the DS is positive. Funny, that.)
Agreed and thanks for this kind note. I would remind all our readers that despite the fact Michael Lavorgna didnât gush over DS like most the other reviewers have, he did manage to award DirectStream the highest honor he has for sound. Just sayinâ.
That and also I think that the first impressions with the DS can be a bit puzzling if one is at all rushed to develop an opinion.
The sound signature , by traditional standards, can take more than a few minutes to fully âgetâ what is going on.
The past few generations of affordable DACs got better at presenting detailed and more acoustically pleasant listening experiences and we developed a criteria for review that was, IMO, more equipment oriented than music focused. We were making the proverbial silk purse with a Sowâs ear.
The DS [ this is where I feel âgame changerâ is appropriate] is a major step forward in directing our focus back to musical enjoyment and this can be a challenge for anyone if they were not expecting it and are focused on doing an âequipmentâ review.
The closest comment to music was âpurityâ and not really used in the context of music. Also âthe DAC sounded likeâŚâ also leaves the impression that Michael did not have the opportunity to really listen to music. I hope he does get an opportunity in the near future.
When I think back about my own first impressions, they were all about the musicality of the source material and the legitimacy of the presentation.
Hehehe, perhaps I was also affected by the fact that the DS looks identical to my PWD so my poor olde brain forgot there was a new âmachineâ in the house, just new REAL music.
Very well written gordon. I can add this. In my own quest for better digital audio as I heard ultra expensive dacs the sound being reproduced was like the DS. Having had this and ultimately buying one I felt the positive impact of the DS in just a seconds of hearing it.
Of course overtime the DS gets even better but the type of presentstion remains the same awesome .
Keep in mind that there are many things that can affect our âopinionsâ when sitting down to review a product and , as Rob suggested, the pressures on a professional reviewer are even greater.
I also tend to prefer a little âmeat on the bonesâ or weight but it is also possible that that helped to temper some of the previous shortcomings as well as seemingly add more beat and fullness to the sound. I much prefer the legitimacy of the DS as it seems to be more acceptable as real music to my little brain. This and the spot on timing draws me to the music more than ever and This is why I suggested a bit of rig tuning would probably be in order once we began to decipher the WHY it is appealing and the HOW to get it tonally to our personal preference.
Alekz said
Tony, have you ever tried MIT cables? Especially since you have the Pass preamp
The only problem is the price
I put my 750h Shotguns back in after living with Shunyata for the past few years.
They have the boxes too but not adjustable.
Nice steo up for the DS. The Shuns were better with the PWD.
They are pretty much opposite in their concepts and technology.
I still have a pair of biwired MIT MH-750 in the closet. Great cables. The MIT speaker cables are not adjustable, but made for specific purposes. For example, for tube amplifiers, for fast, wide bandwidth power amps, etc. I wonder if you can try MIT XLR interconnects (your signature says, that youâve got RCA ones).
Most of my gear has whiskers, I have had them for so long.
I have the âmatchingâ RCA MITs but , for now, I am running direct o my amp by Wireworld XLR. Iâm not sure it is better SQ wise but it sure makes my rack less intimidating. [ pre has dual power supplies and adds 4 RCA more cables. http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/firstsound/4.html]
Trying out some different XLRs is on my short list but my short list is kinda long at the moment so will get to it when I can.
Ok that is one of the thoughts I had. But it does say it does something to increase details as well. Who knows some of this stuff is smoke and mirrors.
If the manufacturer claims the setting increases details, the switch is doing some else. Grounding a balanced leg does not increase detail or otherwise change the sound.
I thought about it. And I called the USA sales rep. He claims it does something. But the truth is I do not readily believe some companies. Call me an agnostic but unless I hear it I feel it itâs not so. Anyway thanks again. Is there any posting of the beta group as yet on 6115 ?? I a looking forward to reading comments. In some ways I trust other brains more than mine.
alrainbow said
I thought about it. And I called the USA sales rep. He claims it does something. But the truth is I do not readily beleave companies. Call me an agnostic but unless I hear it I feel it it's not so. Anyway thanks again. Is there any posting of the beta group as yet on 6112 ?? I a looking forward to reading comments. In some ways I trust other brains more than mine.
Al
The differences between single ended and balanced can go either way with each piece of equipment.
All of my audio path is balanced and if I put in a single ended piece of equipment anywhere I get hum from any input device.
On the other hand a lot of equipment is actually single ended inside and they have to add circuitry to produce a balanced output. Often this involves, say an opamp, and adding that extra layer can lead to a loss of detail.
