Nice.
Just as I experienced with a well known Australian brand. I don’t have a clue about good or bad distortion, but as little distortion as possible seems definitely not the track to good sound, and as you say the track to sterile, flat, lifeless sound.
I read through the whole thread and I think there was literally one person who had heard the SGCD (he didn’t like it). It seems bizarre to me to have a 13+ page thread about the merits of a DAC that all but one haven’t even listened to.
I especially liked where he said he couldn’t listen to it because he had to go out.
3 Likes
Yea dave and h2o save those snarky comments for where they’re common place. The toilet bowl that is ASR forums. Never seen so many grotesque audio “scientists” congregate in one place. You’re all made for each other…
Paul,
So the measured levels of distortion and signal to noise ratio might just not be audible. PS Audio mastered the voicing very well to my and many others ears.
But what remains simply seem to be facts.
The PS Audio specification on the WEB site and in the instructions for THD + N at 1 kHz is 0.025 %, not 0.04%.
Harmonics seem to appear on a pure sinus 1 kHz signal that reach up to -70 dB. Considering that the harmonics are noise (they don’t belong there). However PS Audio advertises for the Stellar Gain Cell DAC a signal to noise ratio of > 110 dB at 1 kHz, a difference of 40 dB? Not sure whether my ears catch a -70dB noise floor either.
Then one channel performs per spec, but the other is worse, why can’t both perform equal good?
How much would the Stellar Gain Cell DAC have sounded better if both channels of the Stellar would perform as advertised to its specifications?
I agree that the conclusion of ASR is not legitimate. considering that I doubt that any of those levels he measured are audible (to my ears) even if they exceed PS Audio‘s specifications.
Never the less I would wish that you had better arguments than this one, unless you can proof that ASR’s measurements are indeed wrong.
2 Likes
Different point of view - really? Both these 2 turds are ASR forum members. The last thing they care about is how something sounds. In case you missed it - Here’s how they “share their thoughts” on a given topic on their forums. This one’s related to the DS bashing crusade they went on a few weeks back…
psydave
“I have no doubt that anyone who reads either this thread or the one on ASR (or both) will come away knowing more about the DS than they did before.”
The only thing I know from reading the entire thread on ASR is that it is a forum that is inhabited by creeps:
1 Like
Stop the pollution of this forum please…
2 Likes
The truth can be gross and it’s important to point it out when it is. How about we stop legitimizing this cesspool of an “audio” site with references to their agenda laden reviews. That seems fair.
That number is in essence where I get hung up. Why is a valid question about published specs regarded as some sort of sin? I don’t remember a single person in this entire post saying that it must sound like garbage due to the specs. What I do see is, people asking why the specs published don’t meet the specs measured. Simple question. Perhaps the answer is that the “reviewer” screwed something up. Perhaps not. Perhaps specs don’t matter (Pass and FW amps have pretty high distortion numbers yet are highly regarded by all). And if they don’t matter fine - just don’t use them as a selling point.
This btw is an area where Schiit (products that regularly get trashed on ASR) does a really good job. On their DAC descriptions they plainly tell you: if you want good sound, buy this DAC. If you want good measurements buy this other one we have (their cheapest DAC…$99).
1 Like
I doubt you’d hear any difference whatsoever. You can’t detect changes in THD much below 0.1 THD (and even that’s questionable). I can’t and won’t bother worrying about what he found since he clearly hasn’t a clue about what matters when it comes to audio.
He’s more interested in measurements for measurement sake.
As to the variability between what he measured and what we spec I’d have to look and see how the measurements were made, what the unit’s serial number is, etc. We measure and maintain records for every audio product we run through FST. That said,
I probably wouldn’t take the time.
It isn’t relevant.
1 Like
I am unclear who is using them to sell products? Did I just miss your point? We publish specs on our products because people ask us to, not as selling points. I just confirmed in Stellar’s list of features I don’t see any specs mentioned.
And, the assertion there’s “jitter” that he’s seeing causing the noise is beyond the absurd. Wow. Some pretty wild stuff.
Considering that the harmonics are noise (they don’t belong there). However PS Audio advertises for the Stellar Gain Cell DAC a signal to noise ratio of > 110 dB at 1 kHz, a difference of 40 dB? Not sure whether my ears catch a -70dB noise floor either.
That’s because harmonics are not noise or noise floor. If you have added harmonics from distortion it changes the timbre of the sound, but not in a way any reasonable person would confuse for being noise. The actual noise floor is still -110db.
As someone working on a limited budget I have to go to the used market. So I don’t get the (more than generous) PS A return policy. So I need to know as much about a product before I buy. Part of that is the specs. Perhaps they are not selling points and I simply interpret them that way. Perhaps they don’t matter. Perhaps I should take my limited budget and scratch PS A products off my list. Maybe I don’t make enough to be part of “the family”.
Either way, I still enjoy the forum especially the AN3 design/build process.
Thanks for the reply.
I would like to point out that I am already a PS Audio customer, owning the phono converter. All I was trying to say was that a thorough comment from you addressing the poor measured performance of several of your products was in order. It appears that the argument is “things that measure well sound like dog poo”. This is a point of view backed by many (although many of these many have already invested conspicuous amount of cash on PS Audio products, so there might be a little bit of confirmation bias there). Your argument however does not explain some of the other shortcomings, such as channel imbalance, which does not contribute to sound quality in any way hence it cannot have been put there on purpose. Also there appears to be a mismatch in the way the product is advertised and its measured performance. These things are a bit of a red flag to me and I wish there was a more thorough explanation addressing them.
1 Like
Now THIS is a useful post. I did not know that. It’s a LOT more productive and educational than the endless “if you just look at specs you’re an idiot” posts.
3 Likes
Being an owner of both the NuWave and the GCD I personally believe the GCD sounds noticeably better.
I suggest you read something about people offending when they lack arguments. I do not recall offending anyone, just asking clarifications. Your generalisation of people in the ASR forum is dumb. There are people with different opinions there. In fact if you read on you’ll find that I was heavily criticised for defending tube distortion, which in a way makes me more on your side than not.
Instead, you just post middle fingers, call me a turd and don’t stop throwing hate at someone’s who has politely expressed a view different from yours.
Now who is the troll here.
5 Likes
You have to admit, the finger graph was funny.
4 Likes
It was, but it was used to offend, not to have a laugh.
1 Like