The review appears fair in method and in choosing comparison products.
The unit was indeed broken-in and appropriately set-up.
The review. (I think the link will work, but the superscript in the URL copies odd.)
Additionally, Mr. Fremer notes he will provide comparison files:
“Shortly I will post 96/24 files so you can compare all of these under $2000 phono preamps. An outboard A/D converter will be used to keep the comparison fair, and then shortly after these files post, another one will be posted using the NuWaveâs internal DAC.” . . . “[T]hey will not be identified until the votes are in and have been tabulated.”
The files are not yet posted, but the comparison should be quite illuminating - especially as it is blind.
Yes, this will be interesting. Now that I know more of what people expect out of the NPC the initial review seems fair. Having the files will be great and people with the device at home should be able to determine if Fremer’s NPC sounds like their’s or not. I should have mentioned that I thought this was a great idea in my earlier post.
Elk, can you think of any pitfalls with this sort of file generation and comparison?
As long as the each piece of equipment is nicely warmed up, and the levels matched, it will work great.
Mr. Fremer has long been an advocate of digitizing LP playback, recommending various pieces of pro-audio ADC/mastering recorders over the years - the last being the Tascam I have also previously recommended here. He knows what he is doing and will provide fair evaluation files.
He indicates they are ready and is just waiting for the webmaster to post them.
This is an interesting method of comparison. Are the files PCM format only? (Presumably at 96/24 from a 3rd party DAC, followed by PSA onboard DAC.)
Doesn’t the NPC also do DSD file output at much higher resolution and wouldn’t this be a more fair comparison to test the ultimate caliber/character of the overall analog/digital capabilities of the PSA product to others? Will DSD format be posted too. Not even sure 96/24 is really best for a fair comparison of performance…the NPC can go much higher in resolution, right?
Also how would we know for sure that the ‘blind’ posted files have not be mixed up…does Michael have a method for independently (3rd party) validating file output. Could PSA actually look into the bit structure for a source label and verify that the file originated from a NPC PSA device or another vendor’s product - this would not be totally ‘blind’ either.
Double blind can be great for comparison but only when the proper controls are employed. Nothing should be left to chance. Is this a true double blind or does the review know ahead of time which is which?
straylight said: Not even sure 96/24 is really best for a fair comparison of performance...the NPC can go much higher in resolution, right?
Yes, the NPC can do higher resolutions, but in the NPC manual PSA recommends 24/96 for the routine digitizing of vinyl albums. They say there is no need for any higher res to capture the information on an LP, and by sticking to 24/96 you avoid the need for more aggressive (is that the right word?) filters that are needed at higher resolutions.
The review is strictly about the phono section of the NPC. Fremer is using a third party A/D and not the A/D section in an effort to be completely unbiased. This is exactly the right approach.
If he does review the A/D section of the NPC then he should and almost certainly will test it against other A/Ds using sources other than the NPC phono section. Of course, somewhere in the process he must test the complete unit, phono pre through the A/D section as well.
While it may not have been what we wanted and expected, I think that his review was reasonable. He is presenting a subjective review of audio equipment through his own listening preferences. All such reviews are biased in some manner. While the unit in question may not represent the normal production units, we do know that Paul tends to prefer a very neutral and possibly analytical sound, as he clearly preferred the 2.1.0/2.2.0 PWD firmware over the smoother and more organic but less precise 2.0.2 version that many of us strongly preferred.
Aside from the ‘was it broken’ speculation, which I think is a really bad line to raise as speculation, there is something vexing about all reviews that benchmark sound against price. I know we all do it to an extent as consumers looking at value for money, but sometimes it induces what happened in the review, as picked up above by @wglenn, which is the NPC has a lot of features at is price point, is being compared to similarly priced phono stages that do not have those features. Some say apples and oranges, but it might be closer to zucchini and banana.
How I wish I could compare the Simaudio Moon LP5.3 that I sold to the NPC. Mr. Fremer raved about the 5.3. To my ears it was eminently listenable but definitely in the neutral camp. Were the 5.3’s dynamics and lower midrange much better than the NPC’s? I wouldn’t have thought so, based on my recollection, but only a direct comparison would show.
I don’t believe that the NPC we sent him was representative of what we are producing. I say that because after a long conversation with Michael it’s clear to me that what I am hearing doesn’t jive with what he’s hearing - and Michael is a great listener - one I respect a lot.
The original NPC he received wound up having a relay sticking problem so I grabbed another one off the production line without actually listening to it and fired it out to him. I shouldn’t have done that.
I am sending a new one to him next week, one I’ve listened to and approved.
As I understand it, Mr. Fremer plans to do two things. 1) ADC of each phono pre using a third-party ADC. 2) An added file of the NPC as both phono pre and ADC.
This will be interesting.
David said: the NPC has a lot of features at is price point, is being compared to similarly priced phono stages that do not have those features. Some say apples and oranges, but it might be closer to zucchini and banana
The comparison is not with similarly priced units, but the analog stage of the NPC with phono pres of roughly half the price. This is fair.
Paul McGowan said: I am sending a new one to him next week, one I’ve listened to and approved.
Excellent. It will be interesting to learn of Mr. Fremer’s reaction.
Once again, kudos, Paul, for your integrity and openness.
I don't believe that the NPC we sent him was representative of what we are producing. I say that because after a long conversation with Michael it's clear to me that what I am hearing doesn't jive with what he's hearing - and Michael is a great listener - one I respect a lot.
The original NPC he received wound up having a relay sticking problem so I grabbed another one off the production line without actually listening to it and fired it out to him. I shouldn't have done that.
I am sending a new one to him next week, one I've listened to and approved.
Paul, I would be a little concerned here I would think. The first unit is defective, then another one you pull off the production line appears defective as well? Yikes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big PS Audio guy and my unit has been outstanding. My 'drops have never sounded so good.
I bare can hear any difference on macbook pro with Senn HD25-II headphones. Will try it on home rig, but I’m pretty much impressed how close (virtually the same) are those different phono preamps sounding
