stevensegal said
On the harmonics point, elsewhere the tester took the 1khz tone and its harmonics as measured, then reproduced the fundamental and the harmonics and posted it against the original signal. The harmonics were audible. It's a rather neat objective listening test for any piece of kit as to whether a problem exists or not. If you can hear harmonics, it can't be doing the music any good.
But in any real performance the details of the harmonic structure below, say 40dB pale in comparison to the accurate reproduction of impulses and the attack of each note, etc. It's well know that if you cut the attack off of, say, a clarinet and a coronet they are quite hard to distinguish. Further, two recordings of a piano (or any instrument or voice) from even slightly different points have drastically different harmonic structures (at the levels we are talking about) but this doesn't confuse the ear/brain a whit. The accurate reproduction of timing is what gives life to music. The ear/brain is quite insensitive to phase and other harmonic structure in steady state tones, it knows that these change easily depending on reflections, constructive and destructive interference, etc. in a room and hence don't convey much information.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t strive for the best we can do in terms of accurate reproduction, but in the real world some things matter a whole lot more than others and getting unmeasurable THD is quite low of the list of things that matter.
You saw/heard Emily Barker live??? I love her and her group. I also have her stuff on Pallas vinyl and (for the stuff available) high-res. I wish she would tour the U.S.
I think I’ll leave it there. I was asking if there is test data for my DAC Mk2 and I have the answer. I also have the answer as to how it was designed generally.
To be honest, some other DAC owners have been asking their suppliers and obtaining similar responses.
stevensegal said
I think I'll leave it there. I was asking if there is test data for my DAC Mk2 and I have the answer. I also have the answer as to how it was designed generally.
To be honest, some other DAC owners have been asking their suppliers and obtaining similar responses.
No one said how the MkII was designed in this thread - you are only seeing what you want to see in the responses, … I have no doubt that’s happening elsewhere as well.
stevensegal said
I think I'll leave it there. I was asking if there is test data for my DAC Mk2 and I have the answer. I also have the answer as to how it was designed generally.
To be honest, some other DAC owners have been asking their suppliers and obtaining similar responses.
No one said how the MkII was designed in this thread - you are only seeing what you want to see in the responses, … I have no doubt that’s happening elsewhere as well.
I took your advice and read what is published on the website, mostly the features and design pages and the specifications are limited to the “Specifications” page on the same link. No signal test data.
Other responses have been far more vitriolic than those here.
I have three DACs at home (DAC Mk2, Tascam CD200 and a Naim UnitiQute2 in my office). My PS Audio dealer is coming over next week and I may do a quick blind test and see what happens!
As I said, I very much enjoy using my DAC Mk2, I also have a P3, and my own amplifiers are heavily dependent on sourcing good components and listening.