Announcement

Collapse

INTRODUCTION - PLEASE READ FIRST TO UNDERSTAND THIS FORUM!

"This Harbeth User Group (HUG) is the Manufacturer's own managed forum dedicated to natural sound from microphone to ear, achievable by recognising and controlling the numerous confounding variables that exist along the audio chain. The Harbeth designer's objective is to make loudspeakers that contribute little of themselves to the music passing through them.

Identifying system components for their sonic neutrality should logically proceed from the interpretation and analysis of their technical, objective performance. Deviations from a flat frequency response at any point along the signal chain from microphone to ear is likely to give an audible sonic personality to the system at your ear; this includes the significant contribution of the listening room itself. To accurately reproduce the recorded sound as Harbeth speakers are designed to do, you would be best advised to select system components (sources, electronics, cables and so on) that do not color the sound before it reaches the speakers.

For example, the design of and interaction between the hifi amplifier and its speaker load can and will alter the sound balance of what you hear. This may or may not be what you wish to achieve, but any deviation from a flat response is a step away from a truly neutral system. HUG has extensively discussed amplifiers and the methods for seeking the most objectively neutral among a plethora of product choices.

HUG specialises in making complex technical matters simple to understand, getting at the repeatable facts in a post-truth environment where objectivity is increasingly ridiculed. With our heritage of natural sound and pragmatic design, HUG is not the best place to discuss non-Harbeth audio components selected, knowingly or not, to introduce a significantly personalised system sound. For that you should do your own research and above all, make the effort to visit an Authorised Dealer and listen to your music at your loudness on your loudspeakers through the various offerings there. There is really no on-line substitute for time invested in a dealer's showroom because 'tuning' your system to taste is such a highly personal matter. Our overall objective here is to empower readers to make the factually best procurement decisions in the interests of lifelike music at home.

Please consider carefully how much you should rely upon and be influenced by the subjective opinions of strangers. Their hearing acuity and taste will be different to yours, as will be their motives and budget, their listening distance, loudness and room treatment, not necessarily leading to appropriate equipment selection and listening satisfaction for you. Always keep in mind that without basic test equipment, subjective opinions will reign unchallenged. With test equipment, universal facts and truths are exposed.

If some of the science behind faithfully reproducing the sound intended by the composer, score, conductor and musicians over Harbeth speakers is your thing, this forum has been helping with that since 2006. If you just want to share your opinions and photos with others then the unrelated Harbeth Speakers Facebook page http://bit.ly/2FEgoAy may be for you. Either way, welcome to the world of Harbeth!"


Feb. 2018
See more
See less

Is it still worth buying a top quality FM tuner or should we turn to internet radio and DAB?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is it still worth buying a top quality FM tuner or should we turn to internet radio and DAB?

    Yes I ask this question of the HUG as I feel quite sentimental towards FM radio, BBC radio in particular and worry about its' future. Is the indulgence of a Magnum Dynalab tube analogue FM tuner still a justifiable purchase as internet radio contunes to grow in listening figures and DAB hangs-on despite being largely unwelcome? Do any of our Canadian HUGgers have a view on MD tuners?

    Maybe people feel that BBC radio just isn't what it used to be. Dynamic compression and digitisation of the analogue signal being two commonly mentioned problems...

  • mactrix
    replied
    Next try.

    1) Digital Audio

    The nature of sound is analog. We will never listen to digital audio in its raw form. Digital audio is a technology to store and transport sound. To make digital recorded audio listenable, it has to be converted to analog audio.

    Analog audio represents human nature of listing by representing acoustic waves in electric signals. Sampling and quantization translate the electric frequencies of analog audio to digital. Human hearing ranges to up to 20,000 Hz. The generally accepted Nyquist theorem defines the approximately double-rate to be applied to sample analog audio frequencies to digital which typically is 44.1 kHz (CD) or 48 kHz (DAT, broadcast, professional camera and digital video systems). Quantization defines the resolution of the sampling process. Higher quantization captures more details of the sampled audio frequencies, typically 16-bit is used for each audio channel to preserve full reproduction quality. Higher quantization at 24-bit or 32-bit makes sense for additional post-processing of the digital audio signal such as mixing and using audio filters and effects in digital audio workstations.

    Analog audio has a long history and therefore many different audio systems with different technical concepts were introduced to record and reproduce sound and music such as vinyl, tape and radio. The Compact Disc or more precisely Compact Disc Digital Audio (CD-DA) introduced in 1982, was the first digital audio system for the HiFi mass market.

    As mentioned, we cannot listen directly to a raw digital signal. Analog audio goes into an amplifier that feeds the membranes of loudspeakers and headphones with electric audio signals. Therefore, digital audio on CD needs to get converted to analog audio. This task is performed by a Digital Audio Converter (DAC) that converts digital to analog audio. A DAC can be a component within a HiFi unit or it can be a separate device. When CD players were introduced, they had to play and integrate well with existing HiFi equipment that was purely analog. Therefore, every CD player had (and most still have) an integrated DAC unit to output analog audio.

    RCA connectors also know as as Cinch connectors are the HiFi standard to transmit analog audio between different HiFi components. Typical analog amplifiers and preamplifiers provide different RCA inputs and outputs for different use cases (CD, Tuner, Tape In/Out, Phono, AUX, Preamp Out). It's not enough to have the same connector type to make analog audio compatible between the different HiFi units. The electric signal needs to follow a standard as well. Therefore, Line Level is defined as a specified strength of an audio signal used to transmit analog sound between audio components. The voltage can reach 2 volts peak-to-peak with levels referenced to −10 dBV (300 mV).

    Phono Level from vinyl record players is much lower than Line Level and therefore requires either a specific phono amplifier to amplify Phono Level to Line Level or the normal amplifier needs to have a specific Phone input.

    Professional analog audio equipment and systems in broadcast and sound production use different connector types and different level standards. Digital audio is not represented by an electric signal and therefore cannot utilize a voltage related level standard. However, the dBFS standard (dB Full Scale) for digital signals provides a level standard for digital systems too. Even if dBFS cannot reference to specific voltage values, there are reference values to analog line levels of professional systems. The good thing about the dBFS standard is that it is identical for all digital formats everywhere in the world, no matter if it's consumer or professional audio.
    Last edited by mactrix; 09-09-2017, 11:40 PM. Reason: correcting typos

    Leave a comment:


  • A.S.
    replied
    Agreed. Let's assume then, although a squint through HiFiUpYourGardenPath this month reveals all too clearly the utter BS that has replaced science. But as we know, this is a very deep problem that touches all aspects of society globally from the very top downwards. So we are not unique in suffering, although it seems that way.

    I think we need to start at the very beginning. And I have created a new thread, new place to do that.

    Give me a few moments to set it up.

    A

    P.S. Taking just one sentence from one of your answers above, and we see the core problem. To quote you:

    1) Digital Audio Signal - Audio is encoded and stored in digital form as zeroes and ones. dBFS is a unit of measurement for amplitude levels in digital systems as binary number.
    But to the layman, he's lost already. Here are his problem words:
    • encoded and stored
    • digital form
    • zeroes and ones
    • dBFS
    • unit of measurement
    • amplitude
    • levels
    • digital systems
    • binary number

    One sentence, nine core concepts that need to be understood before the ordinary reader can grasp the meaning. So, one asks, how many of the nine could the average reader be expected to have an adequately vague appreciation of, so that we can reduce the unknowns, (this is a guess), leaving the really tricky words:
    • zeroes and ones
    • dBFS
    • amplitude
    • levels
    • binary number

    May I suggest then that we have to find a way of conveying those crucial terms before we can expect the average reader to gain worthwhile knowledge? Just doing this you immediately see why vinyl is so attractive. It requires absolutely no technical understanding or depth of technical awareness at all . Zero. An LP is just what it is, and my four year old granddaughter grasped the concept of music in a groove with ease. That is all she needs to understand to play music from it. But for modern digital (or mixed analogue-digital) systems, you have to have far more basic knowledge to make them work properly.

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by A.S. View Post
    [
    It is impossible to get anywhere with this subject (or indeed with any audio subject meaningfully) unless a common language is used between contributors. HUG exists to illuminate the darkness and mystery of audio, and it is both painful and pitiful to read the misunderstandings laid bare here.
    I think this discussion needs a reset. How about we restart step by step and only continue to after we came to the right conclusion?

    Let me try again.

    1) Digital Audio Signal
    • Audio is encoded and stored in digital form as zeroes and ones. dBFS is a unit of measurement for amplitude levels in digital systems as binary number.
    • There is no fixed world standard to translate dBFS to analog level standards. The digital peak scale is not equivalent to the analog RMS scale.
    • dBFS must have a minus sign at the beginning and 0 dBFS is the highest possible dBFS value without any headroom.

    Can we move on to the digital-to-analog conversion process from there or is there anything to add or correct before?

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by A.S. View Post
    [
    It is impossible to get anywhere with this subject (or indeed with any audio subject meaningfully) unless a common language is used between contributors. HUG exists to illuminate the darkness and mystery of audio, and it is both painful and pitiful to read the misunderstandings laid bare here.
    I think this discussion needs a reset. How about we restart step by step and only continue to after we came to the right conclusion?

    Let me try again.

    1) Digital Input Level
    I think we all can agree that in the digital world there is no Can we all agree that digital to analog conversion in HiFi equipment converts

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by IMF+TDL View Post
    The difference in volume control settings doesn't mean that the amplifier is more "efficient" with digital inputs than it is with analog inputs.
    It's not a general rule but it can be the case.

    Originally posted by IMF+TDL View Post
    It simply means that the analog output signal from the Röst's internal DAC must be a higher level than the signal being sent to the analog/RCA input.
    That's my point. However, the signal being sent to the analog/RCA should have been a standard line level signal at -10 dBV and maximum volume from the source.

    Originally posted by IMF+TDL View Post
    What is the source for the signal you have connected to the analog/RCA input?
    Apple MacBook Pro (15-inch 2016), built-in audio (3.5 mm jack output to RCA cable). Hm, now I wonder if the output is a pure headphone output. In past models it said combined headphone/line output but now it says headphone only in the specs. I had the volume at maximum on both the output and within the Spotify app but now I read this: https://www.macrumors.com/2016/11/04...cal-audio-out/

    With past MacBook Pro models, the 3.5 mm jack was a combined optical/analog line output and headphone output. It switched automatically without user configuration to one of the three modes. I know the optical output has gone with the new model but I would slap myself if also analog line output has gone and I didn't notice.

    I am traveling for the next two weeks so I can't check this right now.

    As a site note, on the digital end I used a MacBook Pro (13-inch Late 2013) with the old combined optical/analog line output (3.5 mm jack output to Toslink cable). System volume changes are not possible in this mode and volume was at maximum in the Spotify app.

    Originally posted by IMF+TDL View Post
    Have you performed any measurements to compare the level of the analog signal connected to the analog/RCA inputs with the analog output of the Röst's internal DAC?
    You mean the preamp output of the Röst? That's the only analog output it has. No, I don't have anything connected to the preamp out.

    I will first check what Apple has changed in the new MacBook Pro.

    Leave a comment:


  • A.S.
    replied
    Thrashing about in the dark - ten years on and still the basics are ignored, disbelieved or discredited. You decide.

    I must comment that this thread reveals the most alarming misunderstanding about how audio signals are actually represented as a varying voltage in both analogue and digital systems.

    It is impossible to get anywhere with this subject (or indeed with any audio subject meaningfully) unless a common language is used between contributors. HUG exists to illuminate the darkness and mystery of audio, and it is both painful and pitiful to read the misunderstandings laid bare here.

    So my question is: why don't contributors ask open ended questions of other HUG members who have a better awareness of the science of audio? What can we, the better illuminated, do collectively to prevent this sort of thrashing about in the dark? Should we, as one of our distributors recently implemented for training staff and public, a "university of audio"? Could we tackle basic audio subjects one by one? Time is running out, and we've been nibbling at this for over ten years now.

    I have no problems of admitting that my knowledge is limited and narrow, and I do not know why others, even less aware than me, seem emboldened to make ludicrously inaccurate statements based on a demonstrable lack of even the most fundamental, basic knowledge of electricity? Surely that degree of a paucity of knowledge can only lead to incorrect purchase decisions, and worse, a distraction from the audiophile objective (it is better music reproduction, isn't it?) as equipment with incorrectly matched electrical signal voltages are cobbled together in some sort of unholy, failed alliance. It really upsets me to think that with just a little knowledge, the consumer could catapult himself out of the audio swamp and into the clear blue skys of decent rerproduction at the lowest financial and emotional outlay.

    Assembling a quality audio system, be it in the studio, the transmission chain or at home, needs the application of science - at the absolute minimum - to be sure that the inter-equipment signal voltages match up, or the result will be sub-optimal sound. 100% guaranteed.

    Please tell me how they can benefit anyone and why the rest of us have to work perpetually to correct basic misunderstandings? Is that a fair use of our collective time resources? Is there not the slightest hesitation in typing false assumptions as if they are hard and fast science? Is there no personal responsibility? No shame? No embarrassment? No curiosity? No self-doubt about cause and effect? No open minds?

    The state of 'audiophilia' today demonstrates a shocking disconnect between objective, scientific reality and folk lore. It's brilliant business though. Less education among would-be consumers always leads to a nice, juicy marketing potential.

    I'd go so far as to question whether anyone should invest any time or money in quality audio equipment if they do not have the most fundamental understanding of the audio signal as it passes from the microphone to the speaker. In such a situation I can only foresee sonic misery: incompatible equipment playing a never-satisfying sound.

    Leave a comment:


  • IMF+TDL
    replied
    Originally posted by mactrix View Post
    I get decent volume at the Röst volume level 20 when using the optical input. From the same source with the same music via RCA it requires about volume level 40. This translates into some watts that makes my Röst more efficient with the digital input.
    The difference in volume control settings doesn't mean that the amplifier is more "efficient" with digital inputs than it is with analog inputs.
    It simply means that the analog output signal from the Röst's internal DAC must be a higher level than the signal being sent to the analog/RCA input.
    What is the source for the signal you have connected to the analog/RCA input?
    Have you performed any measurements to compare the level of the analog signal connected to the analog/RCA inputs with the analog output of the Röst's internal DAC?

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    So the voltage output output levels may be different. However, shouldn't the lower levels associated with the analog inputs just require a bit more of a turn on the amplifier volume control to compensate?
    Yes, absolutely. It's however quite a bit with my Röst. I get decent volume with the Röst at volume level 20 when using the optical input. From the same source with the same music via RCA, it requires about volume level 40. This translates into some watts that makes my Röst more efficient with the digital input. And as said before, I don't think this is special to the Röst.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    What's been covered previously is that some external DACs, CD players, etc, may not actually reduce their level sufficiently so as not to cause signal clipping at the analog inputs to an amplifier.
    There is spec to follow which is -10 dBV for analog line level. It's much lower with phone level and how good can FM radio be? To bring this in relation to the original question of this thread: With DAB, DAB+, DVB, HbbTV and internet streaming, the only thing we need to care about is audio codec compression (MP3, AAC, FLAC, at various bitrates, etc.). We don't have to worry anymore about confusing analog level standards and integrated systems with internal DACs can avoid conversion back to legacy analog -10 dBV level. dbFS is the world standard and there are no differences anymore between the US, Europe, the UK, Asia or Antarctica.

    No one, no one, no one talks or writes about this. Instead digital is blamed for bad quality and tube amps, tube CD players, tube tuners and turntables with tube phone amps are praised as the ultimate audio experience. It's absurd.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    Agreed that it does make sense to match the levels appropriately for whatever the signal path requires. It's also necessary to ensure that the maximum signal levels that the input stages can cope with are adequate. Overall, it's probably not that bad to amplify the output of a DAC if that's what's required.
    If you have more than enough watts then you're right. My Röst only offers 75W at 8 Ω or about 100W for my 6 Ω Harbeth loudspeaker. So, I care.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    Isn't it about getting the gain of the various amplification stages working properly? The "high digital dBFS level" is only high because of whatever amplification is included in the DAC itself. A digital dBFS quantised level has no inherent voltage amplitude. It's the DAC that produces the voltage, and the maximum voltage produced by the DAC will of course depend on its design.
    I agree but again, legacy standards for RCA line level need to be considered.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    And that reason is to provide a reference for whatever output voltage the DAC produces. dBFS just means that the number in the digital signal simply holds the largest possible value that can be stored. It's the DAC that is tasked with converting that number to a voltage.
    Right. Did I mention legacy standards yet? :-)

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    And that seems to be where we run into problems. The 2.0 Vrms that a CD play is likely to put out when dealing with a 0dBFS digital signal will be likely to overload the analog RCA line inputs.
    Let's review this argument that makes sense to me: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...l#post16698736

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    It could be a sinewave, or pink noise, or white noise. A voltmeter could be used to measure the voltage across the load resistor. Knowing the voltage and the resistance, it's possible to compute the power being dissipated by the resistor.
    Yes, this could be. However, a "Lab Report" should provide the details how such test setup looks like in detail. I saw too many misconfigurations even in professional setups.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    It may or may not be bad. However, if the heatsink gets that hot for 10 W output, then there may be a risk of the power transistors being damaged by longer usage at higher power levels.
    That is speculation. Maye 60°C is the normal operation temperature at whatever level. I can try to find out. :-)

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    The DAC takes the maximum number stored, and then converts it to an analog voltage as part of its digital-to-analog signal reconstruction process. Play a CD with peaks at 0dBFS on the CD recording, and the preamplifier produces an analog waveform whose peak amplitude is 2.4V at the preamp outputs. That's all that means.
    Hm, based on my understanding such peaks should result in -10 dBV at 2 V max on the preamp outputs as those are RCA and therefore it needs to match line level specs (at maximum volume I guess).

    Hegel should have omit the preamp output. I don't see how this makes any sense in this device. It's an integrated amp.

    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    Well, it's surprising because digital-to-analog conversion of signals usually produces the lowest distortion levels when handling the 0dBFS levels. It's just the nature of the conversion/amplification process that takes place. In this situation, I would have expected distortion levels much less than 0.05%, which is what good quality CD players can easily surpass, and have been documented to do so in numerous bench tests. A 0.25% distortion level is just much higher than would normally be expected in this instance.
    You might be right but I even don't understand what input was used for this lab test. It sounds like a digital input because for RCA input the Röst would only need to pass the signal through (RCA to RCA) and the volume knob would only allow to reduce the level, not increase it. For XLR input at higher professional levels, the Röst would need to make sure to lower the preamp output to -10 dBV line level standard at maximum volume. However, I didn't find any figures about what XLR input is allowed and Hegel didn't reply my email :-). If the lap test used a digital input then distortion and 2.4 V output could be caused by the internal DAC and a mismatch to get the signal back to proper -10 dBV on the RCA preamp output. So, the benefit I praised for the internal DAC with higher analog level output might cause a problem here at the preamp output. Anyway, it's a legacy problem for me as I'd never use a preamp unless it's a digital one. :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by willem View Post
    I am stil trying to understand this. Is your argument that typical analogue output of a digital source like a cd player is too high with respect to typical input of amplifiers and therefore has to be attenuated to be amplified again which does not help S/N performance?
    Typical analog output at the specified line output level of -10 dBV is not too high. However, this is 0.316 V so I am not sure where this 2 V value comes from. There seems to be some confusion with this 2 V figure and think this post clarifies this correctly: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...l#post16698736 (post 135).

    My argument is that the -10 dBV line output (no matter if it's -10 dBV with 0.316 V or 2 V) requires more amplification when going via analog RCA line connection from an external DAC to an amp compared to an integrated amp with digital input whose internal design doesn't need to care about the -10 dBV legacy standard. Instead the integrated amp can take advantage of modern DAC components that allow flexible leveling. Pro equipment already uses DACs at higher level standards for XLR connections so higher level conversion is possible since a long time. Integrated amps with digital inputs and internal DACs can even exceed the limits of professional equipment. As I said, no rocket science.
    Last edited by mactrix; 08-09-2017, 01:03 PM. Reason: Correcting typos.

    Leave a comment:


  • A.S.
    replied
    Thank you witwald for taking the trouble to deconstruct and explain.

    We see the problem time and again in audiophilia of the lack of a common lexicon of objective language between those who design and manufacture audio equipment (one has to assume that they have some grip on science, even if they, like me are not scientists, otherwise the product could actually be dangerous to use as in electrically unsafe) and the user, aided and abetted by the media. This void creates the space such that utter BS can breed such as '... I was pulled into the delicious, enveloping, cathedral-like sonic seduction [by product ABC].... it was the closest to a sonic orgasm I've experienced ... a thrilling ride ... couldn't wait to change the music and see if it happened all over again ....'.

    Can digital cameras or lenses be discussed in any meaningful, mature adult-to-adult way without an agreed lexicon? Or the operation of a nuclear power plant of petrol chem refinery? Yet 'high-end' audio can be nuanced-over when there is not even the most basic appreciation of inter-equipment signal voltages or consequences of loudness difference?

    Audiophile subjective prose is somewhere on the tragic-comedic continuum. And that makes rich pickings indeed for an entire industry.

    And we're back to the issue of the tease or the 'promise' again.

    Leave a comment:


  • witwald
    replied
    Originally posted by mactrix View Post
    I don't know what the Röst does internally but the huge difference between digital input and analog input is like day and night.
    So the voltage output output levels may be different. However, shouldn't the lower levels associated with the analog inputs just require a bit more of a turn on the amplifier volume control to compensate?

    The Röst definitely doesn't convert to -10 dBV level like an external DAC must do for RCA connection
    What's been covered previously is that some external DACs, CD players, etc, may not actually reduce their level sufficiently so as not to cause signal clipping at the analog inputs to an amplifier.

    It's how I would build an internal DAC by trying to get as little level reduction as possible. It's what makes sense.
    Agreed that it does make sense to match the levels appropriately for whatever the signal path requires. It's also necessary to ensure that the maximum signal levels that the input stages can cope with are adequate. Overall, it's probably not that bad to amplify the output of a DAC if that's what's required.

    Getting as little level reduction as possible by preserving as much as possible of the high digital dBFS level. This can only be achieved in an integrated amp with an internal DAC by adjusting components independently of analog level standards.
    Isn't it about getting the gain of the various amplification stages working properly? The "high digital dBFS level" is only high because of whatever amplification is included in the DAC itself. A digital dBFS quantised level has no inherent voltage amplitude.It's the DAC that produces the voltage, and the maximum voltage produced by the DAC will of course depend on its design.

    Digital audio provides the highest possible level standard with dBFS. As said before, FS stands for Full Scale for a reason.
    And that reason is to provide a reference for whatever output voltage the DAC produces. dBFS just means that the number in the digital signal simply holds the largest possible value that can be stored. It's the DAC that is tasked with converting that number to a voltage.

    Analog outputs of digital playback devices (e.g. RCA outputs in a CD player) need to follow the standards so dBFS on a CD gets output via RCA at -10 dBV to be compatible to other RCA HiFi equipment.
    And that seems to be where we run into problems. The 2.0 Vrms that a CD play is likely to put out when dealing with a 0dBFS digital signal will be likely to overload the analog RCA line inputs.

    What is a "burn-in" test? A constant test tone that creates constant 10W output?
    That would be one valid example.

    What kind of test sound was used and how was watt consumption measured?
    It could be a sinewave, or pink noise, or white noise. A voltmeter could be used to measure the voltage across the load resistor. Knowing the voltage and the resistance, it's possible to compute the power being dissipated by the resistor.

    What do we know where the 60°C came from and is it actually bad?
    It may or may not be bad. However, if the heatsink gets that hot for 10 W output, then there may be a risk of the power transistors being damaged by longer usage at higher power levels.

    Do we hear the difference between 0.0082% and 0.011% distortion?
    Probably not. :-)

    What does "2.4V preamp output is offered at 0dBFs/max volume" mean? The preamp output is analog, how is that related to dBFS?
    The DAC takes the maximum number stored, and then converts it to an analog voltage as part of its digital-to-analog signal reconstruction process. Play a CD with peaks at 0dBFS on the CD recording, and the preamplifier produces an analog waveform whose peak amplitude is 2.4V at the preamp outputs. That's all that means.

    Does the author mean he raises volume to the absolute maximum and is surprised about 0.25-0.35% distortion at the preamp output? How is that surprising and what has it to do with dBFS?
    Well, it's surprising because digital-to-analog conversion of signals usually produces the lowest distortion levels when handling the 0dBFS levels. It's just the nature of the conversion/amplification process that takes place. In this situation, I would have expected distortion levels much less than 0.05%, which is what good quality CD players can easily surpass, and have been documented to do so in numerous bench tests. A 0.25% distortion level is just much higher than would normally be expected in this instance.

    Leave a comment:


  • mactrix
    replied
    Originally posted by witwald View Post
    The price is quite high,
    It is high and I am not promoting the Röst. You can get the same technical specs for 1/10 of the price at same quality. I purchased it for the unique design, great look and feel, usability. I don't believe all the marketing about the SoundEngine etc. but I like the concept and product.

    Leave a comment:


  • willem
    replied
    I am stil trying to understand this. Is your argument that typical analogue output of a digital source like a cd player is too high with respect to typical input of amplifiers and therefore has to be attenuated to be amplified again which does not help S/N performance?

    Leave a comment:


  • IMF+TDL
    replied
    Originally posted by mactrix View Post
    I don't know what the Röst does internally but the huge difference between digital input and analog input is like day and night. The Röst definitely doesn't convert to -10 dBV level like an external DAC must do for RCA connection (for XLR it depends what professional standard is supported). I don't think this is specific to the Röst. There is no magic behind this. A $250 integrated amp from Onkyo with digital inputs should show the same results and it should be better than any external DAC combination no matter how expensive. As a video/audio professional I understand why that is.
    Examine the circuit schematic for an Onkyo A-9010 and see if you still stand behind that assertion.

    Originally posted by mactrix View Post
    No, I don't see the problem. I don't understand this "Lab Report". I showed it a friend of mine who's a broadcast audio engineer and after three readings he shook his head and gave up trying to understand what this is supposed to be about. I read it about 20 times and still don't understand what the author tries to express.
    Here's a hint: Take another look at the graphs in the Lab Report section. Do you still see nothing amiss?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X