Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Re: The 47 Labs DAC and transport don't measure particularly badly.

Posted by thetubeguy1954 (A) on November 15, 2006 at 11:27:54

In Reply to: The 47 Labs DAC and transport don't measure particularly badly. posted by Pat D on November 14, 2006 at 12:52:08:

Hi Pat,

I appreciate the civilness and informative nature of this reply of yours -- thanks! If I appeared to imply that I had doubts as to whether or a technical explanation was available for some particular sonic features of the Kusunoki-style I didn't mean to. The main reasons why I brought up the use of these types of DACs where:

1) I wanted to find another type of audio component, that like SET's do, usually measure poorly but sound "good" i.e. it replicates music that sounds more like live umamplified instruments should, than do many of the better measuring DACs!

2) I wanted to remove tubes and the idea that it was tubes euphonically coloring the music from the arguement/debate when discussing how can an audio component measure poorly yet replicate music accurately. I know the Zanden uses tubes but some of the Kusunoki-style DACs don't! So in my POV the Kusunoki-style DACs fit the bill precisely in that regard. They, like an SET, may not measure particularly well in some respects from a technically, yet despite that it does not seem to measure badly in ways which make it sound bad.

Where I believe we would have a major disagreement is in what actually constitutes the more accurate replication of live music. If I am understanding you correctly you'd say that the more accurate replication would come from an amp where essentially what goes in is what comes only +20dB. In which case a test-machine would be the final arbitrator of what is and isn't accurate. Wherein I'd say the more accurate amp would essentially be one that replicated live music more accurately as deteremined by the ear/brain combo, which NEVER mistakes live for recorded music or visa versa. In which case my ear/brain combo would be the final arbitrator. I know you and I will never agree on which of these constitutes the more accurate replication and that's ok! Different strokes for different folks, otherwise we'd all be listening to only tubed or solid state amps. I am in agreement with your assessment that it is not for us to tell anyone else what the sonic goals of their system should be.

Pat as far as your comment that I consider such DACs to be more accurate to the real thing than other DACs, this is again something I must apologize for if you feel I implied it, I didn't mean to imply that at all. I've never used or heard any of the Kusunoki-style DACs. So I do not know if I would find them to be more accurate in replicating what live music sounds like or not. It's so hard to try and discuss/debate on the internet. What I feel is perfectly clear, others read differently. I thought I was being quite clear when I said: So far IMHO SETs do that better than any other amplifier technology I've ever heard. But because of the: "it sounds more realistic, not it doesn't' it's euphonic colored" back and forth arguement that never goes anywhere but endless repitions of it sounds more realistic, not it's euphonic colored. I looked around for another example of this type of measure poorly yet replicate live music more realistically audio component and found it! Or at least I believe I have in the Zanden, 47lab, Audio Note use Kusunoki-style DACs. I was only trying to find another type of audio component that like SET's do, measure poorly yet have what many believe is a more faithful replication of live music. I trusted HP's judgement on this as I found that when I can audtion components he's reviewed I tend to agree with his opinion of it. I also trust the ears of Anthony Cordesman and Jon Valin.

Hell Don T's berating me for stating what he feels is the obvious, i.e. that my comments are my opinions, but as you know Pat in the past here others have berated me for not doing that very same! In their view because I didn't state it was my opinion I was stating it as a fact! It's quite difficult to know how others will interpet what's posted. That's why I always say ask questions if my postion isn't clear. I would have thought that because I never mentioned having listened to a Kusunoki-style DAC it would be clear I hadn't. I guess I was mistaken. So no haven't actually done a live vs. recorded test. I don't have the means even if I had one I could listen to-but I'd definitely trust my ears on the matter. I'd only do blind test to prove to non-believers I could tell a Kusunoki-style DAC from a non-Kusunoki-style DACs if and when I ever definitively stated I could.

As far as JA thinking on the unit, that some of the distortion may be audible, it will sound rather bright on CDs with pre-emphasis, it is not notably low on jitter, it has lower distortion into a relatively low input impedance, a rather unexpected result and there's some other problems with the 47 Labs DAC and transport but they have to do with compatibility. I'd trust HP's judgement anyday before JA's and HP states on pg 119 of issue 167 ...the Lab 47 Pi/Tracer, to my way of thinking, the very best CD playback system I've heard yet. Which only furthers the point I was attempting to make. Here's another different type of audio component and one which doesn't always use tubes acts like SET's do, which measures poorly yet replicates music that sounds more like live music than many other components that measure better do! So something other than the tubes are euphonically coloring the music must be going on.

Pat as I've said more than once here no one I know has ever mistaken live music for recorded or visa versa. Although the ear can be fooled it appears to be very relaible when determining live vs recorded music. What if we could find an open-minded sound engineer that would be willing to setup test equipment correctly. Do you think it's possible to get the test machine to determine there were no measurable differences between a live softly played guitar in a room and a recording of that guitar played in the same room? I do! What if we could fool a test machine into reporting the recording was indistinguishable from live musician? How much credence would you give measured tests then? What if at the very same time anyone listening always recognized the difference between the live music and the recording? Would you then believe the ear/brain combo was the more accurate of the two in recognizing live vs recorded music? Would designers then start to also give more credence and delve deeper into how the ear/brain combo determines live vs recorded music? I don't know, but the possibility of that excites me!

On another note I read something that might be of interest to you. Paradigm has upgraded their Signature series! The new models are getting beryllium-dome tweeters and cobalt infused aluminium mid/bass drivers. The cost increase is quite modest on the S8 the price changed only $200pr from $6500 to $6700. This might be an upgrade worth looking into "if" you're interested.

Good talking with you. Keep enjoying the music Pat -- Thetubeguy1954

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows. - Epictetus

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---