Dimensionality and roundness are not quantifiable properties. Figments of the OP's imagination!
Next step up on the streaming food chain?
I’ve been enjoying my Auralic Aries G1 for nearly 3 years now. If I wanted to explore a significant step up in my streaming quality, and not a small incremental increase in quality, what devices should be on my short list? Aries G2.2? Grimm MU1? Something else? The G1 is awfully good, however, I still perceive an extra layer of dimensionality and roundness with my analogs set up (see profile for details) that I would love too achieve in the digital realm. Or am I barking up the wrong tree, and should I focus on my DAC, a Bricasti M1, and try as non-oversampling R2R dac? FWIW, I think the Bricasti is excellent- it was the first DAC I ever heard that made me say- "that sounds terrific" instead of saying "that sounds great for digital"
- ...
- 39 posts total
@jasonbourne71 current measurement techniques and equipment do not adequately qualify ALL sonic properties such as soundstage dimensions (just one example). Besides, you are barking up the wrong tree here, almost no one here cares for the measurements crowd blather, the ASR forum is where you should be barking. @zavato I think your DAC is fine for now, upgrading your streamer is the best 1st step, Lumin Aurender Innuos Antipodes Grimm are all good choices, hard to go wrong, budget around $8-12K to get the best value models, after narrowing your choices it comes down to software differences, if possible audition in your own system. FWIW I have a Lumin P1 and it was the best upgrade to my system so far in my digital front end journey. |
@kairosman @jasonbourne52 Dimensionality and roundness are indeed figments of the listeners imagination, as are all things stereo. But that is neithervthe question or the issue. The question is whether or not they are repeatable and reliable. If they are, then they are true, if unquantifiable. Likewise claims of blacker (a visual term) backgrounds attributable to lower noise are specious at best when the current noise floor is well below the listeners background noise floor to begin with. 'Improved dynamics' is another questionable term because dynamics have in our context a very specific definition: The change in the voltage envelope describing the event. A guitarist plucks a note. The microphone picks up that sound, its 'dynamics' defined by its voltage envelope. Pluck it harder, the voltage envelope increases. Absent an increase in the voltage envelope there is no change in dynamics. Likewise, a DAC whose output variations are greater than the input ('improved dynamics') is demonstrably defective. I'm not saying all equipment sounds identical. I'm saying if it does sound or present differently there are reasons, some quantifiable, some not. But to be valid they must be consistently repeatable. |
- 39 posts total