What the benifit of using a separate dac?

This is the way I would approach it. Look for two or three DAC's with high jitter immunity first and foremost. Those that have a few years under their belts (not just a recent one with a rave review but DAC's with many happy users and a resale value that holds up). Try 'em out and make your own mind up. FWIW differences are subtle and there are many good options out there - will any of them defeat your standalone player in your home with your power...only by careful A/B yourself can you decide that.

Obviously it depends on the quality of the DAC built into your player. There is no logical reason why a DAC housed in a separate chassis should be better.

Take care before you spend money. D/A converters have been greatly improved in the last few years, and lowered in cost. Today's moderately priced component probably outperforms the best of a few years ago.

As suggested already, that would depend entirely upon the quality of the respective DAC's (and with the separate DAC, marginally upon the cord between transport and DAC). Also the separate DAC may take advantage of its own isolated power supply, FWIW. One other advantage of a separate DAC is the ability to take advantage of PC Audio which arguably can sound superior to redbook. Certainly the Modwright Transporter I use sounds better than any redbook player I've ever owned, and that is essentially a separate DAC combined with a music server. Unless your player has a digital input (not that many do), you will not be able to use the internal DAC for PC audio purposes. There are a few companies that offer a 30-day trial period. The highly acclaimed Benchmark DAC1 might be a place to start, but my experience is, well, I returned mine. YMMV as plenty of folks seem to like them. Only disadvantage there is that there is only 30-days for burn-in (enough time if you are vigilant about it).

1. To be independant of the transport (things break)
2. To play other formats
3. Connect computer (server)
4. Connect DVD and DTV (use cheap DVD player with jitter rejecting DAC)

DACs with jitter rejection (upsampling) are nice - they allow to use cheap transport and cable but some people prefare non-oversampling sound.

I have Benchmark connected directly to power amp (it has volume control) with one input connected to DVD player (coax) and the other to DTV (toslink). I plan to connect third input to my computer.

Benchmark is on neutral/revealing side (not warm) while more expensive Bel Canto DAC3 is a little more "organic" - check reviews of both on the web (stereophile.com)
Benchmark has 30 day free try-out program and Bel Canto might have as well. If you decide to get Benchmark buy new and the latest - possibly DAC1 USB ($300 more) since it has better XLR output drivers.

having just one purpose, without spinning motors and the associated power supplies for it, I'd have to go with a stand alone DAC as being able to provide improved performance levels.

But like one box CDPs, they too have their own flavors, options, and uses. The USB option for example may or may not be the best path for improved PC integration into a stereo system for example. Albeit, it’s a quicker remedy. Plug and play. I’ve since found that a very good sound card outputting a PCM digital signal via Coax rivals that path pretty easily too.

It can sure benefit or even fill out one’s rig as adding one to my system did. Especially if the DAC does an exemplary job in the de-jittering area. Lavry and Apogee are on the warm side of neutral IMO if that is the need. The Benchmark statements are already posted here. The Bel Canto DAC3 offers a lot of options and very good performance too. I chose the DAC3 as it fit my needs best.

Good points, Blindjim. There are a handful of DAC's that also convert USB directly to I2S (native language to the DAC) which circumvents the SPDIF interface (an additional conversion) in between. I think Empirical does a conversion to the Benchmark to accomplish this, as does the new Redwine Isabella in stock form, as well as others. Just instinctively keeping the signal down to as few conversions as possible would seem like a good thing. I'm not sure if this is similar to "asynchronous" USB conversion that is utilized by Wavelength in their recent versions of DACs, but I think these technologies are doing alot to address the de-jittering, as Jim put it, and computer>DAC connection and the clocking issues therein. Each manufacturer seems to be pursuing their own approach, and ultimately they all present a slightly different flavor. I was astounded in comparing DAC's recently, just how differently they can present music. The fact that so many love the Benchmark and I found it un-listenable (the highs were just too strident for me) just supports what I've always said - it is just as subjective as anything else in this hobby and you really just have to use your own ears and your own system/room/music to really make a judgment for yourself.

Jax2 - It depends when you listened to Benchmark. Early ones had Signetics/Philips NE5532 Op-amps that sounded thin. Around 2001/2002 Philips had factory fire (burned down) and stopped making them. Texas Instruments bought the license and designed new larger die that sounds better. Benchmark also needs a little time to get civilized but even after hundred hours doesn't sound warm (if that's what you're after).

Kijanki - I listened at length to two versions. One was an early version, but post-2002, which was thoroughly burned in. I listened in three very different systems to that one. The second was more recent and was a current, USB version which I ordered direct from Benchmark. Again, I listened in two different systems to that one. Since this was from the factory I had to burn it in myself. By the time I returned it I'd estimate I'd put around 200 hours or more on it by leaving it on whenever I could, so I don't know if it could have sounded better given more time. I don't know whether it came from the factory with any hours on it since they do have the return policy. The latter version was definitely an improvement over the former, but still suffered from stridency in the high end which ultimately made it difficult to listen to for long periods. I found it on the colder side, a sound I'd associate in some ways with SS amplification. OTOH, I heard it in several systems at RMAF and I very much like what I heard there, but I did not listen to any one at great length to determine whether any similar traits to what I heard at home existed in the long run. I have no doubts it can sound good to some folks - clearly it is praised by many - it just did not sound good to me, rather, in my systems in sounded clinical and a bit harsh. In comparison I much preferred an MHDT Paradisea which presented the same music with a much more natural presence. The early version I had I compared to a Wavelength Brick and a very old Muse Model 2+ both of which I preferred, the Muse being more similar to the Benchmark, but not nearly as harsh, while the Wavelength was a sharper contrast being a kinder gentler presentation. I believe all the DAC's I preferred were NOS DAC's if I'm not mistaken. I also tend to like DAC's and players with a tube output stage in general, though not as a rule. As with everything here, YMMV - to each their own.

Thanks so far for comments, its hard when it comes to digital, I live a long way from major cities, so trying in home is impossible, I buy all my gear from all over the world as lot of the brands are not available and plus work commitments have there restraints on my time, so far I bought everything I have using reviews and chat on Audiogon and have been very happy so far.One last question if a Wadia player is so good why do they have to be moded?

One last question if a Wadia player is so good why do they have to be moded?
K_rose

Its not that Wadia product HAS to be a mod candidate,but what the audiophile desires, in his or her particular set-up.
Wadia, like any company, has price constraints when a design goes to market. If the moding company(GNSC comes to mind) can make a Wadia sound all the better, then IMHO it is money well spent. Think Synergy...

One last question if a Wadia player is so good why do they have to be moded?

As an addendum to the answer above - Modders tend to choose some of the best platforms to build upon because it has the potential to show off their work on it even more than a modest component might since the construction that is already there is very stable and revealing to begin with. In a similar way you may experience this if you start investing effectively in better and better components you tend to find that your system becomes more and more revealing of any changes you make to it (at least that has been my experience). That's also the ticket to the merry-go-round, or the sure sign of a bad case of Audiophilial Nervosa. Also, in some cases, components are considered for the space available within their chassis to build into (an Oppo player does not have much room to add anything, though there are mods for them), but I'd guess that would take a back seat to the consideration of what is there already in stock form. There is probably also a psychological component as well - Folks who are willing to invest serious $ in modifying a component for better performance may prefer to be investing in a solid platform that has bling factor, pride of ownership and all that. Are you going to want to spend $1200 modifying a $170 Oppo player? None of this suggests you have to choose this direction. My experience with modded products (GNSC, Modwright, APL) suggests very strongly that skilled modders absolutely can make a significant improvement to a component. I'm sure there are also those out there who do mods who are taking advantage of this, but are not necessarily as skilled as others, who do not make a big difference. If you are considering a modded product I'd do some real-world research on what folks have to say about their experiences with those you are considering. You also may want to consider what mods do to the resale value of the product. In the case of the modders I mentioned they certainly seem to hold their value in most cases.

Why mod something you just got?

Beats me. I think all the talk about modding a this or that is due to desire and budget.

I've noticed modders offer upgrades on popularity as much as platform. eg. Oppo & Waddia, Dennon, and Sony. Two of those players have substantial OEM builds, two don't.

It's also a path which reportedly offers more performance with incremental outlays, rather than an initial hefty one.

The problem as I see it is modding a whatever is ambiguous. Definitely via mods there's gonna be a change... it'll sure be different. Likely better too... but better how, seems the pertinent question.... and there are others.

One persons ear isn't anothers.

I'd be quite selective of just who and just what mods were made, were I to go that route and I'm thinking quite hard on it for my BC DAC3.

The problem as I see it is modding a whatever is ambiguous. Definitely via mods there's gonna be a change... it'll sure be different. Likely better too... but better how, seems the pertinent question.... and there are others.

You could make the same statement about making the choice among stock components. Each will have subtle, or significant differences, and the preference for them would be subjective. The reason to mod is, ostensibly, to improve what is already there. I agree with you in that I see no reason to buy a brand new Wadia and mod it unless you have money to burn - but what if your preference is strongly for the sound of a modded Wadia, rather than a stock one. How is that "ambiguous", and why is that any different from choosing a stock Wadia over a stock Opus 21?

Jax2

WEll, forgive me here, but just where does one go to hear that modded Waddia beforehand?

I think my take here is pretty simple. Although it’s perhaps not an easy thing to audition any number of CDPs, the possibility exists. Also there are reviews of these non modded items, threads, etc.

The modded units however, by and large, have little or no press… no place to find one for audition, and certainly there’ll be no in home trial…. Hence a decision to mod a particular unit to claimed ‘higher levels of performance’ are at best dark or ambiguous assertions as to the end product.

I’m not taking modders or those who have modded their items to task… it’s just that it’s a shot in the dark at best. IMHO.

Without any concrete evidence, or even subjective press available as to the results going in it does seem a dicey prospect to me and only the rep of the modding tech is accountable here… not the ACTUAL outcome OF YOUR UNIT.

Will the device once altered then be too much detail, of too high resolution, or too dark, or too warm, or too lush? ...AND THERE'S THIS... OR TOO UN-RESALEABLE?

At best some of the more prominent assertions are “following this modification it will compete on a par with units costing several times more Well… OK, THEN, How SO?

…and then there’s this… Well, I liked it better the other way or Can you make it a bit less ….. or a bit more …. ?

In all having something modded just it simply seems a big question mark to me. That’s all. In spite of my thoughts here I am pretty sure I’ll go that way next year with my DAC…

But it is scary.

Maybe a good idea would be for modders to have on hand a XYZ with their level one, level two, etc, mods and allow seriously interested folks to actually see up front what they are buying, instead of the other way around. I mean if it's a slam dunk, no brainer mod providing performance and value, then why not? Like they could have one or two already done for previewing?

hell, I'd even pay a resonable fee for that were I not to wind up buying it or having my own done that way!

Just think of all the guess work and speculation that would be taken out of the mix, not to mention the positive press that would follow.

That is the way other designers do it is it not?

WEll, forgive me here, but just where does one go to hear that modded Waddia beforehand?

Hmmm, well, I guess you have a point, but some of the modders do show up at the bigger shows (RMAF, VSAC, CES), and you could hear their stuff there. Just like hearing anything in an environment and in a system that is not the one you bring it home to (just like listening to a stock piece at a dealer), I'd opine that it's all a risk if you ask me...you just have to take intelligent risks and see what works for you. You could also query here and see if anyone local to you owns one you could go listen to. I don't do the retail thing, and rarely buy anything at all at a retail shop. 90% of what I buy is on the used market and is in some ways a leap of faith, but usually I have either heard examples somewhere, or researched and paid attention to who's saying what about a particular piece or manufacturer I'm interested in. Ultimately you don't know anything about any piece in terms of how it will work in your system, in your room, with your music, and to your ears, unless you actually try it. If you want guarantees, I guess there are none. I've found myself to be pretty savvy to the used market and I think I have a pretty good sense of what I can buy and sell something for, and what holds its value and what does not. In this way I've tried out alot of different things over the years and have been able to hone in on which direction suits me and my tastes. Many components have come and gone in my system, but a few have stayed for the long run. I cannot recall ever having taken a beating over any of my buying and selling. I usually just break even and have the experience as value added. There are modders I've come to have experience with that I took a risk on and it paid off and I would go to them again and again. Top of that list would be Dan Wright over at Modwright. GNSC also was a worthwhile investment in my experience. I've heard APL's Denon mod (at the middle of what he offers) and let me tell you it is a damn fine digital front end. I guess Alex has gone AWOL though, which is unusual for him as I understand it, and that might be, I suppose, another risk of any smaller manufacturer. Look at how many small boutique manufacturers have come and gone...some have produce great products too, but that doesn not guarantee success. It's a tough business and those who survive are probably doing more than just one thing right. I can tell you this from my own personal experience, and YMMV, the best things that have come into my life, without any exceptions that I can think of, have come as the result of taking some significant risk. I guess it's not for everyone, but it's worked for me. I understand your hesitations, Jim. There is certainly the other side of the coin - there's some wisdom in playing it safe and being conservative. Do what suits you best.

I purchased a Sony ES player back in the 80's....done good player. But I got back into Hi End about a year ago. I felt that there had to be improvements made...so I wanted to keep my Sony 707 as a transport...A stand alone DAC was next on the list. Tubes or SS...well I read everything I could on the net...my Budget being about 1200....I chose a Monarchy dac....hooked it up....very good. I changed out the stock tubes for NOS Amperex...now that was a significant upgrade. The best was yet to come....swithed out the coupling caps....that did the trick. I'm done...as this dac now produces silky smooth,dynamic and crystal clear sound...all for 1500 not bad.

Jax2

I can and do appreciate your exp and no doubt the modding path has been a beneficial one for yourself and I’m glad for you.

You and I aren't too different… nor for that matter are most of those who frequent the high end audio market. Very little of the abundance of gear is available for local preview. some of which that is available, I’ll just not go thear due to the way that dealership treats people routinely… and I’ve tried more than a couple times to do business with them in spite of their erudite and arrogant attitudes.

90% + of my rig has been purchased sight unseen/unheard. Nearly all were leaps of faith. Yet nearly all of these leaps of faith were fortified with plenty of press and other current & previous owners recommendations. In spite of some actually.

I do my due dilligence… as it is to me to do… and that’s exactly my point as you agreed by saying some of the modders will ‘sometimes’ show off their mods at some of the shows. I’d guess these show pieces are their full on mods as well.

Exactly. Some, sometimes, somewhere. Maybe.

Specific alterations for improvement aren’t for the greater part responsibly accounted for too often. Nor are those accounts ongoing in the more common areas one would look to for such reports… only short raves are posted from those who have subscribed to and paid for them.

As such, these reporters have a vested interest and can’t be considered objective descriptions IMHO.

Well, not 100% anyways. Neither do I discount them wholely.

On the other side of that coin of vaunted increase, is the reliability and contact issue. I tried a couple years ago to contact some of these after market aficinadoes and from some was not even given so much as a simple reply email. Only Steve of Imperical, Mr. Jesse out of Michigan and Richard Kern have spoken to me on some CDP improvements. One was far beyond my ability and the others were left unrealized given the results of the conversations.

A couple others I got to that have a reputation for upgrading components struck me as quite biased and arrogant outright talking down dissmissively of various manufacturers designs relative to their own efforts. Consequently I gave them no further thought.

People are people I suppose and I guess one can’t expect everyone to be polite and objective. I believe one can expect contact and communication to be part and parcel aspects of doing business with them however… and in my exp, this last facet has shown itself to be less than satisfactory. I’ll also add I’ve had even less satisfaction with standard ongoing prominent makers of high end gear too. Quite possibly this vein is simply put, what one has to deal with in upscale audio concerns… and that is indeed a shame.

Nevertheless, I understand the constraints of gear makers which follow a more wide spread concern dissallowing a no holds barred effort… and the after market adjusters which affford the end user an opportunity for greater gain.

Fine. Good.

I would merely prefer to see more objective accounts, such as those written on R. Kerns and D Wrights and others’ efforts. There are quite a few online outlets for such info too for this to not be done.

I see no reason to keep any viable measured performance enhancements as more the ‘well kept secrets’ variety, rather than the openly reported.

Hope you can see the sense in my opinion here… hopefully more modders do too. I’d dearly love to hear objective accounts from any of these hot rodders less than full on mod results in the same online publications we all enjoy and use routinely for help in making our buying decisions. Of course there are those rags which will not publish such matters yet there are those which would.

Naturally as I mentioned also having units on hand which possess such alterations for home trials would surely gain for them far greater appeal.

Shedding such a brighter light on things would benefit both modder and moddee.

I mean given the choice in our leaps of faith, would not all of us prefer to just jump a school bus or two, rather than the Grand Canyon?

We ain’t all Evil Knevils, ya know.

…and isn’t “BETTER” a pretty vague word after all.

Blindjim,

Interesting thoughts. Perhaps modding is partly based on a desire to differentiate - to have something better than or at least different from the next guy. To enhance the feeling of ownership pride by an extra level of customization. Audible benefits may be quite small but kudos is high in the mind of the owner. This is where the value comes - like the guy with the Honda all kitted out with various customized items - he wants his Honda to stand out from the other Honda's - it isn't only about improving the performance.

Shadorne
Hmmm. I never even considered that part.

Your analogy is eirily on target for me though. I had several scooters and had two of them modified, one Honda and one Kawasaki. Both were done through primier after market companies that had gained their reps by virtue of consistent results at the race track. Both Yoshimura Racing and Russ Collins Engineering, (respectively) recieved a lot of press not only on their build alterations, but from actual trials from the two wheel mags.

These full on or partial refits, or even their kits for the DIY'ers, were not inexpensive. Neither were the results subjective. The ride and the feel indicated the improvement, but it was the clock that truly told the story in that arena.

cosmetic changes too were made but mostly they were an afterthought and not the main thrust. I've always been more about the dash than the splash.

Value of the end product was seldom ever a consideration then. It was strickly all about performance and reliability. Getting there first without blowing up.

I got there first a lot... and yeah... I blew up too... once or twice. The explosions though were my bad not the modders.

Mo press is needed. As subjective as it may wind up being spent, if it could gain some modicom of objectivity via folks who do not have some vested interest would go a long way to further fill the voids in the minds of the prospective buyers, and the pockets of the professionals doing the alterations. IMHO

Blindjim - I don't get the connection to motorcycle performance mods aimed at boosting torque and HP for faster lap times. Those are mods easily measured by a mechanical (objective) device. Humans are not objective. Music is emotional. You can chart brainwaves, pulse rate, skin temp, finger movements, etc. But what all that actually translates to an individual cannot be quantified or experienced by anyone else. If you wanted to find a parallel in motorcyle performance mods, I would say it is more akin to mods to suspension, chassis, rubber, frame geometry - those things that are specifically tailored to an individuals preferences and riding style. If you ride you know that dyno charts do not tell you the whole story about how a bike will take you around a course. Even with the closer metaphor I would still say that the reproduction of music in your home is an emotionally charged experience and cannot be quantified by charts and numbers.

Isn't there a book about this - something like "Zen and the Art of Audio Equipment Maintenance"?

Why mod?? I think it only makes sense when you have a well made and properly designed circuit where the manufacturer used sufficent components. Impovement can be made substituting better sonic quality components. Of course this is a topic with all kinds of qualifiers....but in my experience it has been a good one and well worth it.

Wave & Jacks

My point from the onset is or was to illuminate further the curious lack of objective press reviews on the outcomes of after market mods of audio gear.

To that end, both courses of action before the facts were for proposed advantages or increases to performance. One being a scooter, the latter our audio apparatus.

The bike upgrades had better representation via the industry press. The theme here is tantamount to the same province, "imcreasing performance or improvements" via the same sort of after market enhancements... albeit without the same publicized notoriety.

I subscribed to, bought, and utilized those speculative hot rod modifications costing me thousands then due primarily to the coverage the industry press printed about them, by and large.

My last statement pointed to just that item… mo’ press from non invested reviews would lessen the leap of faith required to pursue these measures.

Sorry if it wasn’t clearer.

I’m not haranguing audio modifiers here but merely pointing out a viably solid path to quell reticence, or eliminate it altogether from the minds of those seriously interested in attaining said levels of augmentation

As for myself, I’m thinking to ask for a couple grand or more with but a subjective promise up front could well be fortified still further by such credible monologues ….

Truth be told, I find it curious such accounts aren’t ongoing and at least the now and then sorts.

Blindjim - just to toss monkey wrench: Empirical Audio converts upsampling jitter rejecting DAC (Benchmark DAC1) to NOS non-jitter rejecting DAC (plus other improvements) -you might be sorry with cheap transport and cable. I'm pretty sure Steve from Empirical Audio advices customers but others might not. The point is that modds sometimes can change functionality/make it worse and customer has to be informed.

I even suspect that some mods might introduce a little of harmonic distortions that Benchmark is free of to make sound more lively and less sterile (less clean).

Kijanki

My modding plans surround my Bel Canto DAC3 initially, and following that operation, perhaps an Oppo refference DVD player I believe I'm going to get as I'm going to go largely with the PC as a source now.

But that's an interesting point too, as each time I
've replaced an item with some likewise yet different thing, there has always been the need to re-address some of the cabling... or footers... or tubes.

it's seldom been a plug and play event. I suspect once a thing is 'changed' it would be the same deal again.

BTW it was because of the press and my limited talks with the Benchmark makers that sent me away from previewing that piece altogether.

...curious lack of objective press reviews...

That is an oxymoron. Where have yous seen "objective" press reviews on anything? How could there be such a thing, a review being written by a human being is bound to be subjective simply by definition.

Your clarification on your hot rod metaphor still doesn't connect with me. You're talking about mods that can be measured on a dyno (which really don't tell the whole story about how they translate real-world anyway - 90 ft lbs of torque may not be a good thing if the suspension and chassis isn't up to it, or if you don't know how to handle it). Also, there is an emotional disconnect with those mods, or rather it's not the same kinds of emotions involved in the enjoyment of music and the reproduction thereof. Bottom line is that the numbers do not tell the whole story and "objective" is only a tiny part of the picture. In my case I tend to largely ignore such things beyond the general knowledge of the component in question. What would an "objective" review of a modification read like?

BTW it was because of the press and my limited talks with the Benchmark makers that sent me away from previewing that piece altogether

Blindjim,

Interesting comment based on our discussion about one of the primary drivers for purchase decisions is the desire for differentiated products. The comment says more about you than the sound quality of Benchmark DAC1.

Is it possible that you chose not to preview it because of all the near universal accolades in the press and from professionals combined with relatively modest price means that this is an EBGO product in audiophile terms. EBGO = Everybody's Got One! Therefore the attractiveness of owning such a product is rather limited if you have any inkling to own a differentiated (more expensive) or "better" product.

If you mod your Bel Canto then you can feel even more secure that very few people have what you have!

FWIW: My friend and I bought two identical scooters when I was 15. Same store. Same model - probably produced within minutes of eachother at the factory from the same batch of parts. We had a 30 minute run to school each day and followed eachother. The performance was as near identical as you can get. At one time we got interested in modding to try and eek out more speed from these 50 cc slow-peds. instead of buying two racing type mufflers (with the motorcycle dealer assurance of a significant speed boost) we bought one and tested it. Well is sure sounded different - his scooter had a deep satisfying Harley imitation sound (nothing like that patented Harley sound mind you) while mine remained with its standard millions of scooters on the road sound. Now here is the kicker - my friend took it back a week later and got a refund because it did not make one IOTA of difference to the speed or acceleration.

To end the story, although I have lost track of this old friend, he also became an engineer. It may have been a formative experience. Engineers tend to trust higher authority. Engineers tend to believe text books. Engineers distrust anecdotal evidence without controlled testing and documented measurements to back it up. For Benchmark to plaster their measurements all over a manual with each of their products sold is a very bold thing to do (as any engineer or anyone with manufacturing experience knows). By offering so much detail and information one is exposing oneself to a potential huge embarassement (if anyon eproves you are full of it) and expensive product recall due to lack of performance/conformance should your products not live up to the published specifications (one year to the next). This is very unusual in audio.

HI, I was in the same situation, months back, was using camridge 840CDP, and borrowed a KORA" hermes DAC, and used the cambridge as a transport, and couldnt' believe the diference in sound, was dramatic, sound stage expanded, and holographic imaging was in credible, cambridge is a highly regarded player but adding a tube DAC, made that much of a diference, my system is: belles350ref, von VR4's KOra Hermes DAC,sonic frontier,transport, and purist audio cables:

Somewhere in the archives from years ago you might find some comments I made in listening and comparing an ARC LS2B I had modded by GNSC. My friend had the sme modest preamp in stock form and we swapped out the tube when we compared. Same cables, same system. Bottom line in that case is that we both readily heard improvements in resolution and sounstage. I do not recall specifics. Is that "objective". Someone else listening may have. Heard no difference at all. Which viewpoint would you invest in?

As far as the scooter mod - bolt-on exhausts can easily be as much a detractor from performance as they could an improvement. Adding such a mod with no attention paid to adjusting the fuel delivery (rejetting, re-mapping, etc.) Is far more likely to result in a drop in performance. Some don't work regardless of tuning. I'd really wonder how sensitive one could be to a seat-of-pants judgement on the boost in power on a 50cc scooter of, perhaps 1 hp in some part of the throttle range?! That also could apply to audio mods: our aural memory is actually pretty limited. So how sensitive are you going to be to the changes in a modified player you haven't heard for three weeks or more?

I'd really wonder how sensitive one could be to a seat-of-pants judgement on the boost in power on a 50cc scooter of, perhaps 1 hp in some part of the throttle range?!

Exactly. That is why travelling the same route daily with two identical scooters helped - multiple opportunities to compare under a variety of conditions. FWIW: I had already pulled out the baffle piping in the muffler of my scooter (as all 15 year olds must do) - so perhaps I achieved the same effect as the "racing" muffler. Anyway - it was all good fun - perhaps that is the pleasure in it all - the journey rather than the outcome!

Jaxs2
“Where have yous seen "objective" press reviews on anything? How could there be such a thing, a review being written by a human being is bound to be subjective simply by definition. “

Not necessarily.

IF that truly is your take on info at large, I’ll not try to change your mind here and only offer that you may wish to reflect upon that perspective as it is a pretty dark one to have as a rule. IMHO.

We talk here about all sorts of components, matches and gains. Many are or should be stated in what they truly are… “degrees”… and pertinent to the application we have experienced them in for ourselves. Some don’t construct a rig via specs alone, some do. I have gone that way in the past and did’t care for the end results.

Objectivly speaking of course, subjectivity can not be measured by these same degrees. Noe can get a feel for it’s worth however.

Subjectivity isn’t a bad word. Nor does it undermine completely a persons remarks. It only says “IMHO” it is ‘one truth’ and not necessarily the truth or that it will be YOUR truth.

Therefore I tend to discount Raves a lot. Especially from those who have bought the ‘change’ or item. I feel those accounts although honestly intentiomned are perhaps prone to being tainted if only by their recent investment.. In them I look for comparative notes on likewise items from others of the same ilk or a contrasting one..

If the writer of the article has nothing to gain or lose by delivering an appraisal of a thing, then I have to feel it is more valid or dare I say it, objective, if for only that one aspect.

Idealistically speaking, and I am an idealist… objectivity is a key fundamental in professional journalism. A mainstay and a must or the whole of it should be discarded as it lacks the prerequisite catalyst of integrity ..

But it comes to this. Either we entirely dismiss reviews and/or the reviewer, or we take from them that which we deem true. As there has been much said about published articles and their ties to other than purely objective motivation. I’ve seen no real proof to support such notions, yet they continue to abound in the world of high end audio disscussions.

That dark belief structure will make for a lot less time perusing magazines and online articles regarding any item, let alone audio gear. Let’s simply ignore them all as they are all subjective, huh? Even though we only perceive them to be so.

Well, this might come as a shock but there is truth in reviews. Perhaps not the entire every word sort, but surely I’ve found via my own comparisons to having a reviewed item in house and looking back at the article., much of what was said I found to be valid.

…and just who’s truth are we talking about here… or is it ‘which’ truth?

Any differences I’ve noted were but minor ones, and I chalked that up to the application desparities.

Some of it if not all must however be taken in context. I’ve also found my ear connects more so with certain reviewers than with others. For instance, Much of Art Dudley’s accounts and muy own experiences with those items coincide. Also J Johnson seems more right than wrong to me in his accounts. On the other side I’m no where near John Atkinsons preffs for sound… or some others I don’t recall now.

We trust what we intuitively find agreeable. We discern the truth via experience if we are honest with ourselves about it..

Accounts from other’s of their exp does have some bearing on the things I will pursue. There are other factors, for sure. I’m not usually the trusting type at heart, though I’m getting to become more so that way as of late. Therefore I believe most people are honest. Given that I lend some credence to what they claim up front.

I give still more validity to something which has been supported by others experiences which further validate these initial claims of the mechanic, modifier, solderer, painter etc..

So should we ignore reviews wholely? Take them in part? Or trust them explicitly?

I’m somewhere in the middle ground there and that is why I’d seek colaberative or supportive assertions regarding performance enhancements or even the sort of performance being tendered…. Depending largely on the cost of said change too.

I think it is very uncomplicated …. For $200 sure I’ll take a shot…. For $2,000 I wanna know more.

I do not doubt one wit when the terms improved, increased performance, or just better are used. Not at all.

I just wanna know their percentages of…
.
It’s either use other’s info and experiences or adhere to strickly spec sheets, or remain glued to the “best guess” theory. During the seeking out or researching phase of advancing one’s stereo muscle.

Taking into account both the subjective and objective, has aidded me far more than it has denied me.

Or I’m the luckiest SOB on the planet as near 85% of my system was bought in the dark, sans audition.

Jax2
“Your clarification on your hot rod metaphor still doesn't connect with me. You're talking about mods that can be measured on a dyno (which really don't tell the whole story about how they translate real-world anyway”

Oil well.

BTW… I ran drags. Not road courses.

Jax2
“What would an "objective" review of a modification read like?”

That’s an easy one. “BLAH” “BLAH” “BLAH” “BLAH” “BLAH” OR IN OTHER WORDS,
Merely the facts. The differences from the base unit to those of the altered one via measurements.

Measurements however don’t always riddle out a puzzle.

Shadorne….
“Interesting comment based on our discussion about one of the primary drivers for purchase decisions is the desire for differentiated products. The comment says more about you than the sound quality of Benchmark DAC1. “

I never railed on the Benchmark. Infact if you go back and look through my posts you’ll find I added some info supportive of the Bench that was given me directly from the Bench folks about their technology which was unclear in that thread. This was a good while back too. Like 05 or 06.

I never said I bought into the notion of acquiring things merely due to their status or niche appeal. I simply can’t afford it. I am no longer trying to be unique in any respect.

Shadorne….
“If you mod your Bel Canto then you can feel even more secure that very few people have what you have!”

I pray I never get that vain and I can ill afford to allow my ego to make my decisions for me. IF I gave you that perspective somehow I regret it.

Shadorne….
“By offering so much detail and information one is exposing oneself to a potential huge embarassement (if anyon eproves you are full of it) and expensive product recall due to lack of performance/conformance should your products not live up to the published specifications (one year to the next). This is very unusual in audio. “

Well, who’s gonna go back and remeasure the specs anyways? Have you ever done that? Has anyone here ever taken the time and done a check of specs offered from any maker’s products? I seriously doubt it. If they did however, what would that one investigation change? Uh, I guess Stereophile will, gbut mostly when JA does that part much of it is beyond me anyhow. Those numbers too don’t always add up to the experience the product provides.

That last part gets me too…. As changes are implemented into a device by the designer (s) I’m guessing here, measurements are taken during those alterations…. Why should it then be so hard to provide them with each variation? I mean they got ‘em, they likely wrote ‘em down somewhere at some point… so it should be an easy task.

…but then the note “specifications subject to change without notice” will probably forgoe too much litigation.

In fact I’ll trust their numbers until I determine they are otherwise, suspect. I’ve found some that don’t add up in the brief time I’ve been back to this hobby via my own experiences…. Or at least seem not to..

I’m the champagne sort on a beer barrel budget. Add to that my visual prowess have and are waning significantly, the esthetic appeal most often is now a mere aside for me. I derive no such enjoyment from it. ‘Course I ain’t into owning banged up or shabby looking stuff too often either. Yet I’ll take a ding or dent if the job gets done in fine form.

What a thing does is of far more import to me than either it’s exclusivity or appearance. Price alone usually dictates the latter. For a premium dollar figure however, it needs be of supierior looks as well.

My ideas on erecting and affecting a system are fundamental enough I suspect. The result is the combination of the sum of it’s parts. All of it’s parts. Each item affording something more or something less, yet all of the facets being necessary though not as important at times, one to the other.

I tried 3 DACs in all. Apogee, Lavry, and my current BC D3. The Apogee was the briefest encounter, the dA 10 was lengthier and now the D3 being the longest.

My decision to keep the DAC3 came by what it served up to my systems needs and my concerns… and yes… my objectively subjective preffs. The DAC 3 is not the end all be all product. In fact I’m sure of that. For me to be truly satisfied some of the peripherals surrounding a device need to be in place and with the BC DAC3 I feel they weren’t. But I’ve kept it anyhow…. Soley on the basis of what it lends to my rigs and my own needs for audio satisfaction. It has what I deem to be obvious flaws but it’s shorcomings are outweighed by it’s attributes in my system. It was a disgruntled choice on a personal level, but a good one for my rig..

I said as much in my own personal account of it in the review I posted here on the ‘gone.

Jax2
“Somewhere in the archives from years ago you might find some comments I made in listening and comparing an ARC LS2B I had modded by GNSC. My friend had the sme modest preamp in stock form and we swapped out the tube when we compared. Same cables, same system. Bottom line in that case is that we both readily heard improvements in resolution and sounstage. I do not recall specifics. Is that "objective?".

Yep.

Jax2
“Someone else listening may have. Heard no difference at all. Which viewpoint would you invest in?”

2 for; 1 aginst. You win.

Objectivity is a significant principle of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.

Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief.

Your statement of two people determining some change has been made is objective as I believe the assertian and your own self to be true and honest..

The degree of that noted change if measureable would also be objective.

It becomes subjective when a said difference is derived from a perspective or singular view point than from actual measured indicators.

The context of the subjective information is then as important as is the application. Both terms can contain integrity, honesty, and truths. The subjective portion only needs contain the truths of the relayer of such perceived truths and has no need for actual measured indexes.

Consequently I would believe you were you to tell me a certain change had occurred given a certain practice had been employed. The extent of that difference would be what I would try best to apply to my own circumstance (s) given we spoke of it at any greater length thereafter. If no such a side bar was continued it would be lessend as to it’s import and likely forgotten as it could not be determined as pertinent to other applications. Yet to be realized.

I feel THE truth as important an ingredient as is YOUR truth or my own.

Neither is more or less valid… for it remains in the context and application what truth is found there…. That’s the REAL truth. As at that time it is applicable purely and solely in that milieu.

Ascertaining the increment of change beforehand is the ambiguity, interest and allure for the audio devotee. I just think that with greater acclaim, publicity, and press of these provided increments it would be an easier task to make a decision whether or not to ante up for them. In our own ways we make calls on the next step (s) we will take to improve or change our compliment of devices & accessories. This is how I do it that’s all.

For a premium dollar figure however, it needs be of superior looks as well.

Blindjim,

Your reply sounded superbly utilitarian and pragmatic until you let that slip in! LOL aesthetics is important after all! I 'll admit I am just as guilty of that as the next guy ;-)

Shadorne
well, OK, it is... it's just not the very first thing.

I just had to validate performance is the higher priority for me always.

With all my junk residing in an adjacent room, only the loudspeakers get much face time. They need to be unblemished of course... or have unobtrusive shortcomings.

The more I think about it I think I am more prone to pick of the same items being sold, the one with the less usage over the one with the better appearance though. Usually.

It would come down to just how much savings I could get off the normal sale price and just how big, or what type of a descrepency it was.

I believe that's a pretty natural way of making a buying decision. But trust me here on this, I really don't get a kick out of simply looking at any of my gear except for one thing.... that 120 DIY HT screen when watching TV or DVDs.

That sole item has been for me a real blessing... despite the crap I went through to get it all up and running... and it ain't even tweaked in yet.

I do get a little kick out of what others say when I let them see the Thor and the rest of the tube gear, sometimes though as predominately they all think it's antiques. The Thor gets the most acclaim as a rule... with the usual line of "What in the world is that thing?"

I just tell 'em it's a pretty nice used car, or a long weekend in Hawaii.

Your reply sounded superbly utilitarian and pragmatic until you let that slip in! LOL aesthetics is important after all! I 'll admit I am just as guilty of that as the next guy ;-)

I guess I ain't "the next guy": I don't give a tinker's cuss what the thing looks like if it performs well. This is ironic considering I'm in the visual arts and am a very visual person. It's all about whatever serves the music for me. If it happens to be ugly I'll put it behind cabinet doors (most of my system is - though I'm sure many would consider those things beautiful). Most of what I see in audio design is pretty boring visually as far as I'm concerned - most of what others here consider beautiful just looks like yet another variation on billet boxes with blue lights. The only designer I'd consider an exception to that is Electronluv, but I cannot afford Josh's stuff. If I could, it would be out for all to see.

FWIW - Alex Peychev of APL HiFi is NOT a "modder" in the sense of the others mentioned above. He guts the component, save for the transport and display connections, etc. and replaces everything with his OWN DESIGNS - clock, different and more DACS from AKM, output stage, etc. That's what he did with my Denon 3910 and what he does with the Esoteric transports. This is a very important distinction and is in fact exactly what DOES separate him from the "modders".

My 3910 bears NO sonic relation to what it used to sound like prior to Alex's rebuild - it is totally different machine, but in the same box and with the same crappy transport.(nobody's perfect...)

As far as Alex being AWOL, he should be back this weekend and explained his absence on the APL HiFi forum several weeks ago. A number of us have also received e-mails from him about ongoing projects.

He will be building a separate DAC for myself and probably a number of others, for many of the reasons stated above.

My 3910 bears NO sonic relation to what it used to sound like prior to Alex's rebuild - it is totally different machine, but in the same box and with the same crappy transport.(nobody's perfect...)

A good friend had an APL 3910. I spent a couple of days at his place listening to various music I was very familiar with. It sounded great. I never heard a stock unit, but it sure didn't sound like any $1k stock player I've ever heard.

As far as Alex being AWOL, he should be back this weekend and explained his absence on the APL HiFi forum several weeks ago. A number of us have also received e-mails from him about ongoing projects.

Glad to hear it. Since most folks here are not likely on the APL forum why don't you share his post here (or the gist of it). There have been a few posts on A'gon and AA that indicated there were folks who had been waiting for their modified players for quite some time, and that his customer relations person had to leave for health reasons. Good to hear he's on his way back - seems like he's very talented at what he does.