A DAC that crushes price vs. performance ratio

Charles,
I know you too well...I know that you weren't trying to discourage me. As I said; I am being a little lazy and impractical. 
Many years ago now, John Rutan introduced me to my first AN DAC, the Zero something, can't remember exactly, but it was their lowest model and it had the miniature tubes that were soldered in. It was a revelation and I kept it for years. When I was finally ready, I had the ANK 2.1 built for me and again, it was a happy revelation. You are correct clio09, it is a good piece. I know of course, and I can sometimes imagine while listening, that there is room for improvement, but it is so natural and believable to my ears that I know the designer was on the right track. I'm sure that I would probably be happy with several of these fine DACs, but I'd better slow down and think a bit.   

roxy54 said..."If you’re an ordinary guy, like myself, and not an electrical engineer, this can really become confusing and intimidating. This is something that we didn’t have to deal with way back when. I was reading a review of a DAC last night, and I was honestly lost with 90% of the explanation of the piece technically."

I agree...I think when there is not much else to say about a product under review..technobabble is used for fill. It can be helpful at times, but does take away from the actual point of reading a good review...which should be more about 'quality of sound' first and jargon latter..if at all.

Reviewers always amaze me with how much manufacturer’s text they use in their reviews. I’m sure a lot is justified, such as essential product features. But their borrowed texted often extends well beyond that basic info. 

☝🏻☝🏻And what I said above doesn’t really apply to this review. The only bit of confusion was the usage of “NOS” for describing both the DAC chips and the 6922 tube. But it’s clear what’s meant from context. 😂😂