[Thenewguy007]

Please don't avoid the simple question how nos of cd quality in holo may deals with noise and distortion of nos filter ?

Might want to check out the Stereophile review of it, where they named it product of the year.
Or the ASR/SBAF measurement threads where they said it was one of the best measuring DACs available.

 

[rkt31]

Might want to check out the Stereophile review of it, where they named it product of the year.
Or the ASR/SBAF measurement threads where they said it was one of the best measuring DACs available.

Again it's the matter of "nos mode " for which op is praising it. If you have anything of worth for it's nos setting,then please post.

 

[rkt31]

Might want to check out the Stereophile review of it, where they named it product of the year.
Or the ASR/SBAF measurement threads where they said it was one of the best measuring DACs available.

If you are about measurements in os mode , then many ds dacs will measure even better than this.

 

[GoldenSound]

If you are about measurements in os mode , then many ds dacs will measure even better than this.

Im not sure what you mean by "nos distortion"
The measurements on asr and sbaf etc were taken in NOS mode. What distortion??
https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/kte-may-technical-measurements.8933/

Just because NOS R2R dacs in the past didn't measure too well, this was due to the difficulties of making an R2R ladder that is accurate to a high bit depth, not because they were running NOS. Stuff like the AGD R2R dacs measured poorly as did many R2R IC's. But nowadays there are several choices for R2R dacs that perform very well.

If you're talking about ALIASING, which is something quite different....
The holo may uses an analog reconstruction design which combats aliasing whilst retaining NOS impulse response. Exactly how they've achieved this they've not said. But the results speak for themselves subjectively and objectively.
Though its also up for debate as to how exactly aliasing impacts things audibly even if you do nothing to combat it, such as the denafrips dacs (which also measure quite well, and subjectively are widely loved).

Additionally, R2R dacs do not need noise shaping like DS dacs do. You CAN certainly use OS+noise shaping on an R2R dac and there can be benefits to doing so, but it is not "required" like on a DS dac. R2R dacs do not generate switching noise, noise shaping to filter out artefacts from oversampling isn't needed if you aren't oversampling.

If you want to argue about whether or not NOS/R2R dacs are any good, there are other threads to do that. But it might be worthwhile learning a bit more about the topologies you're laughing about first.

In any case, this thread was intended to mostly be talking about the chord stuff, I would appreciate it if you could avoid cluttering it with "haha dac bad" posts

 

[Sajid Amit]

We are listening to music, why the hell we need to know that? Have you tried May yet?

He clearly hasn’t. But the abundance of laughter emojis do compensate, don’t you think?

 

[Sajid Amit]

Might want to check out the Stereophile review of it, where they named it product of the year.
Or the ASR/SBAF measurement threads where they said it was one of the best measuring DACs available.

Or read Herb Reichert’s review of the May DAC. It is a beautiful review. Worth reading if you like audio, whether the May sounds interesting to you, or not.

https://www.stereophile.com/content...oloaudio-may-da-processor-intona-usb-isolator

 

[rkt31]

He clearly hasn’t. But the abundance of laughter emojis do compensate, don’t you think?

Ok mr dac expert have you seen nos cd quality file 1khz Sine wave test of holo may ? Better to have some tests results in nos mode specially with cd quality files instead of subjective impressions. Btw does ringing artifacts have also any measurements ?

 

[miketlse]

Just because NOS R2R dacs in the past didn't measure too well, this was due to the difficulties of making an R2R ladder that is accurate to a high bit depth, not because they were running NOS. Stuff like the AGD R2R dacs measured poorly as did many R2R IC's. But nowadays there are several choices for R2R dacs that perform very well.

If you're talking about ALIASING, which is something quite different....
The holo may uses an analog reconstruction design which combats aliasing whilst retaining NOS impulse response. Exactly how they've achieved this they've not said. But the results speak for themselves subjectively and objectively. You won't convince me by sticking to subjective or objective statements. Where is your quantitative evidence?

Though its also up for debate as to how exactly aliasing impacts things audibly even if you do nothing to combat it, such as the denafrips dacs (which also measure quite well, and subjectively are widely loved). There are plenty of posts by Rob Watts in the Chord threads, explaining the impact of aliasing on the accuracy of music transients, which then impact the perception of where an instrument is located in the sound stage.

Additionally, R2R dacs do not need noise shaping like DS dacs do. You CAN certainly use OS+noise shaping on an R2R dac and there can be benefits to doing so, but it is not "required" like on a DS dac. R2R dacs do not generate switching noise, noise shaping to filter out artefacts from oversampling isn't needed if you aren't oversampling.

If you want to argue about whether or not NOS/R2R dacs are any good, there are other threads to do that. But it might be worthwhile learning a bit more about the topologies you're laughing about first.

In any case, this thread was intended to mostly be talking about the chord stuff, I would appreciate it if you could avoid cluttering it with "haha dac bad" posts

 

[Bhk1004]

Ok mr dac expert have you seen nos cd quality file 1khz Sine wave test of holo may ? Better to have some tests results in nos mode specially with cd quality files instead of subjective impressions. Btw does ringing artifacts have also any measurements ?

I just have to ask. Do you actually listen to Sine Waves? So many people their entire audio life is built around sine wave measurements but i really dont find it real world relevant. but hey what do i know. im not mr dac expert.

 

[miketlse]

Or read Herb Reichert’s review of the May DAC. It is a beautiful review. Worth reading if you like audio, whether the May sounds interesting to you, or not.

https://www.stereophile.com/content...oloaudio-may-da-processor-intona-usb-isolator

I have read that review, but cannot understand why you think it is 'beautiful'?
It does read like much of it was copied/pasted from a press release.

It is clear that Reichert likes to eulogise about the beauty of the components.
This level of padding, ensures that he does not need to list the important details, such as his test measurements, or what music tracks he used to test the sound reproduction.
It is a classic advertising strategy.

He does spend two paragraphs asking a rhetorical question, and then providing two ambiguous answers.

"However, a more astute DAC consumer would have noticed that, typically, passive R–2R DACs lean heavily on specialty parts options while sigma-delta and FPGA DACs do not. Why do you think that is?"

• passive R–2R DACs lean heavily on specialty parts options
  • provides the veneer of expertise
  • avoids the need to understand maths in enough depth, to code Shannons theory into algorithms.
  • Cannot avoid the fact that such an analog design philosophy, will always be limited to the achievable manufacturing tolerances, for those analog parts
• sigma-delta and FPGA DACs do not.
  • provides the veneer of expertise
  • needs to understand maths in enough depth, to code Shannons theory into algorithms.
  • Cannot avoid the fact that such a digital design philosophy, will always be limited by the accuracy with which the implementation of the coded algorithms, align with Shannons theory. Of course there are plenty of instances where poor implementations, result in aliasing etc, which destroys the perception of depth in the reproduced music.

Consider this: Maybe, when the effects of oversampling, format conversion, interpolation, active signal processing, and reconstruction filters are minimized or eliminated, the sonic character of passive parts becomes easier to recognize, like low-level detail emerging from a lowered noise floor.

Reichert seems to be planting his flag firmly in the 'analog is for discerning customers', 'digital is for non-discerning customers' camp

 

[rkt31]

I just have to ask. Do you actually listen to Sine Waves? So many people their entire audio life is built around sine wave measurements but i really dont find it real world relevant. but hey what do i know. im not mr dac expert.

So you mean a dac which measures poor in nos mode for 1khz or even 32 tones will magically sound better for music and dac which measures better for 32 tone test will magically somehow sound poor with music . Btw music is not actually composed of single sine waves but mBy such waves so 32 tone test should get close to real life situations. Also since when music is composed of single impulse to which the op is referring repeatedly for ringing artifacts when there is no test to show ringing artifacts.

 

[Bhk1004]

So you mean a dac which measures poor in nos mode for 1khz or even 32 tones will magically sound better for music and dac which measures better for 32 tone test will magically somehow sound poor with music . Btw music is not actually composed of single sine waves but mBy such waves so 32 tone test should get close to real life situations. Also since when music is composed of single impulse to which the op is referring repeatedly for ringing artifacts when there is no test to show ringing artifacts.

Can you link these poor measurements? Everything I've seen on the may dac has actually been pretty great measurements.

And yes I've had much more pleasant music experiences with poorly measuring r2r dacs than I've had with amazing measuring ds dacs. Not saying 1 is right or wrong, you are welcome to go with whatever makes you happiest, but as I said earlier, amazing measurements does not correlate to amazing musical experiences for me. Maybe my ears are broken.

 

[rkt31]

Im not sure what you mean by "nos distortion"
The measurements on asr and sbaf etc were taken in NOS mode. What distortion??
https://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/kte-may-technical-measurements.8933/

Just because NOS R2R dacs in the past didn't measure too well, this was due to the difficulties of making an R2R ladder that is accurate to a high bit depth, not because they were running NOS. Stuff like the AGD R2R dacs measured poorly as did many R2R IC's. But nowadays there are several choices for R2R dacs that perform very well.

If you're talking about ALIASING, which is something quite different....
The holo may uses an analog reconstruction design which combats aliasing whilst retaining NOS impulse response. Exactly how they've achieved this they've not said. But the results speak for themselves subjectively and objectively.
Though its also up for debate as to how exactly aliasing impacts things audibly even if you do nothing to combat it, such as the denafrips dacs (which also measure quite well, and subjectively are widely loved).

Additionally, R2R dacs do not need noise shaping like DS dacs do. You CAN certainly use OS+noise shaping on an R2R dac and there can be benefits to doing so, but it is not "required" like on a DS dac. R2R dacs do not generate switching noise, noise shaping to filter out artefacts from oversampling isn't needed if you aren't oversampling.

If you want to argue about whether or not NOS/R2R dacs are any good, there are other threads to do that. But it might be worthwhile learning a bit more about the topologies you're laughing about first.

In any case, this thread was intended to mostly be talking about the chord stuff, I would appreciate it if you could avoid cluttering it with "haha dac bad" posts

Wow, what a claim. R2r dacs don't need noise shaping. Are all r2r nos ? If not then how os is done without noise shaping and dither ? Do they simply truncate the last bits after oversampled. Also at least now you have agreed that nos have inherent problems of aliasing. Now since you have posted so much here I presume that you understand that for a cd quality files removing aliasing in nos is practically impossible. Analog filtering has even more problems. Here also you have conveniently avoided it by saying you don't know how holo does it. ps- If noise shaping is so bad then you shouldn't have used hq player which even has 15th order noise shaping.

 

[rkt31]

Can you link these poor measurements? Everything I've seen on the may dac has actually been pretty great measurements.

And yes I've had much more pleasant music experiences with poorly measuring r2r dacs than I've had with amazing measuring ds dacs. Not saying 1 is right or wrong, you are welcome to go with whatever makes you happiest, but as I said earlier, amazing measurements does not correlate to amazing musical experiences for me. Maybe my ears are broken.

Can you link good measurements of holo in nos mode for 1khz tone or 32 tone.

 

[GoldenSound]

So you mean a dac which measures poor in nos mode for 1khz or even 32 tones will magically sound better for music and dac which measures better for 32 tone test will magically somehow sound poor with music . Btw music is not actually composed of single sine waves but mBy such waves so 32 tone test should get close to real life situations. Also since when music is composed of single impulse to which the op is referring repeatedly for ringing artifacts when there is no test to show ringing artifacts.

1) it doesn't measure poorly in nos mode. That's the point. Have a look at the multiple third party measurements available from various sources.

2) impulse response describes the filter design and how it will affect music and sequential samples.
And to reiterate: lack of oversampling does not mean a lack of reconstruction. You can do reconstruction in the analog domain with an r2r dac. And yes, this then shifts the question of performance away from maths and more onto the design and quality of Components used for that reconstruction. But again, as shown by various measurements, the may performs exceptionally in just about every metric.

Im not saying that nos vs os is better. They are simply different. (as said in the first post). Just as chords filter design approach is different from other manufacturers.

There are plenty of resources you can look at to see how ringing and phase shift affect continuous waveforms. Archimago has a decent article on it.