Stan's New Dac - any reviews yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tfarney

MHO differs, I suppose. I don't particularly believe in PRaT, or the musicality of kit. Transformations in rhythm, pace and emotional connection with the listener are, in my view, the territory of musicians, not chips and valves,

---

I am afraid that you are wrong, but as I am not aware of what other engineers do in the design of their circuits in order to get better PRaT, I can't divulge how I do it in mine. It does require some extra effort to get an acceptable level of PRaT.
You are always welcome to visit me and listen to the reproduction of two test rigs that I have set up. They look identical, but within 1 minute listening to each of them, you can clearly pick up the difference in PRaT from them.

Hi Tim,

Quote:

---

MHO differs, I suppose. I don't particularly believe in PRaT, or the musicality of kit. Transformations in rhythm, pace and emotional connection with the listener are, in my view, the territory of musicians, not chips and valves, so I look for electronics that are as transparent as possible, and transducers that please my ears.

---

The simple fact is that no information lost at source can ever be retrieved further down the chain by transducers or anything else, so I would contend with kbuech's view - and of course the fact that DACs sound different (not to mention T/Ts) proves that there's something valuable to be lost.

However, I'm not saying that a staunchly "source first" approach is the most logical either as the thinking is a bit too simplistic. As ever in audio, it's the absolutist approaches of any type that usually get it wrong. 'Right' is usually found somewhere in the middle.

Brian,

I think you'll find that the LP12 was a flawed design from the beginning. Ivor admitted that if he could go back he would have designed a turntable with a direct-drive mechanism as it is more accurate. The Townshend Rock with fluid damping trough you refer to though is a superb example of turntable design and was years ahead of its time. I use a similar, although rather less elaborate system, on my T/T.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

The Townshend Rock with fluid damping trough . . . is a superb example of turntable design and was years ahead of its time.

---

I am glad my ears did not deceive me. I was not taking that much interest, as my affections had already transferred to CD. At the time I remember thinking that rigidity must the the answer to turntable/arm design - they must be as solid as the cutting lathe, or data will be lost.

Nope, you've obviously got good ears! :)

The principles you describe are fundamental to accurate vinyl replay.

Anyway, I just popped in briefly to make a few points. This is the digital section of the forum so I won't intrude any further with my analogue-orientated ramblings.

Carry on, chaps.

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sensimilia

I am afraid that you are wrong, but as I am not aware of what other engineers do in the design of their circuits in order to get better PRaT, I can't divulge how I do it in mine. It does require some extra effort to get an acceptable level of PRaT.
You are always welcome to visit me and listen to the reproduction of two test rigs that I have set up. They look identical, but within 1 minute listening to each of them, you can clearly pick up the difference in PRaT from them.

---

Stan, I suspect this is a matter of semantics more than disagreement. I believe in transient response. I believe in the ability of components to make the attack of instruments more immediate or not. But when people on boards speak of electronic components actually changing the pace, rhythm and timing of the music, as if that term were meant to be used literally, I believe they take it way too far. 128kbps files, a cheap mp3 player and Radio Shack earbuds do not change the timing of the performance. An old belt drive table could, but I don't think that's what we're talking about here.

Tim

I'm with you Tim. The technology can destroy the music, but it cannot create it. Only musicians can do that. You can have a musical performance that is technically very accurate, but lacks "soul": you can have a much less accomplished performance where the innate musicality of a developing musician is clearly struggling to get out.

Listen to the Young Musician of the Year Competition. Many times I have heard young pianists from Specialist Music schools (it seems to me most evident with pianists). They have been heavily drilled by their teachers, and their technical performance is most impressive, yet they lack the musical and emotional maturity to project themselves in and through the score. Whilst remaining impressive, the performance lacks conviction, and ultimately fails. Two or three years on they may well be different.

The technology cannot even enhance the musicality of the performance, though in some types of music an artful recording engineer can make the best of it. The record/replay chain in itself cannot, as I said add value, though it can surely wreck the music.

Quote:

---

The simple fact is that no information lost at source can ever be retrieved further down the chain by transducers or anything else

---

Of course. And of course that is very different from an electronic component changing the timing of a musical performance.

Tim

I can reference a number of "eureka moments".

One in a HiFi shop a number of years ago - Quad Electrostatics and Cello Music. Before the music started I heard the resonance of the cello as the cellist picked it up. Aha! That's just how it is.

And more recently with Stan's DAC - just plugged it in - piano music off the Virgin Cable box at 128Kb/s MP2 - within two or three bars I had decided I was keeping the box. Listening to pno music showed great accuracy at the end of a movement as the pianist let the final chord die with the dampers off.

Notice in both cases I was making a judgement on the edges of the musical sounds, based on a knowlege of what the authentic instrument sounded like.

In both cases they are good technical reasons for my appreciation of the accuracy.

One day I will have a pair of electrostatics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tfarney

Of course. And of course that is very different from an electronic component changing the timing of a musical performance.

Tim

---

I think Stan will have a different view on this, so I'll let him answer if he has time. I could say more, but I'll save it for later.

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

I think Stan will have a different view on this, so I'll let him answer if he has time. I could say more, but I'll save it for later.

Marco.

---

Marco, I can tune an instrument to a professional strobe tuner, then put on a digital source, any digital source, from the cheapest mp3 player up, and play along, in perfect tune (well, as perfect as my imperfect musical instruments get), every time.

Not only is the timing of the music unchanged, the smallest nuance of pitch - the subtlest measure of accurate time reproduction of music - is audibly unchanged. Don't take my word for it. Ask any guitarist of an age to have played along with records and tape how that experience changed with CD. Don't even make it a leading question. You will get the same answer.

This is, as I said to Stan, a semantic disagreement, not a technical one. I clearly don't understand what audiophiles mean by pace, rhythm and timing, because they clearly cannot mean that electronics change the pace, rhythm and timing of the actual musical performance. Perhaps Stan can explain it to me.

Tim