Quote:
Originally Posted by philip  So you'll choose a not so transparent DAC over a transparent one just 'cause you got a incorrect monitoring system? Interesting... |
Really? What's your definition of "incorrect"? Not one SINGLE component of a monitor chain is ever perfectly CORRECT! You have to consider your monitor chain and room acoustics as a SYSTEM. Changing any one component affects the total sound quality.
I didn't say that one DAC is necessarily more "transparent" than the other. It's an interesting semantic exercise, but would you kick an Avocet DAC out of bed just because you bought a Lavry Black? Can't there be two devices which sound different, but both get the rating of "transparent"? I know that by definition "transparent" means "has no effect on the sound". But the fact is that every DAC has an effect on the sound, in different ways. And the way to get the most out of that DAC is to marry it with associated components that help to get the most out of it.
This includes: jitter, master clock, DAC, analog line amplifiers, interconnects, power amplifier, loudspeaker cable, loudspeakers, room, and room treatment.
It's also true that a certain amount of harmonic distortion may sound better and more "transparent" than vanishingly low THD. Because other components in the chain may be delivering excess of IM distortion or high order harmonics which sounds better when masked by slightly greater lower HD. You'd think: Well, I won't buy something that produces more than x percent of THD.
For example, for whatever reason I can't tolerate a Bryston amp in my system. The speakers reveal the graininess in it. Does this mean that a Bryston is not a transparent amp? Not true, in some other systems, a Bryston can sound fantastic and both systems can be of high quality (transparent) mastering grade if you pick the right complementary components.
So, what's incorrect about balancing the total system till it is correct! It's holistic and MUST be considered in toto. Have I made my point?
BK