Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Dempsey  Respectfully, I don't see how that can be possible, assuming the objective aspect of the above. |
I may have worded that one too snappy to be meaningful, sorry.
What I mean is that in the absence of a perfect converter, and assuming that several different converters are roughly similarly accurate (however you choose to measure/quantify that) or differences are very small, perception of accuracy/deviation will likely depend on what kind of change/difference/distortion you can best tolerate.
Give the samples a listen if you have the time and then read what people are writing about them in this thread, I think you'll find it quite interesting. Everyone has their very own angle on the different shortcomings.
Quote:
|
What might be interesting is multiple D-A-D-A-D-A conversions of each to show any cumulative shortcomings (against the source).
|
Can do if someone pays me for the time
Seriously though, I think it would indeed be interesting for education/entertainment. However, for practical considerations, if I can hear the difference and 'grasp' and identify the nature of the change from a 1x conversion, then that's the basis I want to make my choice of converter on. If I can't reliably identify the difference, then I'm OK with making a random choice. Or rather, then I'd choose the one with the best features, the cheapest or prettiest
Which is the prettiest comverter by the way?
PS: In case you missed it, DC linked a 60x generation conversion run (one converter only) in
Wouldn't converting twice harm the signal?