1 Like
Thought this was quite interesting !!!
Interested in your thoughts on the subject
BorisM,
Thank you.
I think that since you didnāt contradict me, SINAD is measured with a 1kHz sine wave. You are correct that Amirās charts would indeed pick up anomalies either above or below the 1kHz but for people just looking at a list of devices with the SINAD listed that number may not be very helpful because it covers so little. I also agree that even inexpensive devices today are pretty flat in frequency response at least, while perhaps not so even in distortion. Terry, at Pursuit Perfect System says that the RD 160 has a āsmiley faceā frequency response, i.e., emphasis on highs and lows. This would be an example where its SINAD albeit still rather low, may overstate its actual SINAD.
You are most certainly correct that given my tinnitus (not to mention the floaters in my eyes) Iām wasting my money on a lot of good gear.
StandardModel
.
Youāre welcome.
Amir does have some write-ups as to what he measures and why. Like for example how he measures amps at 5W instead of more common 1W. And why he includes a lot of other measurements, including SINAD vs power, FR etc.
That said, SINAD, in addition to being a very good shortcut to estimating the sound quality, is a good measure of engineering quality. One could certainly design a DAC with good SINAD but some very odd FR butā¦ are you aware of any?
That is presented in measurements though. Apart from $5 no-name DACs from Temu, you are far more likely to get uneven (and high) distortion in an expensive āaudiophileā DAC. Thereās a fancy BS Audio one that is incapable of reproducing a sinewave as anything looking like a sinewaveā¦
Could be, which just makes it an even worse option in my opinion. If I want to adjust FR, I will use proper equalization to do it the way I needā¦
Not necessarily wasting. A well-built, good-looking, ergonomic device is woeth something just for that. If you like the full-front screen, a Rose (software issues aside) might be worth the premium over EverSolo or something.
However we need to agree (or agree to disagree) on whether something like a DAC exists first of all to reproduce the signal accurately. This isnāt 1970s whene we did not have any reasonable ways to adjust the signal to work with the speakers/room combination, and the best you could do was plugging a graphic equalizer in your playback chain. Or pick devices that would somewhat cancel each otherās deficiencies out. Today we can correct a lot (not everything, but a lot) in DSP with practically no loss in resolution. But if your DAC is adding extra distortion, you canāt get rid of it afterwards. Somewhat non-linear FR is unlikely to result in a very destructive loss of data, but IMHO itās still better to have a flat (and less distorting) DAC, especially when it can cost 1/10th the price, and alter the FR precisely the way you want in the digital domain.
Increase your hydration to.help the floaters.Check it out! 
BorisM,
Here is what Amir says abuot SINAD. It seems to me that he is saying that a good SINAD number is an indication of a good design and sine qua non but it is not a complete measurement. Assuming he is correct it could very well be possible to differentiate between two devices with the same SINAD.
"SINAD or THD+N is not perceptually correlated measure. So it is hard to make an argument for audibility of any value regardless of conditions selected. You can have two amps with identical SINAD and one may have audible distortion and the other not.
The reason to measure SINAD is to detect engineering excellence as a general measure."
StandardModel
Yes, indeed, and I think I touched on that above. SINAD combines noise and distortion in a single number, so devices with identical measurement can have widely different components of it, as long as they add up the same.
BUT, as weāve been over before, there are limits to audibility. You wonāt hear any noise thatās at -120dB (not in any realistic way that does not lead to permanent hearing loss and blown speakers anyway), and the same goes for distortion. So anything where those numbers are low enough (or, same thing, SINAD is high enough) there is no audible distortion or noise to worry about, even if precise measurements show that output is different.
If it is bad enough, then sure, devices with same SINAD would sound different. Whether it sounds good to any particular person is another question entirely. E.g. a PowerNODE (I got a couple for non-critical areas) has a SINAD of 76 IIRC. It sounds quite inoffensive, but you could tell it apart from something transparent. For something better measuringā¦ I will believe it when I see it.
Amir is a clown that tests components on headphone equipment , rather than a true 2 channel speaker system. For the most part, he should be ignored if he canāt even understand that difference in testing methodology. In my opinion, Amir doesnāt even have a decent set of speakers , if he did, he would know topping is not adequate to drive them. Hes a manchild spreading false information.
I have to say, buttcycle does a great job trolling as a stereotypical audiophool. Thereās no way a real person could be this stupid in real life!
Bicycle,
My RD 160 has arrived. Now Iāll listen for myself and report what I hear. Iāll keep my LAiV Harmony because I like the sound regardless. Iāll also keep the RD 160 because Iām a fanboy of HiFi Rose and a sucker for bling and I like the idea of a matched pair.
StandardModel
1 Like
Hi StandardModel,
Any update regarding the new RD160 ?
Bustahip.
More details soon.
Man is it heavy! Those three transformers must weigh a lot.
Iām experimenting with the various inputs to see if they sound differently.
As you probably know, the ASR people will eat you if you pay more than $1k for a DAC as āseen one seen them allā, in the āAll the girls look alike.ā syndrome. Iām comparing it to my LAiV Harmony DAC.
Just for fun I bought a FiiO s19 with the same pair of AKM DAC chips as are used in the RD160 for my second listening system. I want to see if the same DAC chips sound any differently in a $5k DAC vs a $1k DAC.
I have seen very, very little in the print media about this DAC and canāt figure out why.
I will report back soon.
StandardModel
Iād be very interested in your findings, I think the 160 is a great piece of kit.
Thanks for getting back to meā¦ good luck.
Bustahip,
Iām due to replace my Golden Ear Reference speakers with Popori electrostatics this week. Iām hopeful that this will give me more accurate speakers-at least they better be at the price differential. You know the old joke -an old man says to his young wife, āDonāt sell my audio equipment for what I told you I paid for it.ā Iāll do the really critical listening then.
For now I can say that Iām a big fan of two attributes of the LAiV DAC. Sound stage and warmth. Both attributes are better with the RD160. Not a huge amount but definitely better. Wider and taller with depth about the same. Also, the space in between instruments is more silent and the instruments are more precisely located than with the LAiV. I was afraid of the Delta Sigma harshness in the AKM chips and also sibilance both of which I hate. Neither are present with the LAiV or the RD160.
Obviously Iām not an audio expert, Iām just saying what appeals to me. YMMV.
StandardModel
Hi StandardModel,
Which version of firmware are you using for the RD160 ?
I am using version 1.20 which the unit came with. I am interested if there are any differences between 1.20 and the latest version 1.24. I have been advised by other members on the forum that there is no difference sonically, but have also been told 1.24 has changed the filters slightly.
I am hesitant to change the firmware as I am concerned I will loose the sound I now haveā¦
@ROSEHAN could you please explain the difference between RD160 versions 1.20 and 1.24, thank you
Bustahip,
I need help. How do you access a menu that tells you what software version you have on the RD 160?
I donāt know how to do it.
StandardModel
Hi @StandardModel,
to check the software version on your RD160, just press the Menu button on the remote control. Then navigate to System Version Information ā it will show you all the relevant firmware details.
Hope this helps!
Best regards,
Philipp
1 Like
Hi StandardModel,
Exactly as Philsisch instructions.
Another piece of info that needs to be updated in the owners manual !!!
Philipp,
Thanks. That did the trick. Good directions.
I now know I have version CPU: v 1.2 and MCU: 1.0.1
I am upgrading now.
Thanks for your valuable help.
StandardModel