breakthrough? (correcting phase error in DAC)

[cat6man]

the latest absolute sound mentions a new Soulution DAC with 'phase correction' that is the new BREAKTHROUGH paradigm for digital playback.
supposedly, on/off tests for the soulution DAC with and without 'phase correction' is "insert your favorite term for &*! unbelievable here".

any ideas what this is supposed to be?
what phase error? applies to all DACs in theory, just to sigma-delta or R2R?

is phase the new jitter?

 

[edorr]

the latest absolute sound mentions a new Soulution DAC with 'phase correction' that is the new BREAKTHROUGH paradigm for digital playback.
supposedly, on/off tests for the soulution DAC with and without 'phase correction' is "insert your favorite term for &*! unbelievable here".

any ideas what this is supposed to be?
what phase error? applies to all DACs in theory, just to sigma-delta or R2R?

is phase the new jitter?

This reminds me of my days at Gartner. FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), is what drives this industry (i.e. fear of missing out on the latest "breakthrough" innovation).

 

[Don Hills]

This reminds me of my days at Gartner. FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), is what drives this industry (i.e. fear of missing out on the latest "breakthrough" innovation).

aka FOMO...

 

[Whatmore]

aka FOMO...

Is that what Mckinsey calls it

 

[Ken Newton]

I have no idea if this is what Souloution is referring to, but from time to time, I've seen the argument made that sampling during A/D conversion inherently applies a phase shift to the digitized waveform. As I recall, it's been suggested,that this phase shift stems from the sampling interval, or from half the sampling interval (I don't recall which), and how that interval lines up with varying signal frequencies of within the input waveform. For example, the sampling interval for CD is close to 22.7uS. If a waveform constructed of a 20KHz sine wave added to a 20Hz sine wave, say, with joint zero crossings (meaning, phase coherent) is then sampled at 22.7uS. intervals, it would result in the sampled point of the 20KHz wave being shifted by about 163 degrees, while the sampled point of a 20Hz wave would only be shifted by less than 1 degree, leaving a net phase shift of up to 162 degrees spread across the audio band.

This notion has always seemed to me to be an attempt to deny the sampling theorem, which tells us that the exact band-limited waveform can be sampled and reconstructed. At worst, the consequences of such a phase shift would seem to be linear phase, which means it would simply be a uniform time-delay equal to the sampling interval. However, I certainly may be missing something about this argument, or Souloution may be referring to some other phase effect.

 

[Al M.]

This reminds me of my days at Gartner. FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), is what drives this industry (i.e. fear of missing out on the latest "breakthrough" innovation).

Yes, I have had an eye-opening experience in this regard when, courtesy of Goodwin's High End, I was able to compare at home the highly acclaimed NAD M51 DAC to my Wadia 12 DAC. I sonically preferred the 20 year-old (!) Wadia 12 to the NAD DAC, except in the bass performance (well, the Wadia 12 had been upgraded in 1997 with the Wadia 860 opamp, but that was also 17 years ago). So much for the hype of ever higher performance of digital over the years. Don't get me wrong, the NAD is a great DAC when judged on its own, but folks, let's be real. Paul at Goodwin's High End wasn't surprised about the findings.

I ended up buying the Berkeley Alpha DAC 2. Now that one did live up to the hype of ever higher performance of digital over the years ... It was simply in a different league than both the NAD M51 and the Wadia 12, with a stunning price/performance ratio. Paul was like, I told you so... (yes, it is 2.5 x more expensive than the NAD M51, but in my view ridiculously cheap relative to its performance).

But the NAD M51 is still a reference of comparison for John Atkinson from Stereophile when it comes to the best of today's DACs. This DAC comes up again, for example, in his recent review of the Auralic Vega DAC. To be honest, his comparisons left me completely in the dark about the Auralic Vega's performance, which may be great, but I really don't know. I like to read JA, but that was one hell of a worthless review, in my opinion.

Well, in general most reviews of audio gear are worthless, again just in my opinion (there are a few writers that do make me pay attention, such as Roy Gregory, now at Audio Beat).

 

[BlueFox]

But the NAD M51 is still a reference of comparison for John Atkinson from Stereophile when it comes to the best of today's DACs. This DAC comes up again, for example, in his recent review of the Aurelic Vega DAC. To be honest, his comparisons left me completely in the dark about the Aurelic Vega's performance, which may be great, but I really don't know. I like to read JA, but that was one hell of a worthless review, in my opinion.

If you had a problem understanding the review of the Auralic Vega DAC then you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

In regard to the NAD M51, this is what he says on page 101, second paragraph.

"When a product sounds as good as the Auralic Vega did, it's no problem to wax poetic about it in absolute terms. But how did it compare to the two $2000 D/A processors I was listening to during the same period: the NAD M51 and the Benchmark DAC2 AGC...."

The NAD was being used in conjunction with a review of another NAD product, so he compared it to the Auralic Vega. It was convenient, not a "reference of comparison".

 

[Al M.]

If you had a problem understanding the review of the Auralic Vega DAC then you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

In regard to the NAD M51, this is what he says on page 101, second paragraph.

"When a product sounds as good as the Auralic Vega did, it's no problem to wax poetic about it in absolute terms. But how did it compare to the two $2000 D/A processors I was listening to during the same period: the NAD M51 and the Benchmark DAC2 AGC...."

The NAD was being used in conjunction with a review of another NAD product, so he compared it to the Auralic Vega. It was convenient, not a "reference of comparison".

Well, the section is callled "Against my benchmarks" and he finds the NAD M51 to compare favorably, even though overall he preferred the Auralic Vega. But it certainly doesn't seem from his review that he views the Auralic Vega as being in a completely different league, like in my view the Berkeley DAC is -- and the Auralic Vega might very well be as well, but I don't know. So no, I don't think I need to work on my reading comprehension skills, at least not in this case.

 

[Whatmore]

If you compare something to something else then the something else is the reference of comparison

 

[Al M.]

If you compare something to something else then the something else is the reference of comparison

Now that is a good answer...

 

[LL21]

the latest absolute sound mentions a new Soulution DAC with 'phase correction' that is the new BREAKTHROUGH paradigm for digital playback.
supposedly, on/off tests for the soulution DAC with and without 'phase correction' is "insert your favorite term for &*! unbelievable here".

any ideas what this is supposed to be?
what phase error? applies to all DACs in theory, just to sigma-delta or R2R?

is phase the new jitter?

Interesting...the Zanden DAC has a phase inversion switch. Maybe I should play around with it more. If someone can explain to me what it is supposed to do, that would be helpful. I may email them as well.

 

[Matrix]

AFAIK, the phase inversion switch changes (inverts) the absolute phase (=both speakers) on a recording.
The cone movement (on both speakers) is inverted (outwards vs inwards) during music playback.

Some recordings are made with inverted (absolute) phase.
The switch is there to correct this problem but sometimes the best results are obtained with the inverted (absolute) phase.
You'll have to try which setting you prefer.

PS I don't think this is the breakthrough Solution is referring to.

 

[Ken Newton]

Matrix, you are correct, on all counts.

 

[Ken Newton]

the latest absolute sound mentions a new Soulution DAC with 'phase correction' that is the new BREAKTHROUGH paradigm for digital playback.
supposedly, on/off tests for the soulution DAC with and without 'phase correction' is "insert your favorite term for &*! unbelievable here".

any ideas what this is supposed to be?
what phase error? applies to all DACs in theory, just to sigma-delta or R2R?

is phase the new jitter?

cat6man,

I didn't locate any info. about a new DAC on Souloution's website, nor do I have the latest issue of TAS. Could you post those few sentences from the TAS article which addresses this DAC 'phase correction'? Such an brief excerpt shouldn't cause any copyright worries.

 

[cat6man]

cat6man,

I didn't locate any info. about a new DAC on Souloution's website, nor do I have the latest issue of TAS. Could you post those few sentences from the TAS article which addresses this DAC 'phase correction'? Such an brief excerpt shouldn't cause any copyright worries.

from soulution's facebook page:

Alan Taffel highlights soulution's new DAC technology:

...I compared the sound both ways with a variety of CDs and SACDs, and the results were eye opening. Engaging the phase cancellation function consistently led to greater spaciousness and the elimination of note “smearing” that I had assumed was endemic to the recordings. Based on what I heard, the Soulution phase shift cancellation circuit could be a watershed development in digital sound evolution...

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/ces-2014-digital-components/

 

[JackD201]

Phase discontinuities (envelope) affect filter behavior. There's quite a bit of research ongoing in universities right now but the research is primarily focused on applications for speech/hearing aids.

 

[LL21]

Yes, now I remember something about this. I am no techie, but I remember Yamada San of Zanden being interviewed about his DAC. His big bug bear about digital was having phase integrity...something he felt a lot of people missed...so he focused heavily on this which was reflected somehow in his choice of chips and why he uses the analog filters/NOS approach or something as I recall...I cannot remember. I will go back and try to re-read it.

 

[Jazzhead]

I have an incoming DAC , the Stahl-Tek Opus Prime , it has a parity switch for phase reversal , is this similar to the mentioned phase cancellation , anybody know ?

 

[LL21]

sounds like it may be like the Zanden phase switch...I don't think so. that may relate to recordings made with inverted phase. I think this phase discussion in this thread has to do with phase integrity through the d/a process...I think some digital filters apparently are not phase coherent or something...I am no techie. I know Zanden was super super focused on phase coherence throughout the D/A process and that was one of his chief goals. I think Mike Stahl shares many similar design philosophies with Yamada San...many Audio Exotic fans were long-time Zanden digiphiles...though his work is designed differently/ Nevertheless, mike also makes a point about talking about phase coherence.

I have an incoming DAC , the Stahl-Tek Opus Prime , it has a parity switch for phase reversal , is this similar to the mentioned phase cancellation , anybody know ?

 

[Ken Newton]

I have an incoming DAC , the Stahl-Tek Opus Prime , it has a parity switch for phase reversal , is this similar to the mentioned phase cancellation , anybody know ?

This phase reversal undoubtedly refers to absolute phase. Which I prefer to call, waveform polarity. A phase/polarity reversal control conveniently performs the same function as would simply reversing the polarity of your speaker leads. The purpose is to correct for recordings where the waveform polarity of the original acoustic event has been reversed somewhere along the mastering chain. However, there's no way to know for certain if that has happened during mastering, so, you can only judge by listening to whether activating the reversal control results in better perceived sound or not.

Stahl-Tek calling theirs a parity control strikes me as unnecessarily odd, or even purposely mystical sounding. Such controls are quite common in DACs, being that they are extremely simple to implement, so, I can't imagine that this is what Souloution is now referring to.