OK, well, first off, and so there's no confusion.....
I picked the handle DACMan here because, well, I like DACs....
I think digital is where music is going because it just plain works.
When I was a little vermin, I wanted to be an Electronic Engineer, so I ended up in a very good engineering school.
Unfortunately, that proved to be rather tedious, so I dropped out and went to work.
I held various positions as electronic assembler, electronic inspector, and system inspector (Fairchild Weston Space and Defense Systems), and prototype technician for military electronic equipment (Robotic Vision Systems), ran the test department at a company that made disc drive test equipment for a while (Wilson Labs), and then did production engineering there for a while. After that I moved over to computers, where I did product analysis, finally ending up running the "networking and communications equipment department" at an analyst firm (The Technigroup), and then I did sales support engineering for a while at a company that made load balancers back when they were "cool cutting edge tech" (HydraWeb Technologies). I also did a stint as a technical writer, and ended up doing a lot of technical writing as part of several of my other jobs.
Throughout all of this, I was always interested in audio equipment as a a hobby - and, I have to admit, I was probably more interested in the equipment than in the music. I do like listening to the music, but the equipment is the cool toy part of the deal. I have designed lots of stuff - but I'm usually too lazy to built it
For those who actually read this far, and who read my other posts, I will say here that, back in the seventies, I bought and sold lots of tube gear. I know how it works, how to design it - right, how to build it, and most of what there is to know about it. I think it's very cool as technology, and as toys, but I do NOT think it is a practical way to do audio..... and, by that, I don't just mean that it's expensive to do correctly..... what I mean is that it simply is NOT the best way to get the job done. I believe that, at ANY level of price and performance, solid state will do a better job for less money and, at the "cost no object" level, solid state is just plain better. There was a time when tubes were the best way to do audio, but that time has passed. Let me also be clear that my definition of "high fidelity" is "accurate reproduction of the original" and, to me, that means accurate and uncolored reproduction OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL. I think an amplifier or a preamp should be "a straight wire with gain", or as close to it as I can get. I think that an audio system should NOT change the way the recording sounds..... even if, occasionally, you (or I) may like the result better. If I don't like the way a recording was mastered, then I'll find a different recording.... I'm NOT going to try and find an amp that makes the one I have sound the way I would prefer it to sound. [That way lies madness because, no matter how a system changes the sound, it's a crap shoot whether it will make a given recording better or worse. I'd rather find a system that is as close to perfect as I can get, and then look for really good recording to play on it.]
I really like digital technology. I think digital recordings are pretty darn good (although not perfect yet), and have infinite room for improvement. I think media like tape and records are already pretty close to "maxxed out", and most of the so-called recent improvements are simply bull$#!+, whereas there is plenty of room to improve digital - if it actually turns out that any improvement is really useful. I'll take a sideline seat for the argument about whether 16/44 digital audio is better than an LP (it's quieter, lower distortion, and flatter, which makes the answer obvious to me, but there are still phase and filter issues that make it less than perfect), but higher sample rates just make it a "no-contest".
I am currently working at Emotiva Audio (we design and sell "economical high-end audio equipment" - and, yes, it is built in China). For the curious, you can find the companies website URL in my signature..... we also have two "sister companies": Sherbourn makes stuff intended mostly for custom system installers, and Emotiva Pro makes studio equipment (mostly powered monitors so far). Emotiva makes amps, preamps, DACs, and speakers (and the usual cables and such).... and, if you were curious, at the moment we only make solid state gear (although we might do an occasional piece of tube gear eventually), and we only sell online direct to the customer. I write all the new manuals, do some support, stick my nose into engineering and sales on occasion, and now seem to be mostly in charge of our online forums..... you will find me there (and a few other places) as KeithL ...
I should also make it clear that my views expressed here may not necessarily be those of the company I work for - although they're usually pretty close - which is why it's so much fun to work there.
I picked the handle DACMan here because, well, I like DACs....
I think digital is where music is going because it just plain works.
When I was a little vermin, I wanted to be an Electronic Engineer, so I ended up in a very good engineering school.
Unfortunately, that proved to be rather tedious, so I dropped out and went to work.
I held various positions as electronic assembler, electronic inspector, and system inspector (Fairchild Weston Space and Defense Systems), and prototype technician for military electronic equipment (Robotic Vision Systems), ran the test department at a company that made disc drive test equipment for a while (Wilson Labs), and then did production engineering there for a while. After that I moved over to computers, where I did product analysis, finally ending up running the "networking and communications equipment department" at an analyst firm (The Technigroup), and then I did sales support engineering for a while at a company that made load balancers back when they were "cool cutting edge tech" (HydraWeb Technologies). I also did a stint as a technical writer, and ended up doing a lot of technical writing as part of several of my other jobs.
Throughout all of this, I was always interested in audio equipment as a a hobby - and, I have to admit, I was probably more interested in the equipment than in the music. I do like listening to the music, but the equipment is the cool toy part of the deal. I have designed lots of stuff - but I'm usually too lazy to built it
For those who actually read this far, and who read my other posts, I will say here that, back in the seventies, I bought and sold lots of tube gear. I know how it works, how to design it - right, how to build it, and most of what there is to know about it. I think it's very cool as technology, and as toys, but I do NOT think it is a practical way to do audio..... and, by that, I don't just mean that it's expensive to do correctly..... what I mean is that it simply is NOT the best way to get the job done. I believe that, at ANY level of price and performance, solid state will do a better job for less money and, at the "cost no object" level, solid state is just plain better. There was a time when tubes were the best way to do audio, but that time has passed. Let me also be clear that my definition of "high fidelity" is "accurate reproduction of the original" and, to me, that means accurate and uncolored reproduction OF THE ELECTRICAL SIGNAL. I think an amplifier or a preamp should be "a straight wire with gain", or as close to it as I can get. I think that an audio system should NOT change the way the recording sounds..... even if, occasionally, you (or I) may like the result better. If I don't like the way a recording was mastered, then I'll find a different recording.... I'm NOT going to try and find an amp that makes the one I have sound the way I would prefer it to sound. [That way lies madness because, no matter how a system changes the sound, it's a crap shoot whether it will make a given recording better or worse. I'd rather find a system that is as close to perfect as I can get, and then look for really good recording to play on it.]
I really like digital technology. I think digital recordings are pretty darn good (although not perfect yet), and have infinite room for improvement. I think media like tape and records are already pretty close to "maxxed out", and most of the so-called recent improvements are simply bull$#!+, whereas there is plenty of room to improve digital - if it actually turns out that any improvement is really useful. I'll take a sideline seat for the argument about whether 16/44 digital audio is better than an LP (it's quieter, lower distortion, and flatter, which makes the answer obvious to me, but there are still phase and filter issues that make it less than perfect), but higher sample rates just make it a "no-contest".
I am currently working at Emotiva Audio (we design and sell "economical high-end audio equipment" - and, yes, it is built in China). For the curious, you can find the companies website URL in my signature..... we also have two "sister companies": Sherbourn makes stuff intended mostly for custom system installers, and Emotiva Pro makes studio equipment (mostly powered monitors so far). Emotiva makes amps, preamps, DACs, and speakers (and the usual cables and such).... and, if you were curious, at the moment we only make solid state gear (although we might do an occasional piece of tube gear eventually), and we only sell online direct to the customer. I write all the new manuals, do some support, stick my nose into engineering and sales on occasion, and now seem to be mostly in charge of our online forums..... you will find me there (and a few other places) as KeithL ...
I should also make it clear that my views expressed here may not necessarily be those of the company I work for - although they're usually pretty close - which is why it's so much fun to work there.
