Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 138 conversations about:
darwin
90
Jan 5, 2019
bookmark_border
Apple uses better DACs than just about any pc laptop which is easily verifiable or other type of smartphones as well. Not only do we know what they use there are measurements of them. I do use an external dac/amp in some cases but it’s probably the amp making more of the difference.
Jan 5, 2019
Menace
47
Jan 5, 2019
bookmark_border
darwinNope. LG does.
Jan 5, 2019
Royaume
21
Jan 5, 2019
bookmark_border
MenaceI have the G6. It uses a sabre chip which faaaaaaar outclasses any other mobile device. Also Darwin, you are completely underestimating the difference a good DAC makes. The DAC is the very thing producing the signal. If the signal is poor to begin with, it doesnt matter how well that signal is amplified. Thats why you can buy DACs for 10k
(Edited)
Jan 5, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 5, 2019
bookmark_border
darwinYou're FOS. Keep trying to tell the masses that Apple has a magic way of transforming an average DAC into some holy grail, just because it has an apple logo on it. We see that it works for you and all of the apple fanbois, but the people who actually review these stand alone DAP/DAC devices don't bother comparing any of the trending new devices on an apple device of any kind, for a simple reason. Maybe you'd like to share with us what the ACTUAL DAC that you seem to believe is better than the rest is. There is no concrete evidence that your statement holds any water at all in the audiophile community. The ESS Sabre based devices, as well as a host of others, are better than the DAC that's in your beloved apple POS product. If you were telling the truth, then ALL of the reviewers of top quality gear would hold the apple as the standard that others wish to surpass in specifications and other parameters. That's what the reviews are all about. No-one mentions any apple product when setting up comparisons when there are high quality devices compared against each other. That's because they don't compare in any way, shape, or form. Anyone who wants to compare a quality DAP/DAC component to an apple laptop are free to do so. It would be an exercise in futility, as the available high end product reviewers on reputable websites don't want to waste their time on a substandard device, only because there is an apple fanboi base that needs to be schooled in the way these things actually are. We don't need to PROVE this to anyone.
(Edited)
Jan 5, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 5, 2019
bookmark_border
MenaceLG has a number of phones that beats apple DAC implementations hands down. So do all of the other manufacturers who are careful to put high end DAC circuitry in their phones. Now we are told that apple has magic amplifiers in their products that make them untouchable, and superior. That's certainly a new twist with no facts (again) to back it up. A perfect amplifier does nothing but amplify sound. "Not only do we know what they use there are measurements of them." Of course there is no proof of that blanket statement, as usual. It would be really nice to see some fanboi put up some specs, and tell us what these magic components can/will do. Look up any Sabre ESS 9018 or better and do a comparison if you want us to believe that is true. The DAC chipset is not the only component that makes the flagship DAP's sound so much better than these embedded apple devices. To claim that you have any apple computer or phone, without anything to back up your blanket statement is getting old. To proclaim that it has superior sound qualities to is just not true, and it also makes the person stating it to look ignorant. Here's a doozy for you. "It uses a sabre chip which faaaaaaar outclasses any other mobile device." I'll take my FIIO X7 Mk II, or any other company's flagship stand alone DAC based device up against any of your apple fanboi "Holy Grail" products any day. You can use the same Sabre 9028 Pro chipset, stick it in an apple device (not that I know of any offhand), and the stand alone product will still beat it hands down. The SOC (System on a Chip), and MANY other audiophile chipsets employed in stand alone device play an important role in the output sound quality as well. It simply not even worth explaining to anyone with any knowledge of how these devices are made.
Jan 5, 2019
wdappio
25
Jan 6, 2019
bookmark_border
bootster1I'll put up my XDuoo XD-05 up against any of his precious Apple products and I'd bet that the $200 DAC/ Amp would kick the crap out them. "If you own a Mac you don't need a DAC." Lmao!! If that's the case I've got a bridge to sell you. It's in Brooklyn.
(Edited)
Jan 6, 2019
Broody
183
Jan 6, 2019
bookmark_border
darwinyou are so very, very wrong.
Jan 6, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 6, 2019
bookmark_border
Royaume "The DAC is the very thing producing the signal." Oh really? I really don't want to burst your information bubble, but the DAC chip does no such thing. The source is an audio file, such as an MP3, or a FLAC, ALAC, APE, WAV, WMA , or a host of other file extensions that contain the "Signal", or more commonly called an audio file. A DAC is simply a converter. It takes a digital signal (audio file) and converts it into an analog one that can be amplified and then presented to the loudspeakers or headphones so that it can be heard by the human ear. The best thing the apple fanbois can do would be to look up some of these basic definitions, and then come to a forum to discuss the facts. It would save us a lot of time, and the fanbois a lot of embarrassment. Your post is faaaaaaar out there alright. Learn the basics and the definitions before you present more false information. Owning an apple product places you in the minority to begin with, but do us a favor and learn the basics of what actually happens to the "Signal". No one is saying that an apple product produces inferior sound, but it is foolish to claim that they have any kind of advantage over a dedicated device that is built strictly to produce sound from audio files. The 10k sentence you made at the end of your post is bewildering, at best.
Jan 6, 2019
FlyingDisc
53
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
bootster1I personally would not call an "audio file" a "digital signal" that is impoverishing that languaging too much.
Jan 10, 2019
Royaume
21
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
bootster11) I'm not an apple fanboy. I dislike apple. Where'd you get that idea. 2) I am familiar with terminology. Audio file means audio file. "Signal" is a communicative term. A signal is the means of communication of information. It is you who are confused. Files are not signals. But when the file is read and it is being fed to the DAC, then we have a 'digital signal'. The reason I said 'the DAC is the very thing producing the signal' is because I was talking of the relevant analogue signal that would be amped. The DAC does that, leading to 3. 3) The 10k comment was intended to impress on you how complicated and nuanced the generation of an analogue signal from a simple digital description is! My point was that a huge amount of engineering that can be put into it, and that there is a niche market for that too. The DAC is a hugely impactful component if any system. Its not like converting from wav to flac. Not at all. Its like being given a finite resolution digital image and being asked to generate the best possible infinite geometry piece of artwork that you can. It is an infinitley complex problem, posing a great many engineering challenges.
(Edited)
Jan 10, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
FlyingDiscWhether it is a binary, octal, or hexadecimal file, it is digital. If you have an audio file stored on your computer, it is a digital file, and most certainly not an analog one. Whoever started the conversation we are now having that decided to call an audio file or the output of a DAC device to call it a "Signal" did so without any regard for conventional naming of what is being discussed. What I did was to use the term, "Signal" to try to explain to the poster that the DAC output is not called a "Signal", through conventional terms. I will admit however, that some people could refer to the output of a DAC as a "Signal" in conversation. I've never heard it referred to it as that, but I can't speak for everyone in that regard. I knew what he was talking about however. I placed quotation marks around the word to clarify that I was talking about the same thing he was, I think.
Jan 10, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
Royaume "It is you who is confused. Files are not signals. " I am hardly the one who is "Confused" here. You were the one who called them that, not me. I just tried to clarify the nomenclature. Like I said in my other post, I am fully aware of what it is that you refer to as the "Signal". The analog output of the DAC in an audio component was what I believed you referred to as a "Signal". When you say something such as this, and I quote, "Its not like converting from wav to flax", I can tell you that it isn't fields of grain that you want to discuss. Or is it? That really confused me, but how am I going to not being confused with nomenclature such as that. In all fairness, maybe you can explain in more conventional terms what you really meant by that quote. I am going to add here that we are getting down into the weeds here, and going off topic.
Jan 10, 2019
Royaume
21
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
bootster1*flac Hahaha autocorrect lol
Jan 10, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 10, 2019
bookmark_border
RoyaumePerhaps you'd like to watch Ted Smith give us an insight to DAC implementations. The way Mr. Smith explains this, we can all feel humbled that we are not going to discuss the matter with any kind of overt knowledge of how these DAC components work. "The DAC is the very thing producing the signal". If you watch this video in it's entirety, and I encourage anyone who is the least bit curious (pun intended) about the topic, then we can all rest, knowing that the DAC in a MAC is not the holy grail that some of these apple fanbois would like for us to believe.
Jan 10, 2019
FlyingDisc
53
Jan 14, 2019
bookmark_border
Jan 14, 2019
bootster1
61
Jan 19, 2019
bookmark_border
FlyingDiscI was just trying to associate the two terms as best I could. The word "signal" can be used in one stage of the process that is applied to this conversation, as it is just a misnomer for this persons perceived concept of how a digital file is perceived by the output stage of a digital DAC converter. I was merely trying to play the name game in order to conjure up the concept of how a source file is converted through the DAC chip and the output is coming out as an analog "signal" (if you will) waveform that the output stage can recognize. I knew what he meant, but like you said, the nomenclature was in need of an explanation.
Jan 19, 2019
View Full Discussion
Related Posts
Trending Posts in Audiophile