I like w8 better for its fullness and details not heard in previous versions mentioned
That is indeed what my longer winded previous post comes down to. And although one may argue that even this is so, something else may cause the other version to be liked better, I did not hear the "more detail" as an argument (from the con side
). What I really want to say is : I can't imagine that if this is my notice, it works out differently with someone else. It is quite an absolute thing you know (like foot tapping is way important, but not an absolute thing). It now is even the more important, when Leif hears, say, the same as I do, while he uses an oversampling DAC and I do not. I imagined this
could matter, which is why I slowly brought up the subject. But as said, it would be the first time that the DAC matters on XX judgements, and so it still is not (at least not on the OS/NOS side of matters).
Btw, by no means (and I mean by NO means) I want to state things here. I never did and I never will (the whole project would be rendered useless then), but this seems a strange one.
All this "strangeness" would be gone when people say "yeah, of course I hear more detail. But nevertheless I don't like it". Which would not be rare at all. Having said that, personally I have big problems with liking a version that molests complete instruments over a version which don't. The first may have better foot tapping figures, but if so BOTH versions are wrong then.
Lastly, we must be careful. And now I *do* bring up the DAC subject, but which I do this time to leave all more in the open and objective;
With my old DAC I could choose SPDIF and USB. The USB connection was converted to SPDIF inside. Not the best, and from that or something else, both sounded different. This could not be explained in real technical terms by me, except for a perceived more strong bass in the favour of USB. USB lost though, because of the lack of musicians wanting to play for *you* (call it a sub-foot tapping matter).
This time I can choose for SPDIF and I2S. The difference should be in terms of jitter only, and where SPDIF has loads of jitter, I2S has nothing in comparison. Note : This is a bit apples and oranges for reasons beyond the subject here, but looking at the result : jitter, it is okay to use the phenomenon.
Now, the difference is day and night. I said it elsewhere, this is two different DACs because of this only. But, it is very difficult to describe what you actually hear when listening to SPDIF. I mean, without knowing the I2S connection one could try to describe the common phenomena from music playback. But with the I2S connection as a reference, one could easily say "wow, what a raw sound that is". Additionally the higher picthed sounds are not equally spread over the spectrum (one tone of a xylophone sounds louder than the other).
Since about all XX can do about the SQ is jitter-influence at the input side, we are dealing with something which cannot be compared amongst us all; So, before I continue : you can bet if I have a jittery connection, XX has more influence on that compared to when I don't have a jittery connection at all. Thus, my raw perception from SPDIF can be smoothened by XX to some extend, while the I2S connection is already inherintly smooth. Also :
When a DAC is insensitive to incoming jitter, nothing can be done on that side of matters, and what remains (for XX) is some "mysterious" other influence (which btw really is there). Now :
Apart from some DACs which cannot be influenced at all (two exist, and I don't think one of us here has one), there are some DACs around of which can be said they are virtually immune to incoming jitter. You out there may have one (but then I wouldn't know the brand), and more of them will emerge in near future. BUT :
Leif has one, and I have one.
I know, statistically there's a million times too few data to work with, but I dare say this *does* matter, and it may well be an explanation in this case;
The jitter influence from XX can hardly be at work, and only that other thing (working upon the analoge side of the DAC) is still working. Next it should be so that this other thing incurs for better detail (which I extend to making instruments more real), while a NEGATIVE jitter influence from the 0.9w versions (should be from off 0.9w-5) masks that better detail which actually is there.
It would, btw, fit my ideas about better detail being totally unrelated to foot tapping qualities.
Ok, I hope there's not too much nonsense in the above, and I'm only trying to find explanations, and in the mean time present some proof of not wanting to state anything as being wrong or right.
if we all can keep it up, right now two camps are right. For me this just means "work to do", and try to create something with both virtues in it.
Peter
