MSB Select II arrival
- Thread starter Mike Lavigne
- Start date
Very interesting debate.
What we should not forget is that circuits became more complicated because of the limitations of the simpler circuits or topologies. We can go on forever glorifying the virtues of Triodes and especially DHT. They have severe limitations which called for more complicated ( yes, that word) devices and circuitry. It is another dear fallacy to think that a Digital DAC chip is simplicity itself. It is not,these are for the most part intrically and bewilderingly complex assembly of miniaturized components. Sometimes numbering over thousands of parts.. That is what chips mostly are. They're not "simple" in most instances.
It seems to dawn on many that Digital is capable of conveying music in all its nuances. Well IMO it has been the case for many years. I tend to believe from all the Kudos that the MSB Select is great and for those people who've heard one of the top DACs on the market...
However great that the MSB might be there are many others, some of these not as dear ... as microstrip brushed on, a serious and unbiased audition (is that possible?) of something like the Devialet could open many ears and perhaps hearts... The Devialet BTW is far from simple it is complex , complicated and extremely good sounding.
Now back to the MSB which in spite of all the resistance seems to have bridged many (all ?
Yes people! Digital can be that kind of good.. has been for a while
Only if you are a pure objectivist meter reader are triodes inferior and requiring more complicated circuits to "improve" the sound. In fact, they are still the most linear amplifying devices made by humankind.
Circuits were made more complicated for many reasons but sound quality was not one of those reasons. Making things smaller and cooler were two reasons.
Except that it's obsolete according to the manufacturer, written all over the data sheet:
http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/obsolete-data-sheets/AD1865.pdf
Hello Al,
That’s true.
As are several hundred thousand or more vacuum tubes.
Says nothing about their current viability when ideally utilised in circuits that seek to maximise their performance thresholds.
Your point is what, exactly (as it appears I’ve missed it)?
Best,
853guy
Yes we know that, but it doesn't take away it is line of the best sounding chips ever made. BTW Audio Note and Aries Cerat use it in their DACs, and I assume they bought up old stock to do that.
I think the crux of this discussion is a chip that has NO processing (simple) and can avoid a filter messes less with the data, and thus 'in theory' can produce a remarkably clean sound.
18 bits, up to 16X oversampling. The digital processing is usually carried by the filter, typically the SM5813 at that time.
On what then do you base your claim? You mention "Linearity" an objective metric (as in measurable). You can't have it both ways...
Parting shot : Digital PCM is not "simple" .. The processing is always complex and requires appropriately complex devices and cicuitry
The functioning diagram of the above mentioned AD1865 ...
Each of the devices within this chip is composed of dozens of basic components ( Transistor, Diodes, Coil , Caps, Resistors, etc) .. This assemble cannot by any stretch be called "simple".
Perhaps we should get back to the OP ... We have already hijacked waaaay too much Mike's thread.
Yes, nothing was onboard with this chip. All digital processing has to be done prior to feeding it into the chip. It has no processing logic. This means simply the chip will accept signals with 18 bits and frequencies up to 705.6 Khz. You can actually feed it 24 bit signals with the right digital receiver chip but the last six bits will be truncated.
You can take the Iout, which is straight off the resistor ladder... The data latch is probably something simple like a TTL flip flop that latches and unlatches depending on the CLK. This is probably one of the simplest DACs ever made on a chip. My point is that it does not have any control logic, digital filters built in (most do) etc. It is probably as close to a discrete DAC concept as was done on a chip because of the temptation to put MORE onto the chip because you can.
After 900+ posts who cares what the OP was? What Mike thought of the sound was exhausted long ago...
Analog Devices tests and grades the DACs at 705.6 KHz, probably knowing of its limitations at this frequency - no one knows what is the real performance at 44.1 kHz. Any way it is not a pure R2R device as some people seem to assume - the four MSBs are segmented, the lower 14 are R2R. And AD does not supply information on what segmentation technique is used for the 4 MSBs.
trying to be a bit respectful to your 'not unexpected' shot, note please that mine and others feedback on the Select II is hardly done. which is not to say that reasonable side issue talk should not be part of things. but deep dives should be taken elsewhere like any other narrowly focused thread.
Yes, it seems to be a kind of hybrid. Interestingly, the Burr Brown PCM63 is a true ladder DAC but gets 20bits by having two 19bit ladders that are interleaved or something...they are summed on the output. Both are great sounding DACs
You took my comment as a "shot"... really? Of course you will continue to add to your previous statements...but isn't it clear what your main impressions are by now? It is primarily the side topics that have kept this thread going...maybe those should have been started elsewhere but people seem to like to keep tangentially similiar ideas going in an existing thread for some reason.
that is correct
collinear dual 19 bit r2r http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/LINKS%20AND%20DOWNLOADS/DATAMINING/pcm63K.pdf
Really, the subject in a lot of these threads is MUSIC and to find / buy / get / design the best gear to actually hear that. So naturally as threads wear on they come back to that basic need and subject. IMO if a thread does bang on for months about one subject, and in some cases the posters of that unit in question are few in number, it kind of becomes a fanboy club of 2 opinions (example) with 100 folk admiring from a distance, but quite possibly not knowing what they are admiring.
Anyway, IMO if the thread contains info that helps me and others, and we swop out ideas and experiences.
Last edited:
I think while ideas should be exchanged, (and Mike was the one who encouraged me to share another viewpoint (Lampi) on his own thread), we should post respecting him, and not be dismissive. Yes sometimes things that go off path should not go too narrow on it, which I do think happened here, though personally I have never been into the techie side of things to discuss details of the chips etc. I can understand some are
Similar threads
