[George M. Middius]

Sander deWaal said:

Serious question (I know it's still only January, but off I go): What is the
difference in cost between the DAC they put in a sub-$100 player and an
expensive one? It was my impression -- superficial, I admit -- that DACs are
now produced in such numbers that the cost difference should be quite small.

It is, actually.

Did you hear that, paul?

It's the surrounding (analogue, clock) electronics and power supply +
PCB routing where a difference can be made.

I thought PCBs were banned.

A difference, not necessarily an improvement, but you knew that.

No religious argumentation, please.




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

Any CD player, has a farly good DAC,

In a budget changer? I don't think so. and budget is what we're
talking here.

Serious question (I know it's still only January, but off I go): What is the
difference in cost between the DAC they put in a sub-$100 player and an
expensive one? It was my impression -- superficial, I admit -- that DACs are
now produced in such numbers that the cost difference should be quite small.

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs. There's also been
discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a possible contributor
to sound quality.

We'd better get the 'borgs to test that suggestion immediately.

It does seem like a DAC can be a less important part of a chip designed
for other tasks.

You mean like, say, video upsampling?




--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Eeyore]

"George M. Middius" wrote:

I thought PCBs were banned.

Polychlorinated Bi-Phenyls are indeed banned.

Graham

[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs.

Ok, mine has but that's a fairly rare method.


There's also been
discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a possible contributor
to sound quality.

Snort ! Admittedly the 4558 op-amps in low-end consumer players that Trevor
mentions aren't that great. I've never met one though.

Graham

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
wrote:

MiNe 109 said:

Any CD player, has a farly good DAC,

In a budget changer? I don't think so. and budget is what we're
talking here.

Serious question (I know it's still only January, but off I go): What is
the
difference in cost between the DAC they put in a sub-$100 player and an
expensive one? It was my impression -- superficial, I admit -- that DACs
are
now produced in such numbers that the cost difference should be quite
small.

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs. There's also been
discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a possible contributor
to sound quality.

We'd better get the 'borgs to test that suggestion immediately.

It does seem like a DAC can be a less important part of a chip designed
for other tasks.

You mean like, say, video upsampling?

That kind of thing, yes. Or meant for non-audiophile tasks:

http://www.globalspec.com/FeaturedPr...chnologies/Hig
h_Speed_DigitaltoAnalog_Converter_for_Space/18687/0

In space, no one can hear you scream.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs.

Ok, mine has but that's a fairly rare method.

Sony, Arcam, for two. Like I said, a high-end phenomenon.

There's also been
discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a possible contributor
to sound quality.

Snort ! Admittedly the 4558 op-amps in low-end consumer players that Trevor
mentions aren't that great. I've never met one though.

Here's an example of output stage marketing:

http://www.rega.co.uk/html/apollo.htm

"The new player utilises a brand new design output amplifier. This
amplifier is of discreet design and uses the very highest quality audio
components. It operates in 'Class A' and represents a big step up in
performance from previous players. Because of the high quality 'Class A'
output stage the CD players sound quality will improve over the first 15
minutes after switching on."

It gets a lot better at once, then less so.

There was talk some years ago of cheap dvd players with distorted output
as measured by an actual audio pro.

Don't forget to make fun of cd player tube output stages!

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net wrote:

paul packer said:

Any CD player, has a farly good DAC,

In a budget changer? I don't think so. and budget is
what we're talking here.

Serious question (I know it's still only January, but
off I go): What is the difference in cost between the
DAC they put in a sub-$100 player and an expensive one?


Sometimes nothing, sometimes something.

The last time I took a $39 DVD player apart, the DAC was a Crystal Semi part
rated for 90 dB dynamic range at up to 24/192 sampling. It met spec.

It was my impression -- superficial, I admit -- that
DACs are now produced in such numbers that the cost
difference should be quite small.

There are better DAC, and they are pricier. Chips capable of 115 dB
dynamic range can still cost a little money. For example the CS 4398 which
is one of the very best chips is under $5 in production quantitites. The
CS4341A price which is what I think was in that $40 DVD player costs $1.24
for similar quantities. Of course those are asking prices, not actual
selling prices.

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs.

Mostly a work-around. In theory every doubling of DAC chips adds 3 dB to
potential dynamic range. Thing is, there are no known commerical audio
recordings with more than about 75 dB dynamic range. If you pay more than
the price of a CS 4341A, you are paying for numbers, not better sound.

There's also
been discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a
possible contributor to sound quality.

Possible contributor? All things are possible, far more interesting is that
which actually transpires.

It does seem like a DAC can be a less important part of a
chip designed for other tasks.

Audio DACs with any pretentions to quality are almost always not integrated
with other chip functions for technical and economic reasons.

[Sander deWaal]

George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said:


It's the surrounding (analogue, clock) electronics and power supply +
PCB routing where a difference can be made.


I thought PCBs were banned.


Sorry, that's jargon, Printed Circuit Board.

--

- Maggies are an addiction for life. -

[ScottW]

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
said:


It's the surrounding (analogue, clock) electronics and power supply +
PCB routing where a difference can be made.


I thought PCBs were banned.


Sorry, that's jargon, Printed Circuit Board.

How many acronyms are there?
We use these for bare boards and components
attached.

PWB - Printed Wiring Board
CCA - Circuit Card Assembly

Acronyms are another hot button.
I have so many hot buttons...I'm on fire.

ScottW

[paul packer]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 15:56:49 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast
[dot] net wrote:

paul packer said:

Any CD player, has a farly good DAC,

In a budget changer? I don't think so. and budget is
what we're talking here.

Serious question (I know it's still only January, but
off I go): What is the difference in cost between the
DAC they put in a sub-$100 player and an expensive one?


Sometimes nothing, sometimes something.

The last time I took a $39 DVD player apart, the DAC was a Crystal Semi part
rated for 90 dB dynamic range at up to 24/192 sampling. It met spec.

It was my impression -- superficial, I admit -- that
DACs are now produced in such numbers that the cost
difference should be quite small.

There are better DAC, and they are pricier. Chips capable of 115 dB
dynamic range can still cost a little money. For example the CS 4398 which
is one of the very best chips is under $5 in production quantitites. The
CS4341A price which is what I think was in that $40 DVD player costs $1.24
for similar quantities. Of course those are asking prices, not actual
selling prices.

High-end models sometime have multiple DACs.

Mostly a work-around. In theory every doubling of DAC chips adds 3 dB to
potential dynamic range. Thing is, there are no known commerical audio
recordings with more than about 75 dB dynamic range. If you pay more than
the price of a CS 4341A, you are paying for numbers, not better sound.

There's also
been discussion of the circuitry following the DAC as a
possible contributor to sound quality.

Possible contributor? All things are possible, far more interesting is that
which actually transpires.

It does seem like a DAC can be a less important part of a
chip designed for other tasks.

Audio DACs with any pretentions to quality are almost always not integrated
with other chip functions for technical and economic reasons.


So there you go. Why ask me when you've got Arnie? :-)

[bassett]

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 11:50:28 +1100, "bassett"
wrote:


So, you think a new Pioneer or Sony DVD player will sound significantly
worse than an old CD changer--is that it, bassett? The fact is, there
will be no loss of sound quality, possibly an improvement; there will
be greater reliability and the option of playing movies. And such
players can be had for AU$100. Where's the problem, except in your
addled "mind"?

It really is quite simple, Most DVD players consentrate on the vidio
quality, and don't bother with the Audio quality, You get what you
get.

Rubbish. That was true 5 years ago. Where have you been since then?

Any CD player, has a farly good DAC,

In a budget changer? I don't think so. and budget is what we're
talking here.

The more you pay the better the
quality of the DAC, or you buy a seperate stand alone DAC.

Budget, Dumbo. Get it?

Perhaps you should define the term "old CD Player" I,ve just
obtained
an old , used , Mark Levinson CD Player. And very nice it is too.

Budget.

As for Pioneer and Sony, I,ve never owned those products, or though
I
did compair a Pioneer Plasma agains't a Fujitsu once.

Budget.


O budget, you mean like a $35 DVD special from Aldi or Strathfield,
there real quality items, while there working. And there about your
level, or should that be your budget.
bassett

[Sander deWaal]

"ScottW" said:


PCBs .


Sorry, that's jargon, Printed Circuit Board.


How many acronyms are there?
We use these for bare boards and components
attached.

PWB - Printed Wiring Board
CCA - Circuit Card Assembly


I'm sorry, I am only familiar with the acronym PCB, which is what we
use for both the naked and the stuffed board .

The English speaking engineer crowd I speak and correspond with, all
seem to understand its meaning very well.
Even the Chinese!

--

- Maggies are an addiction for life. -

[George M. Middius]

Sander deWaal said:

PWB - Printed Wiring Board
CCA - Circuit Card Assembly

I'm sorry, I am only familiar with the acronym PCB, which is what we
use for both the naked and the stuffed board .

Engineer jargon leaves something to be desired.

The English speaking engineer crowd I speak and correspond with, all
seem to understand its meaning very well.
Even the Chinese!

No MSG!








--

Lionella loves the Krooborg from afar. With mud on top.

[paul packer]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:31:38 +1100, "bassett"
wrote:


Budget.


O budget, you mean like a $35 DVD special from Aldi or Strathfield,
there real quality items, while there working. And there about your
level, or should that be your budget.
bassett

Don't be an idiot. Why would I pay $35 when EzyDVD had them for
$29.95. Since they were all regions, I bought two.

[bassett]

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:31:38 +1100, "bassett"
wrote:


Budget.


O budget, you mean like a $35 DVD special from Aldi or
Strathfield,
there real quality items, while there working. And there about your
level, or should that be your budget.

bassett

Don't be an idiot. Why would I pay $35 when EzyDVD had them for
$29.95. Since they were all regions, I bought two.

Well that's your pocket money gone for two months.