Many of the very worst designs are nose bleed expensive. Some of the best designs are relatively cheap because the components in an excellent design don’t need to be super expensive and design costs can be spread out over a high volume of units. The high end budget being mostly consumed by marketing and cosmetic considerations and the lack of any significant sales volumes to offset R&D. This is the reason that mix and match of components can yield surprising results. If an audio device performs poorly with a cheap SMPS, then the audio device isn’t adequately designed. I’ve said this many times before, and I’ll say it again. All Benchmark do is make sure the circuit is fully differential from input to output. You can’t embed this in circuit board design because this is about cable construction and implementation. As both types of PSU cause issues in the video it certainly can’t be touted as one type of PSU vs. The video is illustrative, not scientific. Does anyone use cables as long as in that video at home? The entire point of pro rated cables is they will tend to be much longer runs than at home, and that you may not have the luxury of careful routing in a pro environment. I had one for quite a few years.Īlso note that this can also be fixed by proper routing of conventional cables. The DAC1 doesn’t suffer any inherent problems in normal operation. Demonstrating the noise generated by the transformer in their DAC1 compared to the SM supply in their later DAC was just for comparison. You can put them in your HIFI cabinet.īenchmark embeds this in their circuit boards (correct me please if I am incorrect here). That indicates that they do not expect their devices to live in some sort of laboratory environment. Benchmark embeds this in their circuit boards (correct me please if I am incorrect here). Does that mean that linear or switching is better? Or that the device in question is not sufficiently resilient to the real world?ĮDIT: the stated point of the video was to present the noise canceling ability of star-quad in a balanced system. However some products apparently cannot be run optimally without purchasing a completely different power supply. Other competing products are also resistant enough to interference that it is not worth worrying about. Indeed, they state that you can stack Benchmark DAC3/LA4/AHB2 without issue. The newer DAC3 has a different power supply which emits less magnetic noise (or emits noise elsewhere in the EM spectrum) but it doesn’t affect the performance of the unit. It was engineered to accommodate the power supply that it had. The DAC1 was released about 20 years ago, had that large magnetic interference generating transformer in the chassis and still performed very well relative to competing products in the day. Even toroids, which have the least amount of magnetic leakage, still spray magnetic fields from the area where the cables exit the windings.Īnother title could be good vs. As John clearly demonstrated, the biggest issue with LPS is magnetic leakage. A good SMPS puts all of the switching noise way out of the audio band. The LPS die-hards constantly talk about “noise” from SMPS. I also made a bunch of my own using Van Damme Starquad which is easier to obtain in the UK to connect up my Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 for REW measurements.īoth cables perform equally and are cables that are widely used in the recording industry and at musical performances the world over. Same as Benchmark’s, just without the logo. They’re hard to get in the UK, so I bought them from a UK based cable supplier who makes them from the Canare cable and fits the Neutriks. The thing about Benchmark’s cables is that they’re standard Canare Starquad microphone cable with Neutrik XLR connectors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |