DAV Preamp samples.

  • Thread starter Thread starter BigRay
  • Start date Start date
Robert D said:
That's a bit too much of an absolute. It is neither correct to say that specs mean nothing, nor to say that specs mean everything. It is also incorrect to make the assumption that the chip only provides some mathematical gain, devoid of sonic influence other than that pure gain product. If that were true, we could get great sounding preamps using the old 4558s. The chip does matter, and does influence the quality of the sound, but does not in itself define the sound.
Click to expand...
Cmon Ray, give it to him. That is some of the most objective logic that this board has ever seen.
 
Big Kenny said:
Cmon Ray, give it to him. That is some of the most objective logic that this board has ever seen.
Click to expand...

I restated and he agreed. Case closed! ;) Logic has no place here. :p
 
BigRay said:
I restated and he agreed. Case closed! ;) Logic has no place here. :p
Click to expand...

One might say that what you did was, when confronted with fact and logic, backpeddled, minced your words, and refused to admit you were wrong, but far be it from me to say so. :D
 
Robert D said:
One might say that what you did was, when confronted with fact and logic, backpeddled, minced your words, and refused to admit you were wrong, but far be it from me to say so. :D
Click to expand...

HA! :D No, I just didnt elaborate well enough. Didnt state things plainly. Obviously components make a difference to what gear sounds like, but what I was saying was that specs and part numbers dont matter to those who only use our ears,...if something sounds good ,then that means everything...and specs mean nothing.. ;) I am wrong often! Just not now. :)
 
Ray, perhaps there are some factors you haven't considered, when you say that ears mean everything and specs mean nothing.

For instance, it is entirely conceivable that someone could design a preamp that sounds wonderful, but cuts corners with a large number of cheap shoddy parts that don't necessarily influence the sound when it is new, but over time rapidly cease functioning or give diminished results.

In that case your ears would be of no use when auditioning - only a familiarity with the quality of the component parts or the integrity of the design would give you the warning that maybe, for the long haul, this might not be the best investment.

Surely you'll concede at least this point! :D
 
There are 3 camps as I see it...the tech geeks, the ear people, and a mixture of both....I am firmly in the middle group. Even if things go bad over time, the here and now is all that matters, to me anyway. With the gear I invest in, QC isnt a concern of mine... I dont think "staying power" is really a problem with any of the reputable companies. From what I know of analog gear, it seems to stand up really well to the test of time. . When I shop for things, I listen. If something works, I buy it. I have to say that never once has the thought of any of my gear "going bad" crossed my mind. I get concerned about conversion, not because it "goes bad" but because that market is always being injected with the latest and greatest. Sure your scenario is possible, but not applicable to me. My philosophy= ears and nothing else. ;)

I admire your desire to shatter my bullheadedness. :eek: :D



littledog said:
Ray, perhaps there are some factors you haven't considered, when you say that ears mean everything and specs mean nothing.

For instance, it is entirely conceivable that someone could design a preamp that sounds wonderful, but cuts corners with a large number of cheap shoddy parts that don't necessarily influence the sound when it is new, but over time rapidly cease functioning or give diminished results.

In that case your ears would be of no use when auditioning - only a familiarity with the quality of the component parts or the integrity of the design would give you the warning that maybe, for the long haul, this might not be the best investment.

Surely you'll concede at least this point! :D
Click to expand...
 
I was under the impression that you were doing a lot of recording of live classical music concerts. Since these are one time/ real time performances, and not something you can just stop when something breaks down, I would think quality control would be a HUGE concern.

I suspect that in your relatively short career, you haven't had any disastrous breakdowns. After your first one, you may feel quite differently about quality control!

Not that I'm wishing you any disasters...! :)
 
littledog said:
Ray, perhaps there are some factors you haven't considered, when you say that ears mean everything and specs mean nothing.

For instance, it is entirely conceivable that someone could design a preamp that sounds wonderful, but cuts corners with a large number of cheap shoddy parts that don't necessarily influence the sound when it is new, but over time rapidly cease functioning or give diminished results.

In that case your ears would be of no use when auditioning - only a familiarity with the quality of the component parts or the integrity of the design would give you the warning that maybe, for the long haul, this might not be the best investment.
Click to expand...

This discussion is getting so skewed out of proportion it's silly.

We are not talking about Behringer here, we are discussing well designed gear that is handmade by an experienced designer/tech. There is a long history of development and use by the Decca record label. You've heard this gear or it's predecessors on numerous albums.

What happens is that one person goes online and says that there are cheap opamps in there, and then other people start repeating this ad nauseum, then other people take that and run with it, and before long you have people warning about "cheap shoddy parts" that "over time rapidly cease functioning or give diminished results". And most of these same people have never once actually heard the gear or even held it in their hands.

As the British would say: "bullocks".
 
SonicAlbert said:
This discussion is getting so skewed out of proportion it's silly.

We are not talking about Behringer here, we are discussing well designed gear that is handmade by an experienced designer/tech. There is a long history of development and use by the Decca record label. You've heard this gear or it's predecessors on numerous albums.

What happens is that one person goes online and says that there are cheap opamps in there, and then other people start repeating this ad nauseum, then other people take that and run with it, and before long you have people warning about "cheap shoddy parts" that "over time rapidly cease functioning or give diminished results". And most of these same people have never once actually heard the gear or even held it in their hands.

As the British would say: "bullocks".
Click to expand...

Sorry if there was any implication that I was referencing DAV products when I was talking about quality control. I was drawn into the discussion more by Ray's philosophical assertion that "ears" are the sole determining factor and not "specs".

In practice, I largely agree with Ray. But since he stated it in such absolutist terms, my contrarian instincts compelled my to I was to come up with a hypothetical scenario where "ears alone" might not be enough.

My best effort wasn't apparently very convincing to Ray - and it ended up being misunderstood by SonicAlbert as an attack on a particular company. That was the farthest thing from my actual intent. I was just running off on a tangent that I found interesting... Sorry for hijacking the thread and provoking references to British livestock (Bullocks). I'm more familiar with the term "Bollocks" myself, which was originally a euphemism for testicles. I hear British people use that phrase all the time, but perhaps Sonic hangs out more with the cattle farmers! :p
 
SonicAlbert said:
As the British would say: "bullocks".
Click to expand...
In keeping with the mood of the thread I'm going to have to pick up on a minor innacuracy in your post there Albert.

It's "bollocks". :D
 
littledog said:
Sorry if there was any implication that I was referencing DAV products when I was talking about quality control.
Click to expand...

well, I think the implication that Alby saw (and I did too) came because I clearly said "With the gear I invest in, QC isnt a concern of mine
" in the sentence prior. It is well known what gear I use primarily(DAV, Pendulum, and Hamptone) No ill will here, I think you are a good man, I know that from PM and seeing your other posts. I will argue all day though! :p

Those that are ill mannered and counterproductive are my only issues..

as Sodelsolray said, I am a pretty black and white kind of a guy, no gray area. ;)
 
Kevin DeSchwazi said:
In keeping with the mood of the thread I'm going to have to pick up on a minor innacuracy in your post there Albert.

It's "bollocks". :D
Click to expand...

All that matters is how it sounds, haven't you been following the thread? :D
 
Robert D said:
All that matters is how it sounds, haven't you been following the thread? :D
Click to expand...


now that is the first salient point youve made all day! :p Score one for me!

:D
 
littledog said:
Sorry if there was any implication that I was referencing DAV products when I was talking about quality control. I was drawn into the discussion more by Ray's philosophical assertion that "ears" are the sole determining factor and not "specs"
Click to expand...

Didn't seem like you made any implications, just posed a hypothetical situation.
 
John Berry said:
From what I have researched and read about the DAV BG it is built mostly of cheap parts chips and suffers from 'motorboating' if loaded too much.The dude who complained about his unit 'motorboating' is allready selling his unit off at record.org . "DAV BG #2 - Mint/New Condition - $!250 ."
Click to expand...
This was the DAV Basher... not you littledog

And it makes me sick that I missed that opportunity... a BG #2 for $250
 
BigRay said:
now that is the first salient point youve made all day! :p Score one for me!

:D
Click to expand...

How can I put this elloquently?....... Bite me Ray. :rolleyes:
 
MOFO Pro said:
This was the DAV Basher... not you littledog

And it makes me sick that I missed that opportunity... a BG #2 for $250
Click to expand...


You didnt...it was 1250, and the guy that was selling was NOT selling because he had problems , but because he needed more channels. Thats it. John Berry/Chessrock(it is someone here) is just being a moron as always. Noone said anything about motorboating.

Teddy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top