22 posts / 0 new
Last post
highstream's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 19/03/2013 - 17:33
Posts: 7
July DAC review

Surprising that your July Dac review didn't include two well-regarded UK models, the Beresford Bushmaster TC-7530DC and John Kenny's new Ciunas.  Or even France's Micromega MyDac, given that *every* review by other audio journalists/magazines has all but explicitly contradicted What Hi-Fi's earlier findings.

chebby's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 02/06/2008 - 09:40
Posts: 16035
RE: July DAC review

Do you know if these manufacturers submitted their DACs for review?

"We are currently awaiting the loading of our complement of small lemon-soaked paper napkins for your comfort, refreshment and hygiene during the journey."

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3478
RE: July DAC review

Reviews are entirely subjective and relevant only to the reviewer, unless the reviewer has bothered to conduct any meaningful testing of the equipment on offer.

That aside, any magazine is going to have a finite ability to test a selection of DACs for a variety of reasons, not least of which is time.

philipjohnwright's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: 26/06/2009 - 21:32
Posts: 242
RE: July DAC review

"Reviews are entirely subjective and relevant only to the reviewer, unless the reviewer has bothered to conduct any meaningful testing of the equipment on offer"

Ermm......surely a group review of DAC's is, by definition, meaningful testing of the equipment?

Or do you mean measurement? If so then we perhaps disagree, in that I believe measurements are useful but don't tell the whole story, because we don't know all the factors that affect sound quality so don't meaure them all. If indeed they are all measurable; psychological factors, including how we perceive things, are probably relevant (as is which side of the bed we got out that particular day!)

Back to the main topic - there will always be equipment that get's left out of a test for a variety of reasons. I agree the Beresford would have been a useful one to include. I have to say I hadn't heard of the Ciunas before though, and I'm pretty up to speed usually (maybe I'm getting old)

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3478
RE: July DAC review

philipjohnwright wrote:

"Reviews are entirely subjective and relevant only to the reviewer, unless the reviewer has bothered to conduct any meaningful testing of the equipment on offer"

Ermm......surely a group review of DAC's is, by definition, meaningful testing of the equipment?

Or do you mean measurement? If so then we perhaps disagree, in that I believe measurements are useful but don't tell the whole story, because we don't know all the factors that affect sound quality so don't meaure them all. If indeed they are all measurable; psychological factors, including how we perceive things, are probably relevant (as is which side of the bed we got out that particular day!)

Back to the main topic - there will always be equipment that get's left out of a test for a variety of reasons. I agree the Beresford would have been a useful one to include. I have to say I hadn't heard of the Ciunas before though, and I'm pretty up to speed usually (maybe I'm getting old)

No, I don't mean measurements, I mean testing. Testing is conducted to determine measurement and a product that measures as having less audible distortion than another and has a better frequency response is likely to sound better.

Remember this "All that is audible is measurable, but not all that is measurable is audible".

Your statement highlighted, just reinforces the pointlessness of subjective reviews. Particulary when we are asked to consider how the reviewer is feeling that day amongst a whole raft of other intangible factors.

 

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 52 min 17 sec ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 23030
RE: July DAC review

Overdose wrote:

Your statement highlighted, just reinforces the pointlessness of subjective reviews.

[LINK REMOVED - house rule 15]

Moderator: john.duncan.whf at gmail dot com

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3478
RE: July DAC review

John Duncan wrote:

Overdose wrote:

Your statement highlighted, just reinforces the pointlessness of subjective reviews.

[LINK REMOVED - house rule 15]

and?

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 52 min 17 sec ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 23030
RE: July DAC review

Overdose wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

Overdose wrote:

Your statement highlighted, just reinforces the pointlessness of subjective reviews.

[LINK REMOVED - house rule 15]

and?

Just pointing you (quite helpfully, I thought) at some pointless subjective reviews.

Moderator: john.duncan.whf at gmail dot com

plastic penguin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 28/04/2008 - 10:56
Posts: 16435
RE: July DAC review

highstream wrote:

Surprising that your July Dac review didn't include two well-regarded UK models, the Beresford Bushmaster TC-7530DC and John Kenny's new Ciunas.  Or even France's Micromega MyDac, given that *every* review by other audio journalists/magazines has all but explicitly contradicted What Hi-Fi's earlier findings.

Same old chestnut.

As Chebby suggests WHFI rely on manufacturers to submit their latest models. If they don't WHFI can only test the models they may have in stock (they keep certain brands as reference) or hope the makers come forward.

Not casting aspersions but you can't review something if it doesn't exist... 

Amp; CDP; Turntable; Tuner; Speakers

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3478
RE: July DAC review

John Duncan wrote:

Just pointing you (quite helpfully, I thought) at some pointless subjective reviews.

They're not usually something I indulge in or indeed am swayed by, but thanks anyway.

theadmans's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 04/06/2009 - 16:27
Posts: 74
RE: July DAC review

Yes I agree that the July DAC test is fundamentally flawed without the inclusion of the Beresford Bushmaster.

Would have been really interesting to see how the £185 Bushmaster stacks up against the likes of the Rega DAC and Audiolab M-DAC. The Regas and Audiolabs of this world of course have a sizeable Dealer Margin built into their pricing. It would be nice to confirm that the Direct Sold Bushmaster with no Dealer Margin does in fact sound every bit as good as the perenial Rega and Audiolab favourites.

 

Al ears's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 1 day ago
Joined: 23/11/2008 - 19:20
Posts: 3024
RE: July DAC review

Reviews that lack one persons particular favourite are bound to happen.

All reviews are very subjective and to say July's review was flawed is just rot.

If you really must read someone elses thoughts on a particular DAC then that is fine as I am sure you can find it elsewhere on the web or other publications. There is, however, no point in asking WHFSAV to review something that they are not given access to.

If you are really interested in a particular DAC then I guess the best thing to do is to go and audition it yourself.:)

 

Motto: Never pay full price for anything, there is always room to haggle!

Tom Evans Audio Design amplification / Acoustic Zen speakers.

theadmans's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 04/06/2009 - 16:27
Posts: 74
RE: July DAC review

Alears wrote:

Reviews that lack one persons particular favourite are bound to happen.

All reviews are very subjective and to say July's review was flawed is just rot.

If you really must read someone elses thoughts on a particular DAC then that is fine as I am sure you can find it elsewhere on the web or other publications. There is, however, no point in asking WHFSAV to review something that they are not given access to.

If you are really interested in a particular DAC then I guess the best thing to do is to go and audition it yourself.:)

...the Beresford Bushmaster is not just my favourite DAC (if you read the thread at least 3 people have chimed in saying it would have been nice to have included the Bushmaster).

In fact, I auditioned the Bushmaster against the Rega and the Audiolab - and decided that I prefered the Bushmaster. The point I am making is that it would be nice if Beresford could be included in these magazine reviews so they get more credit for what is an outstanding product IMHO.

I keep seeing this argument about only reviewing stuff that is provided for review. However, in my opinion the magazine should buy in products that deserve to be in the line up if any are obviously missing. At the end of the day they are suppose to be providing a fair assessment of what is currently available to buy. It often seems to me that the products reviewed reflect more on the efficiency of the company's marketing department than the technical quality of the products.  

Also in other areas of the reviewing world we get fair comparisons (eg a £4 Lidl Wine reviewed as better than a £20 bottle from Waitrose etc) but in Hi-Fi reviewing - all too often - equipment only seems to be allowed to be better if it is roughly at the same price point as it's competitors. 

As someone who is always keen to avoid wasting money - I would love to see a comparison of the Bushmaster against some of the bigger manufacturers.

 

 

 

 

plastic penguin's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 28/04/2008 - 10:56
Posts: 16435
RE: July DAC review

theadmans wrote:

Yes I agree that the July DAC test is fundamentally flawed without the inclusion of the Beresford Bushmaster.

 

The review flips over several pages ranging from budget to hi-end. It's impossible to review every dac at once. If the mag was called 'What Dac? Sound and Vision' your request would be valid.

For one reason or another, many brands in a multitude of catagories get omitted. C'est la vie.

Amp; CDP; Turntable; Tuner; Speakers

expat_mike's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 1 hour ago
Joined: 30/03/2013 - 19:10
Posts: 405
RE: July DAC review

Hello Highstream,

 

The Micromega MyDac was reviewed as part of the May DAC supertest, in the French edition of WHFSV.

The HRT microstreamer, Arcam rDAC and Meridian Explorer DAC all scored 5 stars, but the MyDAC was one of a group of four DACs that scored only 4 stars. So the MyDAC doesn't even win the supertest in France.

I find it easy to look at the pictures, and the no. of stars, but reading the reviews in French, is still a slow process, but good practice. Smile

 

scorps's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 21/07/2008 - 13:48
Posts: 29
RE: July DAC review

totally agree wi alears. i've been reading this magazine for the best part of 30 yrs and regard as does my brother as a bit of a bible they cant review all the available gear at anytime or would take them days to come to a decision of kit that they preferred. At the end of the day its all down to our own ears if u go solely off a comment in a mag then u not gonna get the best out of ur stereo, it has to be right for you but whathifi has helped me narrow down what i need to listen to so many times through my upgrades, starting with a technics amp and cd player of irrelevant numbers through mi pioneer a400,marants cd52 celestion 9s(which got a poor score in what hifi ,but sounded marvelous to me) to what i have now. No doubt in the near future u will see a smaller test which includes the beresford i personally have a beresford caimen dac at present that been gatorized wi external power suply n is marvelous. rest of system is sooloos control 15, densen beat preamp, bryston 8b-st run in bridged mode n pair of pmc pb1s not all group test winners but sound marvelous together.

Pages

Log in or register to post comments