On 2007-05-24, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:

One DAC I saw reviewed (I can't remember which one but it was
expensive!) made the comment that it was so sensitive, it would reveal
the differences between digital cables. What this meant was that it had
such an appallingly engineered receiver that there was no reclocking of
data, and pattern jitter on the cable went uncorrected. So much for "so
sensitive", crap actually.

It *was* 'sensitive' - the problem was that it shouldn't have been! :-)

Steady on! That's the same heresy as "an amplifier should just amplify
and its output should not depend on the particular speakers it drives."
It's the uncultured engineer's philosophy and the antithesis of the
right-minded thinking of those who enjoy music. :-)

--
John Phillips

In article , John Phillips
wrote:
On 2007-05-24, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:

One DAC I saw reviewed (I can't remember which one but it was
expensive!) made the comment that it was so sensitive, it would
reveal the differences between digital cables. What this meant was
that it had such an appallingly engineered receiver that there was no
reclocking of data, and pattern jitter on the cable went uncorrected.
So much for "so sensitive", crap actually.

It *was* 'sensitive' - the problem was that it shouldn't have been!
:-)

Steady on! That's the same heresy as "an amplifier should just amplify
and its output should not depend on the particular speakers it drives."
It's the uncultured engineer's philosophy and the antithesis of the
right-minded thinking of those who enjoy music. :-)

s/music/amplifier 'sound'/ :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"John Phillips" wrote
in message
On 2007-05-24, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote:

One DAC I saw reviewed (I can't remember which one but
it was expensive!) made the comment that it was so
sensitive, it would reveal the differences between
digital cables. What this meant was that it had such an
appallingly engineered receiver that there was no
reclocking of data, and pattern jitter on the cable
went uncorrected. So much for "so sensitive", crap
actually.

It *was* 'sensitive' - the problem was that it shouldn't
have been! :-)

Steady on! That's the same heresy as "an amplifier
should just amplify and its output should not depend on
the particular speakers it drives."

Real world example being many tubed amps and just about every SET.

It's the uncultured
engineer's philosophy and the antithesis of the
right-minded thinking of those who enjoy music. :-)

A highly-colored audio system is an audiphile's way of making each recording
his own.