|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.6.89.169
In Reply to: Alex-Will you be offering a Mod package for the DV-60/SA-60? posted by dusted on April 14, 2007 at 15:57:55:
dusted,Why would you imagine Mr. Peychev could do better than TEAC? Would it be by replacing any parts TEAC used to meet a price point? Surely TEAC has design and engineering talent equal to Mr. Peychev's.
Follow Ups:
Any mass produced device is a result of a number of compromises, the craftsman who makes one offs has a lot more freedom, the end result has less to do with talent than a fewer number of compromises. Alex can give individual attention to each unit leaving his shop, while TEAC cannot. Based on your assesment one should never mod anything :-)
dee,Your conclusion of my assessment is inadequate. The components of most commercial products must be selected to meet a price point. A modder can reverse those compromises by upgrading where the OEM selected a lower grade part. Another type of mod can be the use of a component with newer or improved technology, most likely a later DAC. What I doubt is the prowess of a modder to substitute his design or engineering skills for those of the OEM. If you have ever visited a Sony lab and exchanged ideas with their scientists, you know they can attract top talent, talent unlikely to be available to a modder.
heavy duty cost accountants, and "we have always done it this way so why should we change?" chains of command.The SONYSCD-1SCD-777ES machines use a absolutely hideous design for their audio output section using 11 opamps per channel!
Is this the result of the genius "top talent" who developed the SACD processing technology? No - it was lifted connection by connection, component by component from a Burr-Brown Application Note AB-206) that is part of their 1994 Applications handbook - but may well have been written well before that!
IMO, too muchtop-down control...
< < lifted connection by connection, component by component from a Burr-Brown Application Note > >Not only the big Japanese majors practice this type of intellectual laziness. The so-called "Adaptive Biasing" that Levinson uses in their big power amps was taken directly from a 1981 AES paper written by (of all people!) the engineers from Sansui!
But to my way of thinking, the mere fact of using an op-amp for an audio circuit is another example of this mindset. Effectively the designer is saying "I can't design a better circuit than this." While this may hold true for cost-sensitive applications where sonic performance doesn't matter, it is a bit embarrassing when it comes to a so-called "high-end" product.
To make a statement suggesting that Sony or TEAC have any advantage in retaining the best scientific or engineering talent is ludicrous. Where I work, in Silicon Valley, many of the best engineers and scientists are not interested in working for a company like Sony. Nor are they interested in working for NASA, Lockheed Martin, etc., etc. A university, perhaps.Alex worked at Sony and left in part because he was disgusted with the way their cost cutting measures (read: profit maximizing) were compromising their products.
Sony, TEAC, etc. design their products for a particular price level and profit margin. They voice their products in a particular way as well. Alex redesigns players taking a cost-no-object approach. IMO, what sets Alex apart is his ear for the sound he wants to obtain in his designs and his ability to reach his goals. (I say this because Alex and I agree on sound, but I'm certainly not alone in this.) Part of Alex's success -- and that of other modifiers -- is derived from hours and hours of obsessive experimentation with different variations in design. I think it is safe to say that Sony, TEAC, etc. just don't go to those lengths. Finally, if they designed a player like Alex, the BOM would be much, much higher.
But it sounds like your statements are based merely on conjecture, not on real experience or actual knowledge.
So every bright engineer must work for Sony, or Teac, or some other large corporation? No lone wolfs, or geniuses are allowed to operate out in the wild? Innovation only comes from large institutions? Why should that be the rule? If that was true, I could only make progress if I worked for IBM or soem other industrial Giant. Nobody should be interested in my expertise, because I am not branded by some big corporation, I could never design a better system? And also a large corporation may not pay as much to an employee what one can get on the open market, perhaps developing new products. I would not under any circumstances underestimate the talent available to an enterprising fellow :-). It all depends on the aspirations of that talent. How do you think startups attract talent?
| ||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: