Anyone, Snaxo vs Exakt ?

sunbeamgls posted:

Allante93 posted:

Don't know what I'm looking at, but looks very expensive!

Upgrades & Accessories

EXAKT

Klimax Exakt 350 Modules 21,500 =  10 power amps, 10 DACs and 2x Exakt engines, dealer install

Exakt Akubarik Modules 14,250 = 10 power amps, 10 DACs and 2x Exakt engines, dealer install

Klimax Exaktbox (package price for 2) 16,000 = 2x Exakt engines and 12 DACs (and 2 very nice lumps of alloy), dealer install

The Big Picture, who dominates the Active technologies during the 21st Century?

Allante93!

As above.  Not saying it is good VFM, but just letting you know what's in there.

p.s. Exakt Engine = an FPGA (the low cost hardware) and the software (the bit that consumes large amount of expensive brain power, research and testing)

Thanks, I was afraid to ask, but out of curiosity, what Does the letters stand for, FPGA?

ALLANTE

sunbeamgls posted:

Allante93 posted:

Klimax Exaktbox (package price for 2) 16,000

Where did you find this little gem please Allante93?

It's OK, I found it now - this price is only available if buying an Exakt enabled Klimax DS/DSM at the same time, otherwise its an even more collosal 20,000gbp.  Of course, Majik and Akurate level Exakt is available at less stratospheric pricing.

Allante93 posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

Allante93 posted:

Don't know what I'm looking at, but looks very expensive!

Upgrades & Accessories

EXAKT

Klimax Exakt 350 Modules 21,500 =  10 power amps, 10 DACs and 2x Exakt engines, dealer install

Exakt Akubarik Modules 14,250 = 10 power amps, 10 DACs and 2x Exakt engines, dealer install

Klimax Exaktbox (package price for 2) 16,000 = 2x Exakt engines and 12 DACs (and 2 very nice lumps of alloy), dealer install

The Big Picture, who dominates the Active technologies during the 21st Century?

Allante93!

As above.  Not saying it is good VFM, but just letting you know what's in there.

p.s. Exakt Engine = an FPGA (the low cost hardware) and the software (the bit that consumes large amount of expensive brain power, research and testing)

Thanks, I was afraid to ask, but out of curiosity, what Does the letters stand for, FPGA?

ALLANTE

https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_...f&q=define:+fpga

Simon, the SHARC is classified as a DSP rather than a FPGA (at least by AD themselves); but where hybrid devices are concerned the boundaries are getting rather blurred.

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

Huge posted:

ASICs go out of production
Transistors go out of production
Capacitors go out of production
FPGAs go out of production
OEM speaker drive units go out of production
Transformers go out of production
Car engine management components go out of production
Jet engines go out of production
...

Starting to border on trolling now H.

No, since you were progressively clutching at smaller and smaller straws to justify the uniqueness of the techniques in use in the Exakt system, this was just 'reductio ad absurdam'.

While it's true that Linn have put together features that previously haven't been assembled in one place, individually they're well known.

Well, the particular point on ASICs going out of production was absolutely nothing to do with Exakt functionality, but ho-hum.  Carry on.

sunbeamgls posted:

Well, the particular point on ASICs going out of production was absolutely nothing to do with Exakt functionality, but ho-hum.  Carry on.

So what was the purpose of posting it then?  It was a criticism of a post of mine mentioning that that line of technology hadn't been used.

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

Well, the particular point on ASICs going out of production was absolutely nothing to do with Exakt functionality, but ho-hum.  Carry on.

So what was the purpose of posting it then?  It was a criticism of a post of mine mentioning that that line of technology hadn't been used.

OK,  let's put this in sequence:

- I mention that I assume the Exakt engine is based on an FPGA

- You question why I assume FPGA

- I establish that an FPGA is in use and identify the model used

- You say that ASICs can do the same job

- I point out why ASICs may not be a good idea for a small volume manufacturer and how an FPGA may be better because the software is portable across generations of products whereas repacing ASICs need new hardware design and manufacturing processes

- You list a load of stuff that goes out of production, rather pointlessly.

This kind of progression of interaction looks to me like trolling.  And doesn't really help the rest of your position, but that's up to you.  I'll leave it there.

jfritzen posted:

Allante93 posted:

 

The Big Picture, who dominates the Active technologies during the 21st Century?

I don't know if such a small market like active systems lends itself to the term domination. Active systems (in the sense of Naim/Linn) are a niche in the niche of high end audio and even high end audio is shrinking. So active systems will probably remain small scattered islands in the ocean of passive crossovers.

But since you asked: Linn !

I hear Jfritzen, just like you were interested in what XO they were using at the Bristol show earlier this year, to go with the Kudos Titans, others were also.

Berlinger/Naim Amps/ Kudos Titans 808

The Kudos Titans, that's right, there are many right here on the Forum, that use the following  Speakers to go along with Naim electronics.  Now, that's just one Major Aspect!  Kudos, PMC, B&W, KEF, and JBL, all combined with Naim Electronics.

That's why Linn did it, that have loads of Speakers to match their Exakt technologies, 

Now the Trickle down aspect, for regular guys that can't afford these Hi End technologies, like myself. 

17K USA invested in 2nd hand gear, Cdx2/282/HCDR/3 x 250.2 to go along with my Existing Briks:

Take a look at the Naim Gear associated with the Three Post going on this very moment:

Sbl and Active mode/252-Sbl

Going Active/92-Credos

 Active Nap 500 DR Upgrade/S1-Ovators

Everything ranging from Nac 92s to S1 pre amps, all Naim Electronic. 

From a Business Prospecting it all adds up to sales! 

Which is in sink with Naim's  Upgrade Paths. 

Just think, Focal comes out with a gem of a Speaker, Active Ready for the Snaxo, Same Principal Linn is using!

Why? To Capture a larger share of the Market!

This very moment, Individuals who show interest in Non Linn Speakers, are considering Linn Exakt technologies! 

Foca/Naim should be competing for these same Individuals, so they can become entangled in the World Of Naim, and it's Snaxo technologies!

Business 201, That's all ! 

I didn't major in Business, but it seems logical! 

  Allante!

jfritzen posted:

Allante93 posted:

 

The Big Picture, who dominates the Active technologies during the 21st Century?

I don't know if such a small market like active systems lends itself to the term domination. Active systems (in the sense of Naim/Linn) are a niche in the niche of high end audio and even high end audio is shrinking. So active systems will probably remain small scattered islands in the ocean of passive crossovers.

But since you asked: Linn !

You may be right, especially if Focal/Naim doesn't get their act together!

sunbeamgls posted:

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

Well, the particular point on ASICs going out of production was absolutely nothing to do with Exakt functionality, but ho-hum.  Carry on.

So what was the purpose of posting it then?  It was a criticism of a post of mine mentioning that that line of technology hadn't been used.

OK,  let's put this in sequence:

- I mention that I assume the Exakt engine is based on an FPGA

- You question why I assume FPGA

- I establish that an FPGA is in use and identify the model used

- You say that ASICs can do the same job

- I point out why ASICs may not be a good idea for a small volume manufacturer and how an FPGA may be better because the software is portable across generations of products whereas repacing ASICs need new hardware design and manufacturing processes

- You list a load of stuff that goes out of production, rather pointlessly.

This kind of progression of interaction looks to me like trolling.  And doesn't really help the rest of your position, but that's up to you.  I'll leave it there.

You have twice taken a distorted view of my replies by claiming I've written things that I haven't actually stated and twice used this to accuse me of trolling.

In comparison I haven't insulted you even once, so why are you taking this ad hominem approach?

Huge posted:

Simon, the SHARC is classified as a DSP rather than a FPGA (at least by AD themselves); but where hybrid devices are concerned the boundaries are getting rather blurred.

But it is quite possibly an FPGA device - DSP of course is its function and not its physical implementation of the Super Harvard architecture  which would define it being an FPGA. I guess it could be CPLD - but reading TI's architecture of their SHARC DSP processor is looks more akin to an FPGA implementation using soft processor cores built on FPGA fabric because of its size and complexity. But I guess if the CPU and DSP cores were hardwired or even implemented using the more recent ISEF Architecture  from Stretch then it would not be an FPGA architecture as I understand it. The ISEF architecture does look to have advantages for the development of computing intensive DSP engines but I have no personal experience of it

Simon

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Huge posted:

Simon, the SHARC is classified as a DSP rather than a FPGA (at least by AD themselves); but where hybrid devices are concerned the boundaries are getting rather blurred.

But it is quite possibly an FPGA device - DSP of course is its function and not its physical implementation of the Super Harvard architecture  which would define it being an FPGA. I guess it could be CPLD - but reading TI's architecture of their SHARC DSP processor is looks more akin to an FPGA implementation using soft processor cores built on FPGA fabric because of its size and complexity. But I guess if the CPU and DSP cores were hardwired or even implemented using the more recent ISEF Architecture  from Stretch then it would not be an FPGA architecture as I understand it. The ISEF architecture does look to have advantages for the development of computing intensive DSP engines but I have no personal experience of it

Simon

 

Interesting, still don't understand, so googled, and came up with the following:

I am assuming, this is the technologies you guys are talking about, that might be incorporated within the Exakt Dacs.

Could you please simplify, and paraphase as it relates to traditional 20K dacs, mentioned below:

""Smith’s audio DAC didn’t just sound good with SACDs, it made CDs sound better as well adds McGowan, “closer to high-resolution audio than I thought possible.

” In fact, McGowan felt that Smith’s FPGA-based DAC stood up well against audiophile DACs costing $10,000 to $20,000. “It just slayed them,” he said. (Note: We’re talking about an audiophile DAC based on a low-cost Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA here.)

The secret to Smith’s sweet-sounding DAC: jitter (actually lack of jitter). “DSD is incredibly sensitive to jitter,” says Smith. Clock jitter shows up directly as noise in the output stream. “People are laughing at me when I say I can hear 2psec,” says Smith, “but…when you have a good noise floor (120db), you can hear it.” Smith credits Xilinx Principle Engineer Austin Lesea with help on reducing jitter. Lesea is a jitter virtuoso. Here’s Lesea’s White Paper on the topic: “Jitter: Variations in the Significant Instants of a Clock or Data Signal.”

PS Audio introduced its $5995DirectStream DAC, using Ted Smith's DAC design, on March 1, 2014"".

 Allante93!

Proper context, Google source:

Audiophiles swoon over DirectStream DSD audio DAC based on Spartan-6 FPGA

Not being an Engineer, or Computer savvy, this is a

foreign language.

 However, I do understand English!

I sincerely a contradiction in the following statement:

In fact, McGowan felt that Smith’s FPGA-based DAC stood up well against audiophile DACs costing $10,000 to $20,000. “It just slayed them,” he said. (Note: We’re talking about an audiophile DAC based on a low-cost Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA here.)

It stood up well, and slayed, at the same time?

I think my regurgitating percentage, just increased!

Thanks for the input!

Allante93 posted:

Not being an Engineer, or Computer savvy, this is a

foreign language.

 However, I do understand English!

I sincerely a contradiction in the following statement:

In fact, McGowan felt that Smith’s FPGA-based DAC stood up well against audiophile DACs costing $10,000 to $20,000. “It just slayed them,” he said. (Note: We’re talking about an audiophile DAC based on a low-cost Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA here.)

It stood up well, and slayed, at the same time?

I think my regurgitating percentage, just increased!

Thanks for the input!

 

The DAC in question "stood up well" whilst the DAC being compared was "slayed".

Our language is fun isn't it?