记得曾发过mod DAC1的帖子，因为找不到了，特转一下benchmark 的回应。

shy888

交易区新帖推荐

This company is not affiliated with Benchmark in any way.  Benchmark does not condone any modification of the product.  Further, any modification to the product will void all warranties.

We have seen several 'modders' come and go.  We have received several modified products for repair (non-warranty) because the modifications disrupted the circuit.  Every modified product that we have seen performed more poorly then the stock product.

This 'modder' (ASi) sells his 'service' of modifying many products from many brands.  However, his methods are rather suspect, as indicated by some of the information he has on his webpage.  For example, on the "Why Mod?" page (http://www.asi-tek.com/whymod.html), he says that "the sound" is only determined by the electronic components, which represents a small portion of the entire expense of a device.  The truth is that 'R&D' will have more of an affect on the sound then the parts.  A great engineer with mediocre parts can make a better device then a mediocre engineer with great parts.  The 'engineer' behind ASi may be in the latter of those two descriptions, given the fact that he doesn't recognize the importance of R&D over parts.  It tells me that he just uses the most expensive parts, even if he doesn't realize what difference they are making. There are many other signs that point to this as well...like the 'About' page (http://www.asi-tek.com/aboutus.html).  He has a picture of an ancient oscilliscope, and the caption reads, "...if needed..."  A real engineer wouldn't make any changes without using the oscilliscope to monitor the process at all times - "always needed", not just "if needed".  

There are many other things that I could point to on that website to discredit their compotence, but instead of going there, let me explain our design practice: We do not use inexpensive parts in spite of performance.  The components used in our products are not selected for budgetary reasons, but simply based on acheiving the maximum performance.  The majority of the cost of our products is in R&D (research and developement).  In other words, we spend money paying engineers to design the best possible circuit instead of simply throwing the most expensive parts into a box and saying it is "better".  If any of these proposed mods made the performance of our products better, we would graciously and happily adopt the revised circuit and implement it immediately.  But, unfortunately, every mod we have seen has been nothing but a misdirected failure.

Take our advice: Do not mod your Benchmark equipment.

All the best,
Elias

sentence

被彻底鄙视了啊，我也觉得mod要慎重，尤其是中高档机

shy888

所以对类似『一看XX芯片就知道输了几条街』的言论实在不必太在意。

wl336

如果承认可以mod不就是打自己耳光嘛

shy888

原帖由 wl336 于 2010-9-11 13:00 发表
如果承认可以mod不就是打自己耳光嘛

这样浅显？

小白

A great engineer with mediocre parts can make a better device then a mediocre engineer with great parts.  这句话很有意思。

chen0706

虽然Benchmark说的大部分都是真理，但是显然即使他们“selected for budgetary reasons”，也会自称是“based on acheiving the maximum performance”的……
想磨机的话，先得确定自己的水平高过设计者。原机成本很大一部分是R&D，磨机者想超过原机，是不是也得把自己的R&D成本加进去呢？

激光鼠

Every modified product that we have seen performed more poorly then the stock product.  

fsscn

官方我倒认为这种反应是正常的

shy888

原帖由 小白 于 2010-9-11 15:26 发表
A great engineer with mediocre parts can make a better device then a mediocre engineer with great parts.  这句话很有意思。

实际上，这也是白版长久以来一直所持的观点（或态度）。至少在对待solo耳放的观点上是清晰明了的。

googoodos

相信人家的R&D，都是数据对比出来的，你MOD依据什么？不能只是发烧器件吧

激光鼠

设计师也是人，水平高过厂家设计师就可以磨机，DAC1的声音不算很好，有改进余地

shy888

benchmark厂商很低调的，在美国很少见。