hobbyist wrote:...good enough depends on your objective as constrained by your budget.
D'oh! right back at you!
That's precisely my point! 'Good enough' is subjective, not objective. But there are objective ways of assessing converters to find which are more accurate and which are more flawed.
Someone with a low budget may decide a Behringer ADA8200 is 'good enough' but it's not hard to demonstrate it's limitations in comparison with, say, a Lavry or Lynx Hilo... No golden ears required...
What I object to is golden eared deep pocket snobs telling almost everybody else that their gear is crap and to go buy more expensive stuff.
Once again... you're pushing on an open door here... If you want to be angry about this kind of stuff go to Gearslutz and join the other ranters. We have a far more measured, realistic and pragmatic approach here. I'd have thought you'd have had enough acclimatisation time to figure that out by now...
Once you get to the bottom of the mid range there is really really nothing that will sound better. You may get more reliability, more functions, prettier cabinets, and other nice or other audibly meaningless things.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I respect yours... but I don't agree with it, and nor will a lot of people who have the experience and knowledge to know better.
I have to ask, what do you think qualifies you to make a statement like that exactly?
How much real experience have you actually had using high-end equipment in professional studio spaces?
While it's certainly true that a lot of quite modestly priced equipment performs brilliantly and sounds fantastic today -- and is very unlikely to be the weak link in any semi-pro project studio -- there are still audible benefits to be found in much of the equipment where no corners are cut and sound quality is the unfettered design priority. And again, it doesn't need 'golden ears' to hear, just normal hearing...