Hector Martin

It's hardware-based emulation via FPGA(s), which as I understand it is different from (and has the potential to be more accurate than) software-based emulation and is one of the reasons why it's more expensive. Not sure how record or live worthy it will ultimately be though.

even if it's FPGA w/the best replication of an original DMG CPU, it'll still be dependent on its DAC output accuracy (or whatever simulation it does). A lot of the GB's distinctive sound does come from its discrete components at the time then again people do prosound mods, so

I've always thought that if people can't get near-indistinguishable output from emulation (software or hardware), they aren't trying hard enough. Modern DACs are transparent and we can emulate any analog quirks in the digital domain.

according to their marketing literature it's "not designed using software emulation"... which I'm assuming is at least for its CPU core. if that logic were to also apply to the actual audio output stage, i don't think it'd be as simple as having a "transparent DAC" […]

[…] especially since the various GB versions have drastically different audio quality between each other (in addition to supporting their respective upgraded platforms like GBC/GBA extensions of course). so unless they're sticking different […]