Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?

[antcollinet]

A intimated above, expectation bias is extremely powerful and is particularly insidious in those who are either unaware of it or deny its influence. This explains a lot:

What We Hear

FIRST SOME UPDATES: This is a promising sign. I’ve managed to publish another article in less than a week and it’s a big one! Since last wee...

nwavguy.blogspot.com

Thanks for that link - very useful

 

[voodooless]

Why do you expect a different DAC implementation to lead to the same result instead?

Because the measurements say so. Down to 20 to 21 bits, SOTA DAC’s of various chips produce the exact same output, any difference is far below audible levels.

How is it possible to think that two completely different electrical circuits can lead to the exact same result?

Because that’s what they are designed to do.

 

[Robin L]

There are now at least a few forum threads on ASR basically saying it's extremely difficult if not impossible to hear audio differences between different DACs when properly set up for a fair comparison. If that is the case, does that mean every single professional reviewer out there is wrong? Do they just have better hearing than most of us?

This is an honest/sincere question, not trying to troll here at all.

"Reviewers" might not be the accurate term. "Influencers" is more like it. There's a hard wall between what is actually going on, audibly, with these common industrial gizmos, and the prose produced by these influencers. On one side is the truth, on the other, something else. From what I have read, the absolute limit of human perception lies in the general vicinity of -115db. Anything further down in the mix is 100% guaranteed inaudible. There are a lot of DACs that pass that bar. However, throw in the usual level of environmental noise, and the limit looks a lot more like -80 db. Looking at Amir's tests, all but around 10% of all the DACs he's tested pass that bar. I'd say the exceptions to transparency are the outliers, something like 90% of all DACs should be effectively transparent.

 

[Robin L]

Ok, I mean any reviewer on Youtube or on the internet or trade press who subjectively describe how different DACs sound using words (not charts or measurements).

Measurements or it's total BS.

 

[storing]

How is it possible to think that two completely different electrical circuits can lead to the exact same result?
try to explain ..

Try this analogy: you can walk to any destination with literally an infinite amount of different routes. Yet you always end up at the exact same destination.

 

[Purité Audio]

Different DAC mean different project.. they can do a difference as well as a different preamplifier or a different power amplifier ... or a different speaker.
Why do you expect a different DAC implementation to lead to the same result instead?
How is it possible to think that two completely different electrical circuits can lead to the exact same result?
try to explain ..

Well you have to measure them, no-one would argue that a ‘broken’ NOS design will sound the same as a contemporary oversampling unit.
Keith

 

[Katji]

[...] does that mean every single professional reviewer out there is wrong? [...]

Please define professional reviewer... where are their results?

Professional means they do [it] "for a living", it is how they maintain themselves, AKA "what they do for a living."
It does not really imply any relevant bona fide qualification.

Ok, I mean any reviewer on Youtube or on the internet or trade press who subjectively describe

The first part is right, i.e., they do it professionally What they describe and how is not part of the meaning of the word.

[ Like "burn-in", something that exists only in the mind, it does not become physical reality after being repeated hundreds of times. same applies to meanings of words, it is the same thing. ]

 

[DanielT]

The reviewers either are not level matching, think they have golden superhuman ears and a extremely revealing system to listen to the DAC or they are flat out not being truthful.

Attached pictures from another forum where various Topping DAC were blind tested. The participants seemed to hear differences, but also received comments of this kind:

I do not want to sound boring, but comparing devices with low THD and small other deviations without level calibration is more or less meaningless - if I express myself diplomatically.

 

[antcollinet]

Different DAC mean different project.. they can do a difference as well as a different preamplifier or a different power amplifier ... or a different speaker.
Why do you expect a different DAC implementation to lead to the same result instead?
How is it possible to think that two completely different electrical circuits can lead to the exact same result?
try to explain ..

Easy to explain. A DAC has one job: to accurately represent the waveform encoded in the digital file on the analogue output. If two DACs are both well designed, so that they both do that almost perfectly - with any inaccuracy below the level of audibility - then they will give exactly the same audible result.

Amir's measurements show that a large proportion of DACs (All those in the blue and green sections of the chart) do exactly that. (Even those in the orange section - for most of us - will be audibly the same.)

It doesn't matter if the designs are different. ( << SLIGHT EDIT - to clarify this statement for an international forum)

 

[Katji]

I know you can manipulate soundstage perception slightly by fr response making voices more forward for example.

But soundstage differences ( in a components not speakers ) normally requires DSP

That refers to psycho-acoustics. If a DAC (Digital [to] Analog Converter) does it, then it is faulty or improperly designed or engineered.

 

[radix]

Professional means they do [it] "for a living", it is how they maintain themselves, AKA "what they do for a living."
It does not really imply any relevant bona fide qualification.

I would disagree with this. A professional is someone who follows a structured occupation that has, for example, codes of conduct, continuing education, peer review, licensing, and so forth. A job or occupation is what one does for a living. Being a professional means more than being someone with a job.

 

[radix]

Can you give us a technical explanation for how different DACs can affect soundstage?

Can't crosstalk affect soundstage? Or imbalanced stereo levels? Though, IMO, a DAC should be nailing those to the point where it's beyond human hearing.

 

[antcollinet]

Here is the problem for manufacturers of high end (especially boutique high end) audio kit - and the industry of reviewers and magazines that support them.

In the early days of HIFI, the technology was not good enough to give perfect fidelity. In the quest for "HIFI" we had to pay more to get closer to that unattainable goal.

We are now living in a golden age of audio reproduction where the electronic technology has advanced, to the point where it is better than we need, to recreate effectively perfect fidelity at very low cost. (This is an example of disruptive technology). "High End" manufacturers must now "invent"** justifications for people to buy the ridiculously high priced tat that they sell. They are helped in this by the perception created in the earlier days that you need to pay more to get more. This perception still persists in the minds of "audiophiles" who don't understand the technology, physics and psychoacoustics.

And the whole industry has evolved to promote that perception out of dire necessity. Without customers willing to pay high prices, then the revenue that supports the industry (including the "press" online and off) collapses.

Places like ASR are coming along in response to an industry that is simply trying to fleece its customers for as long as it can continue to do so.


** I'm being charitable here.

 

[DanielT]

Here is the problem for manufacturers of high end (especially boutique high end) audio kit - and the industry of reviewers and magazines that support them.

In the early days of HIFI, the technology was not good enough to give perfect fidelity. In the quest for "HIFI" we had to pay more to get closer to that unattainable goal.

We are now living in a golden age of audio reproduction where the electronic technology has advanced to the point where it is better than we need to recreate effectively perfect fidelity at very low cost. (This is an example of disruptive technology). "High End" manufacturers must now "invent"** justifications for people to buy the ridiculously high priced tat that they sell. They are helped in this by the perception created in the earlier days that you need to pay more to get more. This perception still persists in they minds of "audiophiles" who don't understand the technology, physics and psychoacoustics.

And the whole industry has evolved to promote that perception out of dire necessity. Without customers willing to pay high prices, then the revenue that supports the industry (including the "press" online and off) collapses.

Places like ASR are coming along in response to an industry that is simply trying to fleece its customers for as long as it can continue to do so.


** I'm being charitable here.

It was audible, what you just said.

... or readable

 

[SIY]

If that is the case, does that mean every single professional reviewer out there is wrong?

I do reviews professionally. Do not put me in that basket.

 

[Katji]

"Wrong" is a bit unfair. They are truly hearing differences, but those differences are caused by sighted bias and lack of level matching, not any audible technical differences in the DACs.

It is not a matter of "fair." They are not hearing differences, they are imagining differences - because of psychology that has already been referred to here. (Psychology that is proven/demonstrated/established for almost as long as the relevant physics of electricity and magnetism on which this audio stuff is based.)

 

[Firace]

Easy to explain. A DAC has one job: to accurately represent the waveform encoded in the digital file on the analogue output. If two DACs are both well designed, so that they both do that almost perfectly - with any inaccuracy below the level of audibility - then they will give exactly the same audible result.

Amir's measurements show that a large proportion of DACs (All those in the blue and green sections of the chart) do exactly that. (Even those in the orange section - for most of us - will be audibly the same.)

It matters not if the designs are different.

But.. we are not speaking only about DAC with the same measurements.
For this reason I write about the TDA1541 and the Sabre becouse they are really different both in terms of project and measurements.
Has anyone ever compared these two types of DACs with the same audio components?

 

[antcollinet]

But.. we are not speaking only about DAC with the same measurements.
For this reason I write about the TDA1541 and the Sabre becouse they are really different both in terms of project and measurements.
Has anyone ever compared these two types of DACs with the same audio components?

TDA 1541 is a chip. We are not talking about chips here, we are talking about finished DAC products. We don't measure the outputs of chips, we measure the outputs of finished DACs

And if two different DACs (products) have audibly different measurements, then at least one of them is badly designed and will appear in the orange/red sections of the chart. In this case it is possible that differences in the form of noise or distortion may be heard.

 

[Firace]

TDA 1541 is a chip. We are not talking about chips here, we are talking about finished DAC products. We don't measure the outputs of chips, we measure the outputs of finished DACs

And ..how do you think a chip that needs 3 voltages (one of which at -15V) could have the same implementation of a Sabre?
Sure, we are talking about finished DACs

 

[antcollinet]

And ..how do you think a chip that needs 3 voltages (one of which at -15V) could have the same implementation of a Sabre?
Sure, we are talking about finished DACs

You are not listening. It doesn't matter what the implementation is - it matters only what the result of that implementation is. Accurate reproduction of the encoded digital signal on the analogue output. Or inaccurate.