Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[Mike F]

I have to agree with @BDWoody here.
Think about it, if we can not quantify something, we can not recreate it, or do anything about it.

Right. But that’s why the statement is self fulfilling, isn’t it? I’m really not sure about that I have to confess - I’m no philosopher - I’m just a humble musician who likes his hi-fi!

But here is the problem. What do I do with information that I’m 100% sure about that can’t be proven scientifically? For instance (and this is where I don my flame suit) I’m absolutely sure that I can hear the differences, for instance, between different digital coax cables. I hasten to add that I can’t hear any difference between optical cables, but between electrical digital connect cables I’m 100% sure there are audible differences. It’s possible that those differences could be measurable through a pair of speakers, but I’m not sure that the wires could be measured to be different? They are just carrying digital information after all....? ‍

 

[BDWoody]

But if your only method for discerning a difference is measurement then this is just self fulfilling, isn’t it? i.e. There is no difference because I can’t be measured........

Why is that the only method?

We want Danny, or Darko, or Hans or you or anyone who makes claims to have heard differences where none are expected to exist, to demonstrate that with level controlled double blind AB/X testing.

No one has yet.

 

[BDWoody]

For instance (and this is where I don my flame suit) I’m absolutely sure that I can hear the differences, for instance, between different digital coax cables. I hasten to add that I can’t hear any difference between optical cables, but between electrical digital connect cables I’m 100% sure there are audible differences

 

[Sokel]

Whenever I test something new I do the same REW measurements of the chain+room.If that reveal any improvement in any of the separate measurements AND does not annoys my brain,stays.
Is that simple for me.
I'm sure there is a myriad other measurements but these will not include everything in my chain+room.So...

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Right. But that’s why the statement is self fulfilling, isn’t it? I’m really not sure about that I have to confess - I’m no philosopher - I’m just a humble musician who likes his hi-fi!

But here is the problem. What do I do with information that I’m 100% sure about that can’t be proven scientifically? For instance (and this is where I don my flame suit) I’m absolutely sure that I can hear the differences, for instance, between different digital coax cables. I hasten to add that I can’t hear any difference between optical cables, but between electrical digital connect cables I’m 100% sure there are audible differences. It’s possible that those differences could be measurable through a pair of speakers, but I’m not sure that the wires could be measured to be different? They are just carrying digital information after all....? ‍

Of course you have to respect the notion that others can discard experiences an individual may had, that can not be re-created or measured.
But statistically, if enough people in a controlled test can repeatedly hear something we can not measure yet, then it becomes a challenge for engineers to come up with a method of quantifying it, but first, the controlled test! To rule out the possibility of external factors, mere chance . . etc. That is the scientific approach.
Regarding you hearing differences in coax cables, there is a small possibility that you may be on to something!
- There is the issue of Noise. More accurately, Random RF Noise leaking into a DAC.
Digital circuits are pretty much immune to this noise, hell that was one of the first reasons they invented digital audio. Analogue circuits, not so much.
If a certain DAC/amp is sensitive to this noise, such as Chord portable DACs as they have no isolation, this noise can interfere with their amp (analogue) section, spicing up the output.
For that to be the reason here, you need a noisy environment and/or noisy DAP and such a DAC that is sensitive, together with cables that have some issue with noise. A lot of If's.
Toslink or optical is electrically an insulated interface by default.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I’m absolutely sure that I can hear the differences, for instance, between different digital coax cables

You need to understand how we hear, as humans we can convince ourself of virtually anything. So when you say that you heard a difference I believe you even though I know, because it has been scientifically proven, there is no difference.
The only way to be sure is by demonstrating to yourself, trough abx blind test that you can really hear a difference, as minute and insignificant it might be.
Does it matter, that is up to you, I believe my system sounds fantastic for a lot of reasons, not all of them totally rational and/or scientifically proven, but it really does sound fantastic, to me, and that is all that matter to me, no little graph will deny me any of it.

 

[Mart68]

Obviously, a device with a flawed lab test result is not going to sound good, but the reverse may not be true.

No it's the other way around. If it does not measure so well it can still 'sound good' since there is a threshold of hearing beyond which it doesn't matter.

It will have to measure very poorly to sound bad. As long as it measures past the hearing threshold it will 'sound' like whatever recording you play through it aka 'transparent'.

 

[BDWoody]

No it's the other way around. If it does not measure so well it can still 'sound good' since there is a threshold of hearing beyond which it doesn't matter.

It will have to measure very poorly to sound bad. As long as it measures past the hearing threshold it will 'sound' like whatever recording you play through it aka 'transparent'.

This is why I am not stressed about what I may be missing out on when using my quality vintage gear. My old Luxman preamp gives me a noticeable hum when I crank the gain waaay up with no signal where my Schiit Freya S doesn't, but in terms of real world use, there are no veils in front of one or the other that I would ever notice.

People take different things from this site. The common misconception 'out there' is that we are all just chasing meaningless numbers, when they are only meaningless when you don't understand them or apply them inappropriately.

I did one controlled test shortly after joining the site between DACs I had on hand, and instantly had a different view of reviews based on sighted listening comparisons.

 

[Mart68]

This is why I am not stressed about what I may be missing out on when using my quality vintage gear. My old Luxman preamp gives me a noticeable hum when I crank the gain waaay up with no signal where my Schiit Freya S doesn't, but in terms of real world use, there are no veils in front of one or the other that I would ever notice.

People take different things from this site. The common misconception 'out there' is that we are all just chasing meaningless numbers, when they are only meaningless when you don't understand them or apply them inappropriately.

I did one controlled test shortly after joining the site between DACs I had on hand, and instantly had a different view of reviews based on sighted listening comparisons.

If I had a quid for everyone who had said to me 'ASR reviewed my DAC and they panned it' I could retire to the Bahamas.

I explain:

They didn't review it, not in the sense you mean, they measured it, that's not the same thing. And just because it fell short of the state of the art in measurements does not mean that it will sound in the slightest bit inferior.

But it becomes hard work, it really does, as 'magazine thinking' (as I call it) is so deeply entrenched. Everything must have its own 'sound signature' like wines from a different vineyard. There's decades of brainwashing to overcome and often it's impossible.

 

[Mike F]

You need to understand how we hear, as humans we can convince ourself of virtually anything. So when you say that you heard a difference I believe you even though I know, because it has been scientifically proven, there is no difference.
The only way to be sure is by demonstrating to yourself, trough abx blind test that you can really hear a difference, as minute and insignificant it might be.

I appreciate that, but the problem is that it’s impossible to prove something to somebody with a double-blind test on an Internet forum. I’m talking about an experience I had when comparing two cables which I still have. I own both the cables so there is no bias going. They are also comparably (and reasonably) priced, so no wishful thinking or snake oil involved. The difference is subtle yet repeatable. I also have no preconceived idea about how each cable should sound. They sound different. Could I tell the difference if someone else changed the cables. Yes. I can only conclude that it’s because of information loss or contamination.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

No it's the other way around. If it does not measure so well it can still 'sound good' since there is a threshold of hearing beyond which it doesn't matter.

It will have to measure very poorly to sound bad. As long as it measures past the hearing threshold it will 'sound' like whatever recording you play through it aka 'transparent'.

It depends on your definition of what a flawed result is.
A f-up!

 

[Raindog123]

I appreciate that, but the problem is that it’s impossible to prove something to somebody with a double-blind test on an Internet forum. I’m talking about an experience I had when comparing two cables which I still have. I own both the cables so there is no bias going. They are also comparably (and reasonably) priced, so no wishful thinking or snake oil involved. The difference is subtle yet repeatable. I also have no preconceived idea about how each cable should sound. They sound different. Could I tell the difference if someone else changed the cables. Yes. I can only conclude that it’s because of information loss or contamination.

The [cognitive] bias here is not that you prefer one product [eg, cable] over the other but that you’ve [potentially unintentionally] convinced yourself that there is a difference. The only way to prove/disprove the bias [vs real effect] is to eliminate listener‘s [eg, your] knowledge of which of the two devices/cables is being played.

We can theorize about it till cows come home… instead, just try it.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Yes. I can only conclude that it’s because of information loss or contamination.

No, that wouldn't be possible.
With digital audio, loss of data or contamination causes cracks clicks, bad noises or complete silence.
If you have a Chord DAC, it may cause a loud white noise.

 

[Ken Tajalli]

If I had a quid for everyone who had said to me 'ASR reviewed my DAC and they panned it' I could retire to the Bahamas.. . . . . .The common misconception 'out there' is that we are all just chasing meaningless numbers, when they are only meaningless when you don't understand them or apply them inappropriately.

Above is from @amirm review of the Topping DX7 pro, and comparison to his beloved DX3 pro.
Just read the last line, please.
Perhaps you could PM @amirm and politely give him some of your wisdom!
After all, the difference between the two devices in real terms is miniscule, yet Amir has fallen into that trap!
Just straighten him out.

 

[nyxnyxnyx]

I side more with objective methods at this point in time. I follow headgears (iems, headphones, headamps...) alot and I believe many popular or even seasoned reviewers don't even know how to setup a proper volume-matched, ABX test. What's worse is not that they can't do it, it's more like they don't want to approach it for whatever reasons.

I do not demand hard evidences like some other guys here but let's say if somebody went through all the difficulty and rigidity to try the test himself and still said he can hear differences or stand with his stance on the subject ( whether he scored 10/10 or 0/10 with his ABX tests) then at least I can respect that dude for at least trying to experience BOTH SIDES.

Usually the full-blown subjective folks strongly believe in many things but they rarely evaluate just how consistent or reliable it is, they usually prefer to blame it on the setup is "not great enough" or someone's hearing is "not good enough" but don't even want to consider that there's a possibility that they're wrong while the objective folks can happily swallow their words if they are proven wrong.

 

[MaxBuck]

You never provided, after having been asked several times by multiple posters to present evidence for your claim „that DACs sound different“ although they are SOTA and measure the same. Therefore your argument is fundamentally flawed.

You most likely perceive a difference due to your perceptional biases, like every human being. You can therefore only proof the correctness of your claim by excluding those biases with an ABX listing test. See the link I provided to you previously.

Everything else is just hearsay, anecdotes …

Everything you say here seems unassailable. Yet the impact of different filters remains a bit of a mystery.

Having owned DACs with switchable filters, I can guarantee that switching them resulted in different sound. I'd love to know how that could be, since supposedly all the influence occurs at substantially higher frequencies than I can hear. I suspect it's because, although I can't "hear" them, presence or absence of the higher frequency signals affects the overall psychoacoustic phenomena that are present in totality. But that's pretty much ignorant conjecture on my part.

 

[BDWoody]

Just moved a few more in.

 

[Mart68]

View attachment 211981
Above is from @amirm review of the Topping DX7 pro, and comparison to his beloved DX3 pro.
Just read the last line, please.
Perhaps you could PM @amirm and politely give him some of your wisdom!
After all, the difference between the two devices in real terms is miniscule, yet Amir has fallen into that trap!
Just straighten him out.

Your missed the 'looks and usability' bit I think.

 

[Sal1950]

Just moved a few more in.

Yo Woody, you're fixin to build the longest thread in forum history. LOL

 

[Ken Tajalli]

Your missed the 'looks and usability' bit I think.