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

[Spkrdctr]

FTFY.

SIY, we are 5,240 posts in and I don't believe I have an answer yet. Do DACS have sound signatures? A simple yes or no would suffice. LOL!

 

[fpitas]

SIY, we are 5,240 posts in and I don't believe I have an answer yet. Do DACS have sound signatures? A simple yes or no would suffice. LOL!

It's the X Factor our trolls try to tell us about. But you have to believe,

 

[Mnyb]

I was just allowing for the fact that the very earliest CD players used no oversampling (or upsampling) at all.

But they did use very sharp analog filters it sort of worked but was hard to do good .

I think many nowadays associate NOS with also filterless DAC’s which is a horrible idea as the filter is not optional the DAC simply does not work properly without it , it’s a part of the process to reconstruct the signal .

 

[Blumlein 88]

But they did use very sharp analog filters it sort of worked but was hard to do good .

I think many nowadays associate NOS with also filterless DAC’s which is a horrible idea as the filter is not optional the DAC simply does not work properly without it , it’s a part of the process to reconstruct the signal .

Actually even most early CD players used oversampling. Philips always did, and Sony did with I think their 2nd generation units.

 

[krabapple]

Actually even most early CD players used oversampling. Philips always did, and Sony did with I think their 2nd generation units.

Yeah, the one example I found right away was the earliest Sony line. They went to 2X oversampling pretty soon after.

 

[Mnyb]

Actually even most early CD players used oversampling. Philips always did, and Sony did with I think their 2nd generation units.

Yeah, the one example I found right away was the earliest Sony line. They went to 2X oversampling pretty soon after.

I reckon development was really fast in the beginning of CD
They early stuff does not get enough cred for what it did .

 

[Blumlein 88]

An interesting early response about digital critics from JGH after trying the very first CD player. The Absolute Sound was crying wolf about digital audio. As indicated here they did so without ever hearing one. Even from the very first JGH indicated dither prevents a hard noise floor below which anything could be heard as some were claiming plus he indicated no real recordings could use what was available to them anyway. Plus that many criticisms of CD sound is because digital was ruthlessly revealing with accuracy what those recordings sound like. It is also funny the very early Philips TDA chips got a reputation for sounding more natural, and were used in some boutique DACs later on. Because those were of course the chips in use in early players that gave digital a bad name. Make it obsolete and hard to get and it must be better right?

Sony CDP-101 Compact Disc Player JGH Responds to Doug Sax

J. Gordon Holt then offered the following controversial thoughts in response to an article (linked here) from Doug Sax of Sheffield Labs and The Mastering Lab in December 1983, Vol.6 No.5: Run Right Out I have never before done this, but I am going to recommend a product to all of our readers...

www.stereophile.com

 

[frascati]

https://m.facebook.com/BackToTheTapCampaign/videos/penn-and-teller-bullshit-bottled-water/295904514122934/

Ok. For the sake of entertainment value this is a crude version of otherwise scientifically established suggestion/placebo effects. And a little mean spirited to boot. But what price fame, eh? Sure I'll sign that release and let the world see what a dolt I am. I get to be on TV. Right?

But for the sake of 'tap water' simply plug in my 29.95 (99ct @ Goodwill) ADS DAC for a sound audition and use a non functioning panel of switches to select among a dozen other commercial DACs ranging in price up to 20K.....

....would the commentary be similarly absurd and damning? From people 'off the street' and audiophiles alike? Would the audiophiles rhapsodize even more embarrassingly than others?

As Vonnegut might say... so it goes.

And DeMent would add ... let the mystery be.

But to any who do ask "What's the bee in your bonnet? To each his own. Let them have their fun!"

I jus gotta say I'm a bit tired of it at this point. The world, to me, lately is absolutely awash in... I'll just stay with Penn n Teller on this... Bullshit. And it's really hard to blame the bullshitters for it. A man's gotta feed his family and all that. I see bullshitters as a standard function. Will always be a part of society...and even some part of us as individuals.

But lately I'm feeling like a man who is tired of watching his neighbors gather, slack jawed, around the snake oil salesman's wagon when it rolls into town. Used to be a few of them. I look out my window one day and it's half of them. I look out recently and it's all but a sober and reliable few of them. And we're running short of sober and reliable in town. It's alarming.

In the 80s early internet era we had some hope that the 'truth', now at our literal fingertips, would mitigate against these trends. But the web has only accelerated them. I would say that is as true for HiFi as it is for conspiracies, MLMs, cryptocurrencies, etc, any and all otherwise useless or worse products and services touted to make our lives better or explain away life's mysteries.

When I see others succumbing so readily to bullshit around me it's hard to be sanguine or even neutral about it. Even when it presents itself as innocuous. Because it's accelerating. It's exhausting.

I'll see myself out.

 

[ahofer]

But for the sake of 'tap water' simply plug in my 29.95 (99ct @ Goodwill) ADS DAC for a sound audition and use a non functioning panel of switches to select among a dozen other commercial DACs ranging in price up to 20K.....

It would be fun to crowdsource such a test. Everyone bring their DACs, set up at an audio show. Watch the vendors keep a mile distance.

 

[krabapple]

An interesting early response about digital critics from JGH after trying the very first CD player. The Absolute Sound was crying wolf about digital audio. As indicated here they did so without ever hearing one. Even from the very first JGH indicated dither prevents a hard noise floor below which anything could be heard as some were claiming plus he indicated no real recordings could use what was available to them anyway. Plus that many criticisms of CD sound is because digital was ruthlessly revealing with accuracy what those recordings sound like. It is also funny the very early Philips TDA chips got a reputation for sounding more natural, and were used in some boutique DACs later on. Because those were of course the chips in use in early players that gave digital a bad name. Make it obsolete and hard to get and it must be better right?

Sony CDP-101 Compact Disc Player JGH Responds to Doug Sax

J. Gordon Holt then offered the following controversial thoughts in response to an article (linked here) from Doug Sax of Sheffield Labs and The Mastering Lab in December 1983, Vol.6 No.5: Run Right Out I have never before done this, but I am going to recommend a product to all of our readers...

www.stereophile.com

As an addendum, after the first 'audiophile' panic over noise floors of early digital, the next menace was jitter.

Sweet JC on a bicycle, the amount of pearl-clutching ink spent on that over the years!


Which is why I love Archimago's recent recap:

Over the years, I've measured older products like these '80s-early '90s CD players, this 1994 Laser Disc player, and even this old Sony PS1 as CD player also dating back to somewhere around 1994. To be honest, none of these old devices demonstrated significant jitter issues. I find it amazing how the audiophile press has obsessed over this word over the decades when it came to straight forward CD playback.

Articles about jitter back in the day from the likes of Stereophile like this one is simply referring to jitter over the digital S/PDIF interface. I don't think there was ever really a problem with single-box devices like CD players, so if you didn't use S/PDIF, don't worry! These days, asynchronous USB and ethernet transmission are typically excellent, jitter-free, with reputable products. Besides, even when present at moderate levels, I've discussed why I don't think jitter is generally audible.

 

[Mnyb]

As an addendum, after the first 'audiophile' panic over noise floors of early digital, the next menace was jitter.

Sweet JC on a bicycle, the amount of pearl-clutching ink spent on that over the years!


Which is why I love Archimago's recent recap:

To compound the issue , "real audiophiles" quickly opted for separate DAC and CD Transport when there where practically no other digital sources around .
Making jitter a possible issue with the rudimentary solutions at the time , when the best solution was to keep the CD mechanics and DAC in the same chassi and have practically no jitter problem .

Funny enough the CD transport was very often more expensive than the most expensive normal CD player the brand produced

 

[krabapple]

To compound the issue , "real audiophiles" quickly opted for separate DAC and CD Transport when there where practically no other digital sources around .
Making jitter a possible issue with the rudimentary solutions at the time , when the best solution was to keep the CD mechanics and DAC in the same chassi and have practically no jitter problem .

yes, Archimago noted that in the quote I posted.

Articles about jitter back in the day from the likes of Stereophile like this one is simply referring to jitter over the digital S/PDIF interface. I don't think there was ever really a problem with single-box devices like CD players, so if you didn't use S/PDIF, don't worry!

 

[dc655321]

Sweet JC on a bicycle, the amount of pearl-clutching ink spent on that over the years!

I may have just pee'd myself a bit. Thanks for that!

 

[Bow_Wazoo]

What would I hear if my signal was dirty with aliasing?

Online Digital Aliasing Sound Test

Tests whether your sound card is prone to audible aliasing.

www.audiocheck.net

 

[Guettel]

SIY, we are 5,240 posts in and I don't believe I have an answer yet. Do DACS have sound signatures? A simple yes or no would suffice. LOL!

Technically all devices emit slightly different signals because they have different components. Whether the difference is audible depends on the specific components and the person.

 

[antcollinet]

Technically all devices emit slightly different signals because they have different components. Whether the difference is audible depends on the specific components and the person.

Right - but this whole thread - including the topic title, is about devices that measure as transparent. IE the differences are NOT audible. Differences are below the level of audibility for everyone.

 

[Guettel]

Right - but this whole thread - including the topic title, is about devices that measure as transparent. IE the differences are NOT audible. Differences are below the level of audibility for everyone.

I was answering a poster's specific question in a specific post.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Right - but this whole thread - including the topic title, is about devices that measure as transparent. IE the differences are NOT audible. Differences are below the level of audibility for everyone.

No way. There are people who can hear -400 dBFS. And I can see gamma rays, cause my eyes are way more sensitive than any measurement device.

 

[antcollinet]

I was answering a poster's specific question in a specific post.

OK - but that person's specific question was just taking the piss out of the whole thread.

 

[VQR]

No way. There are people who can hear -400 dBFS. And I can see gamma rays, cause my eyes are way more sensitive than any measurement device.

I personally hate how noisy the neighbors are on Alpha Centari.