Distortion down to -300 dB, what exactly does that mean physically?

[peterzuid]

I see this crap go on in "subjective" sites. People using things we are unsure of like dark matter as some holy grail of the frailty of science and then using that as an excuse to make assertions about sound and oh cables, fuses, etc. It don't work that way. Something we don't know does not change what we do. In fact, I see that same stupid dark matter argument regularly raised by a rather obsessed and somewhat disturbed individual on Audiogon, so how about we just keep that nonsense there and stick to relevant things there? Most of those sites are a living illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect. A select, active and loud group waxing, usually not too eloquently, about things they quite obviously have no real understanding of, and always with great confidence. The huddled masses nod knowingly, or is that sycophantically (I just made that up). Always a hoot as they quickly reject science if it does not support their conclusions, but latching onto science like a rabid crocodile if it suits them, even if that science is not related and or does not say what they think it means. And such confidence do they exude, as illustrated by Dunning-Kruger decades ago of those with no clue what they are talking about, but confident in their own infallibility no matter how misplaced.






Sound familiar?

No matter how good Chord products are, Rob Watts is playing on the Dunning Kruger effect to generate sales.

Do you have a university degree in psychology and did Rob Watts ask you to share the outcome of your analysis after the consults with others?
If not, this might be just an individual opinion without true knowledge
I get allergic reactions from others who only express an opinion without further substantiation
the last one = just kidding

 

[audio2design]

Do you have a university degree in psychology and did Rob Watts ask you to share the outcome of your analysis after the consults with others?
If not, this might be just an individual opinion without true knowledge
I get allergic reactions from others who only express an opinion without further substantiation
the last one = just kidding

Actually I did get a minor in psychology. Have taken more than a handful of courses in the area after my undergrad too. Personal area of interest and it helped significantly both in experimental design and analysis and management. You should try it.

With such close proximity, I expect you must have a serious issue with hives.

 

[peterzuid]

Actually I did get a minor in psychology. Have taken more than a handful of courses in the area after my undergrad too. Personal area of interest and it helped significantly both in experimental design and analysis and management. You should try it.

With such close proximity, I expect you must have a serious issue with hives.

Wow, and also salesman skills
I'm impressed as intended.

luckily the last remark was the kidding one; otherwise I would be scratchring........pfffff

 

[Mart68]

Do you have a university degree in psychology and did Rob Watts ask you to share the outcome of your analysis after the consults with others?
If not, this might be just an individual opinion without true knowledge
I get allergic reactions from others who only express an opinion without further substantiation
the last one = just kidding

It's an observation rather than an opinion, and as an observation it is easily verifiable.

 

[Frank Dernie]

The truth is out there

If we are concerned about a human being able to hear a change which is 300dB down the truth is NO.

Some things are questionable and require very well controlled tests to discern where the truth lies.

When we are discussing things this big well controlled tests aren't nearly so important. A human can no more hear -300dB than they can reach out and touch Mars or release a stone and have it float upwards.
It is infinitely implausible.

@j_j is a scientist whereas Mr Watts is an engineer who makes his income convincing the technically gullible that the unique aspects of his product are essential in order for them to buy them.

IMO the Chord DACS are splendid (I own one), but there are plenty of others, maybe even most available, audibly indistinguishablle from them IME.

 

[solderdude]

@j_j is a scientist whereas Mr Watts is an engineer who makes his incoming convincing the technically gullible that the unique aspects of his product are essential in order for them to buy them.

IMO the Chord DACS are splendid (I own one), but there are plenty of others, maybe even most available, audibly indistinguishablle from them IME.

yes....

mr Watts doesn't claim to hear -300dB or -350dB though. He claims that he could hear differences between 2 different filters where the measurable differences for distortion were in that area.
That, of course, doesn't make the claim any more believable and if it were real (was during development I believe) he could easily replicate this and show the world. His test methods to prove this are highly questionable so it is best to ignore the claim.

Chord DACs are well engineered but over-priced. They are sold though so there is a market.

 

[scott wurcer]

yes....

mr Watts doesn't claim to hear -300dB or -350dB though. He claims that he could hear differences between 2 different filters where the measurable differences for distortion were in that area.

I thought he stated that those claims were not testable or measurable (they certainly are not).

 

[voodooless]

I thought he stated that those claims were not testable or measurable (they certainly are not).

His ears can he claims.. so that means it should be definitely be testable and measurable.

 

[peterzuid]

This tells us a lot, though perhaps not what you intended to tell.

Some people have curiosity about what is real and what is imaginary, some people don’t. You are upfront that you’re in the latter group, and it’s a pretty large one. That’s why I have had less competition as a scientist for most of my career.

Some people are really interested what others are stating and others are not. The streamer was of a brand that promoted CD ripping engines and storage of WAV files. To make PCM better sounding then FLAC was a commercial interest maybe ? In case you're really interested, there is plenty of info on this on the internet.

 

[Frank Dernie]

In case you're really interested, there is plenty of info on this on the internet.

The problem with searching the internet is that it is bursting at the seams with misinformation and downright untruths so searching is almost guaranteed to find "confirming" opinions which people like to grasp at as justifying whatever cockeyed theory they may have fallen for.

25 years ago the internet had a lot of useful information on it, nowadays the signal-to-noise ratio is so bad real information is often buried in "opinion" from people whose knowledge isn't sufficient to have an opinion worth listening to on a lot of subjects and also marketing and political BS.

It is essential to look at sources, IME, to decide whether a bit of information has any proper foundation or is wild speculation or "me too" spreading of wrong information from people insufficiently well educated to tell.

Tip: the majority of HiFi publications are not a reliable source.

 

[solderdude]

I thought he stated that those claims were not testable or measurable (they certainly are not).

Perhaps I should have said the calculated differences are in the -300 to -350dB difference .
It is indeed of no practical concern as i cannot be achieved in any real world application. So sure not measurable but seems testable.
I mean he could use both filters and conduct a properly controlled test in lab conditions and test for actual audibility.
He will fail of course unless the filters, aside from having those differences, also filter in other audible aspects which he may have left out.

It's all nonsense anyway but am willing to bet his 'findings' will have persuaded a few people to buy his products.

 

[voodooless]

To make PCM better sounding then FLAC was a commercial interest maybe ?

Of course it’s of commercial interest! you have to be different in the market. Chord does the same thing. Being different works. And the best thing is: you can just claim to be different.. you don’t have to prove anything.

n case you're really interested, there is plenty of info on this on the internet.

Let’s have it then.. we’re is it? Let’s dissect the nonsenses

 

[Chester]

There is a little hypocrisy playing out here, if we’re to be honest with ourselves. People claiming Watts’ engineering approach yields inaudible benefits, and lambasting anyone who dare say they are interested none the less, are some of the same people who cheer every time Topping eek out another few inaudible decibels. That’s not a criticism of Topping, but inaudible is inaudible, no matter who designs it. We either care about audibility or we don’t, surely?

If what some of us here are interested in is the limits of engineering, even though it’s inaudible then that’s perfectly valid, and Rob’s efforts are surely as welcome as any other, even if you think he is focusing in an area that’s not worth focusing on.

I’ve not heard anyone say Rob Watts is fundamentally wrong and going against theory in his approach, just that his approach is OTT and not required?

 

[scott wurcer]

So sure not measurable but seems testable.

IMO a testable signal chain includes a 50bit DAC.

 

[solderdude]

That would depend on the testing you had in mind... if it is to determine it is audible and Rob claims he heard this with his DAC, amps and speakers so. That seems to be enough to prove it under controlled conditions as well. I guess we can all guess how Rob would fair under controlled conditions though. It's why this will never happen.

 

[voodooless]

There is a little hypocrisy playing out here, if we’re to be honest with ourselves. People claiming Watts’ engineering approach yields inaudible benefits, and lambasting anyone who dare say they are interested none the less, are some of the same people who cheer every time Topping eek out another few inaudible decibels.

There is a massive difference: for one, Topping does not claim it’s audible. Secondly, we can actually measure the “improvement”.

 

[solderdude]

and thirdly Topping is much, much cheaper.

 

[Chester]

There is a massive difference: for one, Topping does not claim it’s audible. Secondly, we can actually measure the “improvement”.

Both provide measurements I thought. But my point was regarding some of the behaviour in this thread rather than the manufacturers/designers themselves.

and thirdly Topping is much, much cheaper.

Completely agree, and that’s a valid point, just not one that’s been used much in this thread.

 

[voodooless]

Both provide measurements I thought.

That is not the point. The point is to prove your engineering actually makes any difference at all. And in case of a 300 dB whatever thing.. there has been no proof, no measurements to show any difference. In fact, it is said you can’t measure it.

But my point was regarding some of the behaviour in this thread rather than the manufacturers/designers themselves.

There is no hypocrisy if you start with a false equivalence.

 

[Chester]

There is no hypocrisy if you start with a false equivalence.

I have no idea what that means and I’ve made my points, so will bow out here.