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

[Blumlein 88]

I don’t have the equipment. But Amirm does ! If he dares to make the right measurements… that the most difficult part. Changing his mind to make the right thing.

Frequency response, sinad, jitter, linearity, channel matching etc… all these measurements are perfect to get an idea of the engineering of a gear. And they’re all irrelevant to how this gear sound.

Quite ridiculous. All these measurements are irrelevant to how the gear sounds? You are embarrassing yourself now and don't know it.

For the sound itself, Amirm should focus on the harmonic distorsion (and understanding them), interpolate filter, analog time domain etc…

He already shows the filter responses, distortion, I'm guessing you don't get how the time domain works or you would not say this.

For example, the ESS9038 (and others chips of ESS) has an option called « harmonic compensation ». If it is active, it reduce the harmonic distorsion drastically. Some gear (like project) let the user activate it or not. (Many Chinese gear always use this option on, solely to get better results in measurements). And this option impact the sound. I don’t know if it a good or bad thing and I don’t care.

Yes, Amir has done tests of DAC that use the harmonic compensation and some that don't showing us the results of it both ways. I'd say it impacts the preciseness of the reproduction, but I'm not sure without it the sound you can hear is impacted.

The fact is there is many things that can affect the sound, and cannot be see with a frequency response or the average noise floor etc…

And we are trying to tell you that first, you don't seem to understand his measurements, and what effects the sound is the signal coming out of the device while in use. The measurements provide the performance envelope of DACs well enough there is little left to wonder about that can effect sound. You are going by sighted listening where yes many things effect the sound, time of day, knowledge of what you are listening to, how you feel that day, whether you've imbibed a little or not and on and on and on. None of that is actually due to the device itself or the resulting sound in nearly all cases.

Try this little listening test. I have posted it several times in this thread alone.

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

...that is the best take on the subject I have seen so far... ...it is clear to any thinking person that there are asspects involved we have no way to measure... ...it was just stated there are only three asspects measured at the current state of the art...

www.audiosciencereview.com

8th generation copies versus original file. If DAC sound different, I'd think going thru a DAC 8 times and then going thru an ADC 8 times (ADCs would sound different too) would magnify the difference by 8 times. Should be a piece of cake. Do the tests honestly without peaking at results and see if they sound obviously different to you.

 

[Rhamnetin]

The fact is there is many things that can affect the sound, and cannot be see with a frequency response or the average noise floor etc…

If this is a fact, where's the data to prove it? You audiophiles seem to be insinuating that mysticism is at play here, forces beyond our understanding.

 

[JustJones]

Everyone who can tell the difference must be insane I guess.

It's as if you're digital. Yes or No, On or Off, 1 or 0, tell difference or insane.

 

[krabapple]

Nah, I got the vibe fine. I've been on the Internet for a while. I remember reading an article years ago in a blind test, Millennials preferred MP3's over the actual CD sample. I can't blame them, if they've only heard compressed music their entire lives. Hi-Fi will die, because the consumer can not discern the difference. It's how Beats headphones exist. I'm too old anyway, once you're past 30 the hearing starts to fade, and past 50, probably would probably think a cell phone speaker is good enough, like Gen Z does for 12 hours a day.

What you read is about the mysterious surveys of students conducted by music professor Jon Berger at Stanford, reported on widely in 2009 . To my knowledge, no details of the tests have ever been released. We don't even know if they were blind tests; they were not reported as such. All that, despite queries to Berger about his methods from audio science notables like Floyd Toole and Sean Olive. No doubt you know who they are...?

Some of us here have been in this arena for a long time and have memories as long or longer than yours. A little humility on your part might be in order.

here's Sean on Hydrogenaudio in 2010

"Sizzling sound" of mp3's is preferred - Page 5

"Sizzling sound" of mp3's is preferred - Page 5

hydrogenaud.io

Reply #122 – 2010-05-29 20:06:23​

Quote from: dv1989 on 2010-05-29 19:57:01

You may have to email him or something. I don't know if you read the Gizmodo article in which your quote originated, and is introduced as follows:
Quote

Each year, Stanford Professor of Music Jonathan Berger does an informal test of his students by playing a bunch of different music in a bunch of different formats. Over email, here's how he told me performs the informal study:

I did email him after the Gizmodo article appeared months ago, as did Floyd Toole and many other people I know. The result: no response. I also found no publications describing the study.

Cheers
Sean

 

[oleg87]

The fact is there is many things that can affect the sound, and cannot be see with a frequency response or the average noise floor etc…

Name names.

If you think (misapplied) harmonic compensation on DACs would not be captured in Amir’s tests I’m really not sure you understand what that does or what is being measured.

 

[krabapple]

I don’t have the equipment. But Amirm does ! If he dares to make the right measurements… that the most difficult part. Changing his mind to make the right thing.

Frequency response, sinad, jitter, linearity, channel matching etc… all these measurements are perfect to get an idea of the engineering of a gear. And they’re all irrelevant to how this gear sound.

For the sound itself, Amirm should focus on the harmonic distorsion (and understanding them), interpolate filter, analog time domain etc…

For example, the ESS9038 (and others chips of ESS) has an option called « harmonic compensation ». If it is active, it reduce the harmonic distorsion drastically. Some gear (like project) let the user activate it or not. (Many Chinese gear always use this option on, solely to get better results in measurements). And this option impact the sound. I don’t know if it a good or bad thing and I don’t care.

The fact is there is many things that can affect the sound, and cannot be see with a frequency response or the average noise floor etc…

four years here, and you post this, wow

 

[voodooless]

four years here, and you post this, wow

To be fair, he’s 10 posts in the game, of which most were probably done today

 

[antcollinet]

four years here, and you post this, wow

Sometimes I think subjectivists make sleeper accounts to activate later at an opportune moment.

 

[Geert]

At the end of the year we really had a supply problem. No good, since true ASR members started picking on each other. But now that the days are getting longer in the Northern atmosphere, the dark force is strong again.

 

[pkane]

At the end of the year we really had a supply problem. No good, since true ASR members started picking on each other. But now that the days are getting longer in the Northern atmosphere, the dark force is strong again.

The rate of incoming is accelerating!

I recommend training a chatbot to provide answers here. Long and as detailed and wordy as possible, with hundreds of references to all the already given answers in this thread for that very same question for the 101st time. Anybody up to the task?

 

[Geert]

I recommend training a chatbot to provide answers here. Long and as detailed and wordy as possible, with hundreds of references to all the already given answers in this thread for that very same question for the 101st time. Anybody up to the task?

Maybe also something with bonus points for arguments we didn't hear yet?

 

[pkane]

Maybe also something with bonus points for arguments we didn't hear yet?

Probably not worth the time, as it'll never get used.

 

[ahofer]

Maybe also something with bonus points for arguments we didn't hear yet?

Or a hyperlink tree, where they can choose a response, see our response, then choose from the responses they were thinking of giving, i.e.

I heard a diffference
->did you control for just audibility?
-->no, I trust my ears
---> If you trust your *ears* why not eliminate non-auditory stimuli
-->yes, my son/wife changed inputs
-->was it level-matched properly?
Not everything can be measured
->Demonstrate the existence of an audible phenomenon that cannot be captured with a microphone?

etc.

 

[Ricardus]

I did not know there would caveat for stating my opinion. All human's hearing is different. It is subjective. There is no right or wrong in describing what one hears. Maybe I should not be in this forum. I just recently joined. I was hoping to share opinions and gain further insight . Felling this is a rough club !

If you have a hearing deficiency, that deficiency will be the same for every DAC you're listening so and won't cause them to sound different.

If they measure the same they sound the same.

 

[Ricardus]

With inexpensive and fewer devices and equipment, so take it with a grain of salt. Not trying to open a can of worms, but, I personally, find that different DACs, whether or not if it's the chip itself or units they go in, tend to sound a specific way, and I can only use terms I can come up with mixed with "audiophile terms" to describe them.

AKM = well-rounded, can be overly smooth in parts of the midrange, almost like there's variable peaks and dips, and while being generally weightier sounding, it can go either way when it wants to, kind of airy, bassier, very dynamic in volume, imaging and staging, literally can go almost entirely mono-sounding, to huge and 3D in different tracks, track sections or sources, captures individual instrument tone very well almost to the point of being cheesy or wonky; instrument solos really bring that out.

ESS = harsher high frequencies, almost like the vocalists in tracks with a lot of commotion are piercing my ears (AKMs do this too but it's a different kind of harsh), more detailed or revealing of very delicate sounds, lesser bass, thinner-sounding, more metallic and gritty, can be more pacey, more percussive texture from not being as smooth as AKM, consistent imaging and staging whether narrow or big, vocals have more emotion, upfront, and feel more immersive or "exciting". Overall, I tend to enjoy ESS Sabre more upon first impression, because there's something more exciting and different about how it makes tracks sound.

AKM tends to sound its best with good direct source material, while ESS tends to be highly enjoyable in multiple sources; AKM can too but is picky. Then there's the variable where some units can sound like they want to be like the other, but not quite, there's still that sense of having their typical sound but with each chip and unit having their own overall sound but stick to the general premise of their brand signature. For instance, the ES100 is dryer and harsher than the HUD100 but still have a general similarity to their signature. AKMs to me sound more refined almost too much at times without lacking too much bass even when bright, and there's a variability with enjoyment, but they tend to not be so immersive or emotionally impressive as ESS Sabre chips, at least in terms of vocals, especially upon first impression, but non-vocal instruments are a different story. Keep in mind, all are very inexpensive devices, especially my headphones, so my judgement may not be justified, and it's not like I've had everything to test out because of budget.

I was going to say PLEASE NO ONE FALL FOR THIS, but it's too late.

 

[voodooless]

I was going to say PLEASE NO ONE FALL FOR THIS, but it's too late.

Yeah, your 7 pages too late But thanks anyway

 

[Ricardus]

Yeah, your 7 pages too late But thanks anyway

Unfortunately I've been busy with other things and got behind on my reading here. But yeah, anytime there is a new account spouting that nonsense I give it AT LEAST 90% odds it's a troll. But we have to be polite for a few days in case they are a real user who might have something to offer.

 

[DonR]

Luckily it was spotted fairly quickly and the fact he made that post in bold was a serious tell.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

four years here, and you post this, wow

Seems like a burner account. 10 messages in 4 years and most if not all pretty much today.

I wish there was a way to filter out such idiots (sorry) before they steal the members time here by responding to that nonsense.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

I did not know there would [be a] caveat for stating my opinion.

This is not really a "rough club". There is no problem with having an opinion. The problem arises when that opinion runs counter to demonstrable scientific data. Flat Earthers, for instance.

All human's hearing is different. It is subjective.

Hearing is measurable using equipment calibrated to a scientific standard. What is subjective is emotional reactions.

There is no right or wrong in describing what one hears.

In the sense that you have a right to your own personal opinion, you are correct. Still, best not to overestimate its value to others. Uncorrelated descriptions are worthless for transmitting accurate information to other people.

I was hoping to share opinions and gain further insight .

There are websites composed of members who enjoy trading opinions. They think that by doing so, they "gain further insight". What they are actually doing is fostering an atmosphere of reliance on fantasy and total b.s. This website is not like those websites.

Stick around. There's a lot to learn here, such as these, to begin with:

Master List of Instructional Teaching Video presentations (How to read and interpret/understand all the Graphs and Charts!

Collection of Amir’s instructional Videos for reference, refresher and new members: (“Behind the Curtain @ ASR University”) Welcome New and returning Members of ASR. Our Host Amir has put together a collection of comprehensive instructional videos that might help new and returning Members...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Jim