Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?

[USER]

My audio friends and I have been blind-testing each other for 40 years.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I don't agree with all this. I think basic standards should be for young people of good hearing. We don't need specs for 60+ years old. I also don't believe you can hear -80 db distortions. The tests done on that are with a test tone at the frequencies where we are most sensitive to hearing which show -60 db. You'll not get that with music no matter any training you have. If there are any people who can do it with a test tone it will be a tiny portion of people in the world. I actually doubt there are such people until shown otherwise. I'm speaking of distortion here not SINAD. Noise will need to be -80 or -90 db or more depending upon particulars. Also there is a sweet spot for hearing distortion in humans so no younger people won't hear better because they can play louder. Our ears themselves begin to distort somewhere around 75 or 80 db or louder. Eventually around 110 or 120 db and above the air distorts at a level above minimum air SPL. Distortion unless really horrible isn't much of an issue. Noise can be, but increasingly that is not either.

Now yes for any particular thing you don't believe you can test yourself to prove it to yourself or to other people.

Just a note: Phillips originally planned on digital being 14 bit as after much study they found no reason for more in music distribution. Sony once partnered on the CD introduction insisted on 16 bit partly because 8 bit increments made more sense.

I see that my sloppy use of terminology has torpedoed my ship again! I used the terms "distortion" and "distortion and/or noise" when I should have concentrated solely on noise for the higher numbers.

That's my mistake, and you are, as usual, quite correct. I have edited the post to reflect such.

Jim

 

[Mnyb]

You blow a lot of your noise performance if you for example EQ headphones.

You leave like -5dB in safety margin so nothing clips and if you for example has +7dB somewhere in the bass vs the midrange/low treble ( where we are very sensitive ) you just sacrificed 12dB of SNR .

When I bought my old Topping D70 ( non MQA at a deal ) I looked at the data and found that it was a very low noise DAC . This has lower noise than my violelectric headphone amp in all use cases I simply don’t hear it

Another use case for very low noise DAC’s are if you use thier digital volume to directly drive power amps with somewhat higher gain . The ideal use case is the the gain of the amp somewhat matched to the max output of the DAC but we can’t always chose.

Room EQ and subwoofer integration can also sacrifice som SNR due to clipping margin EQ and speaker level adjustments.

And all things add up if every component in the signal chain is marginal to being audible to total result migth not make you happy. I would argue that the signal chain begins already at the recording stage some recorded part of the music may be on the verge of sounding unpleasant and the last straw is your Audio Note DAC ....

All my arguments are not airtight some argument that speakers distortion would mask a lot .
But stellar DAC performance costa couple of 100$ so it’s not like you setting fire to your hard earned cash to get it

I bypassed the DAC anxiety in my last purchase which are active digital speakers I’m totally clueless to what’s the performance of the built in DAC’s and amps have , probably terrible, but the total thing sounds excellent to me and are relatively quit when having my ear to the drivers .
Many simple active speakers has to much hiss not the one I got .

 

[Sokel]

I bypassed the DAC anxiety in my last purchase which are active digital speakers I’m totally clueless to what’s the performance of the built in DAC’s and amps have , probably terrible, but the total thing sounds excellent to me and are relatively quit when having my ear to the drivers .
Many simple active speakers has to much hiss not the one I got .

I saw the data sheet of the chip-amp used in some small Genelecs from a teardown thread and the SINAD was at 70's-80's.
Makes you wonder about stuff.

https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm1876.pdf?ts=1712744355761&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.google.com%252F

Edit:Links

 

[Moxalain]

Hello !

I am convinced that our hearing hears things that we do not know how to measure.
Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a low-end modulation cable and a well-made one.
However, on my measuring bench, they are absolutely identical.
After training in electronics, I learned to no longer trust my knowledge and to believe my ears!
I have an "Eversolo Z8" and a "MHDT Havana" with a 12AU7 Dario (and an adapter). I use both depending on the music.
Jazz trio or "natural" instruments with MHDT. It's more fluid and less precise but it's alive.
For more “electric” music I prefer the Z8. It’s more precise but less fluid !

Best regards from France (Bordeaux)
Alain

 

[Willem]

Do you ever test under controled blind conditions?

 

[solderdude]

I am convinced

And that right there might well prevent you from looking further.
Level matched, blind, statistical relevant comparisons are more reliable but very, very time consuming and alas... also sobering.

Consider that when the applied waveform is exactly the same the sound cannot be different.
Consider that tube amps interact more with a speaker than SS amps. There can be audible amounts of frequency response alterations which are very measurable under actual load.
The DAC and cables between DAC and amp will not.

One more question.. what do you mean with:

modulation cable

 

[Moxalain]

Modulation cable : The wire RCA. Modulation cord. The wires to go from a pream to an amp

Listening to music is a personal and subjective adventure.

All cars run, have 4 wheels and a steering wheel. But we don't all prefer to drive the same one.
I'm not looking for explanations for this. As for wine: I don't like it, I like it, I like it a lot.

I'm not saying that the Z8 is better than the MHDT (or vice versa),
I'm saying that depending on the music, my mood, the humidity, the wind speed, a Caol Ila in my hand or not ...
I like it both, sometimes one more than the other.
I don't remember if I said it, I use a homemade converter with an "engineered USB/SPDIF" card and an MPaudio power supply.
The marriage is very good.

Converto USB/SPDIF

 

[Willem]

Modulation cable : The wire RCA. Modulation cord. The wires to go from a pream to an amp

Listening to music is a personal and subjective adventure.

All cars run, have 4 wheels and a steering wheel. But we don't all prefer to drive the same one.
I'm not looking for explanations for this. As for wine: I don't like it, I like it, I like it a lot.

I'm not saying that the Z8 is better than the MHDT (or vice versa),
I'm saying that depending on the music, my mood, the humidity, the wind speed, a Caol Ila in my hand or not ...
I like it both, sometimes one more than the other.
I don't remember if I said it, I use a homemade converter with an "engineered USB/SPDIF" card and an MPaudio power supply.
The marriage is very good.

Converto USB/SPDIF

If only I could understand this.

 

[Lupin]

Listening to music is a personal and subjective adventure.

I totally agree but the subjective part should/must come from the speakers/headphones and/or EQ used.
It is not and it should never be the job of a DAC to change the output to be more "pleasing" in anyway.

 

[Moxalain]

Yes of course. My remarks are general. All links of chain count and the weakest will be responsible for overall quality.

 

[Willem]

Yes of course. My remarks are general. All links of chain count and the weakest will be responsible for overall quality.

The good news is that these days, apart from the recording, only the last part of the chain, i.e. speakers and the room, are less than sonically perfect.

 

[solderdude]

Modulation cable : The wire RCA. Modulation cord. The wires to go from a pream to an amp

Strange translation probably... RCA cable or interlink cable is the usual phrase. In English modulation is not used for cables.

Listening to music is a personal and subjective adventure.

Yes, made possible by electronics and electro-mechanical transducers making use of acoustics and in the end the auditory system (ears) plus brain (perception)

All cars run, have 4 wheels and a steering wheel. But we don't all prefer to drive the same one.
I'm not looking for explanations for this. As for wine: I don't like it, I like it, I like it a lot.

Yep, again electronics is not complex like wine and preference.

I'm not saying that the Z8 is better than the MHDT (or vice versa),
I'm saying that depending on the music, my mood, the humidity, the wind speed, a Caol Ila in my hand or not ...
I like it both, sometimes one more than the other.

That's perfectly fine.

I don't remember if I said it, I use a homemade converter with an "engineered USB/SPDIF" card and an MPaudio power supply.
The marriage is very good.

Also not an issue at all.

What I meant was that one is already convinced one cannot see it in another way even when something was shown to you.
The problem with conviction is that while something may be reality for you it may not be correct in an absolute sense. Convinced people aren't open viewpoints that are in possible conflict with that what is believed to be true. Conviction is believing something beyond all doubt.

 

[antcollinet]

Hello !

I am convinced that our hearing hears things that we do not know how to measure.
Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a low-end modulation cable and a well-made one.
However, on my measuring bench, they are absolutely identical.
After training in electronics, I learned to no longer trust my knowledge and to believe my ears!
I have an "Eversolo Z8" and a "MHDT Havana" with a 12AU7 Dario (and an adapter). I use both depending on the music.
Jazz trio or "natural" instruments with MHDT. It's more fluid and less precise but it's alive.
For more “electric” music I prefer the Z8. It’s more precise but less fluid !

Best regards from France (Bordeaux)
Alain

I don't know how many times this needs to be said.

If it is in the sound waves reaching your ears - and you can hear it - it can also be measured. Our measurement gear is orders of magnitude more sensitive than your hearing.

if you are hearing differences that can't be measured in the waveforms, then it is not coming from the sound hitting your ears, but is being manufactured in the wetware between them.

 

[IAtaman]

I am convinced that our hearing hears things that we do not know how to measure.

Hello!

I agree with the above statement. I am convinced of it too. I suspect most people here would be as well. We do perceive things differently then they are physically present at times. Where we disagree maybe is the source of that difference. I'd argue it is an artifact of being a bipedal, social mammal. You seem to think it is the cables.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Hello !

I am convinced that our hearing hears things that we do not know how to measure.
Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a low-end modulation cable and a well-made one.
However, on my measuring bench, they are absolutely identical.
After training in electronics, I learned to no longer trust my knowledge and to believe my ears!
I have an "Eversolo Z8" and a "MHDT Havana" with a 12AU7 Dario (and an adapter). I use both depending on the music.
Jazz trio or "natural" instruments with MHDT. It's more fluid and less precise but it's alive.
For more “electric” music I prefer the Z8. It’s more precise but less fluid !

Best regards from France (Bordeaux)
Alain

The standard reply to this sort of statement is for you to undertake a DBT (double-blind test). There is a rigor* to the method, in order for the results to be meaningful. The DBT was chosen as the standard because it controls or eliminates the vagaries of human biases** ... which are very powerful.

Listeners who believe that they hear so-and-so or such-and-such have the opportunity to prove that their claims are real and true. So far, the body of evidence regarding the ability to hear a great number of characteristics (chiefly differences in electronics) does not support listener claims.

* Here is a video by Amir regarding the protocols of a double-blind test:

** And here is a list of common cognitive biases which affect human judgement and perception:

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Note: These tests are for you to educate yourself on the true nature of your abilities or lack of abilities. They give you the ability to ascertain what is true and what is not ... and that is the purpose of this site.

Jim

 

[Angsty]

“Believing is hearing. That's right; if you believe you will hear a difference, then there's a good chance that you will.” — Roger Russell

 

[welwynnick]

“Believing is hearing. That's right; if you believe you will hear a difference, then there's a good chance that you will.” — Roger Russell

I don't think its necessarily true.
I went to listen to some speakers on Friday. I had a very positive attitude to the manufacturer, Amir had just posted a very positive review on ASR, and the dealer was offering an discount I couldn't resist. But I listened to them, under ideal conditions and with a variety of music, and I didn't like them.
I was so convinced that I wanted them that I'd have bought them without listening first.
To my enormous surprise I left empty handed, and it's not the first time, it's happened lots of times.
I agree that sighted listening is much less reliable than blind, but I've never found much correlation between expectation and result.

 

[Mart68]

I don't think its necessarily true.
I went to listen to some speakers on Friday. I had a very positive attitude to the manufacturer, Amir had just posted a very positive review on ASR, and the dealer was offering an discount I couldn't resist. But I listened to them, under ideal conditions and with a variety of music, and I didn't like them.
I was so convinced that I wanted them that I'd have bought them without listening first.
To my enormous surprise I left empty handed, and it's not the first time, it's happened lots of times.
I agree that sighted listening is much less reliable than blind, but I've never found much correlation between expectation and result.

This is a variation on the 'I expected to like them and I didn't, so there's no such thing as cognitive bias or cognitive bias could not be a factor in this case.'

But it ignores the fact that our conscious and subconscious expectations are not necessarily the same. And, by definition, we cannot be aware of what our subconscious expectation is.

 

[Purité Audio]

What were the speakers?
Keith