Why I am unable to hear any difference between these DACs?

[MaxBuck]

"Why am I unable to hear differences that aren't there?"

 

[ahofer]

Yeah. Just switched from the Atom to the THX 789 for the same reason. They sound the same, but I like having a unit that doesn't get all squirrely every time I try to plug in headphones. Plus, the line out passthrough suits my needs for my speakers better than the preamp out of the Atom.

I have my patented Quantum Audio Fusion Stone to sell you. Place it on top of the unit and enjoy the greater sense of space, and the notes arriving *just* in time. Something something fusion quantum effects. You wouldn’t understand.

 

[hwest]

Oh yea my Topping DAC sounds so much better than my Denon! Pfft what a load of garbage. Lets get the wool out of the ears and burn it.

Comparing garbage to garbage doesn't really do anything to elevate a Denon. Out of the Marantz and Pioneer the Denon is actually the most bland due to their implementation I would take the Marantz over the Denon but I wouldn't actually take any of those. As I said if you haven't heard the Onkyo you don't really understand what you're missing. Even the newer Onkyo's which I don't personally like are much better than the Denon or Marantz or Pioneer or Rotel, NAD, etc. It's hard to get great sound when we start talking about soft and smooth where the sounds are all mushed together instead of crisp and alive with true separation.

 

[_thelaughingman]

Comparing garbage to garbage doesn't really do anything to elevate a Denon. Out of the Marantz and Pioneer the Denon is actually the most bland due to their implementation I would take the Marantz over the Denon but I wouldn't actually take any of those. As I said if you haven't heard the Onkyo you don't really understand what you're missing. Even the newer Onkyo's which I don't personally like are much better than the Denon or Marantz or Pioneer or Rotel, NAD, etc. It's hard to get great sound when we start talking about soft and smooth where the sounds are all mushed together instead of crisp and alive with true separation.

Show me tangible evidence that shows your claims are valid. I don't believe in subjective claims that posit one product is better than the other.

 

[hwest]

Show me tangible evidence that shows your claims are valid. I don't believe in subjective claims that posit one product is better than the other.

I can't show you, you can only listen for yourself. It's no coincidence that everyone rates the Onkyo's so highly and when they talk about the sound the description in any review is different than the standard guys. Onkyo doesn't follow to the 'T' the DAC implementation specs and that is what actually makes them sound better. I think with the newer RZ's they do more closely follow those specs. I think most folks have been condition to the new soft/AKM sound, I have both the RZ1100 and PRC5530, I have had Marantz, Denon, Pioneer, NAD, Rotel and Mcintosh all tested and attempted to tweak them to get the live sound without too much success. I just took a glance at Yamaha but they are probably not the best.

 

[ahofer]

As I said if you haven't heard the Onkyo you don't really understand what you're missing.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/L0SaMZxxqMgsAJf69v" width="480" height="358" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="

">via GIPHY</a></p>

 

[BDWoody]

Marantz, Denon, Pioneer, NAD, Rotel and Mcintosh all tested and attempted to tweak them to get the live sound without too much success.

Uh oh...

 

[Koeitje]

I can't show you, you can only listen for yourself. It's no coincidence that everyone rates the Onkyo's so highly and when they talk about the sound the description in any review is different than the standard guys. Onkyo doesn't follow to the 'T' the DAC implementation specs and that is what actually makes them sound better. I think with the newer RZ's they do more closely follow those specs. I think most folks have been condition to the new soft/AKM sound, I have both the RZ1100 and PRC5530, I have had Marantz, Denon, Pioneer, NAD, Rotel and Mcintosh all tested and attempted to tweak them to get the live sound without too much success. I just took a glance at Yamaha but they are probably not the best.

Nobody denies you hear a difference, its just that those differences are not caused by the electronics themselves.

 

[solderdude]

Sigh ... sighted.

 

[SIY]

I can't show you, you can only listen for yourself. It's no coincidence that everyone rates the Onkyo's so highly and when they talk about the sound the description in any review is different than the standard guys. Onkyo doesn't follow to the 'T' the DAC implementation specs and that is what actually makes them sound better. I think with the newer RZ's they do more closely follow those specs. I think most folks have been condition to the new soft/AKM sound, I have both the RZ1100 and PRC5530, I have had Marantz, Denon, Pioneer, NAD, Rotel and Mcintosh all tested and attempted to tweak them to get the live sound without too much success. I just took a glance at Yamaha but they are probably not the best.

Uh huh.

 

[_thelaughingman]

I can't show you, you can only listen for yourself. It's no coincidence that everyone rates the Onkyo's so highly and when they talk about the sound the description in any review is different than the standard guys. Onkyo doesn't follow to the 'T' the DAC implementation specs and that is what actually makes them sound better. I think with the newer RZ's they do more closely follow those specs. I think most folks have been condition to the new soft/AKM sound, I have both the RZ1100 and PRC5530, I have had Marantz, Denon, Pioneer, NAD, Rotel and Mcintosh all tested and attempted to tweak them to get the live sound without too much success. I just took a glance at Yamaha but they are probably not the best.

I bet you fancy yourself as a sommelier of DAC' and hear all those sweet notes emanating the airwaves. I'll tell you this, i listen to my music like an analyst that looks at data. I'm listening for the arrangements and the instruments and I obviously do not care to hear or hear the "coloring" of sound emanating from the speakers.

 

[hwest]

We can always write off good sound for similar if we don't pay attention to the details. It's not a matter of what you hear it's what you are looking for when you hear it, are you looking for details, are you looking for finishing notes, separation and range, I can tell you that 99% of the population is not. What I hear is the quality and seeing it on analyzer while hearing with my ears and comparing it to the brands mentioned just doesn't sound as clean. We can say if you had a live person in front of you vs an off the shelf big brand receiver you would be able to tell the difference if you closed your eyes, the closer you get towards not being able to tell the difference demonstrates how good your system really is. Everyone knows the standard brands are catering to the deaf so let's just stop denying it.

 

[Killingbeans]

So, we're back to "You don't know how to listen to music, and your system isn't resolving enough!"?

 

[Skinner001]

So, we're back to "You don't know how to listen to music, and your system isn't resolving enough!"?

What do you mean back? We never left, it's gonna take a lot more time and work if we are going to pull away to any distance at all...

 

[Killingbeans]

I don't want you gone. If you join me in an exercise where we take our egos and anxieties, strap them to a helium balloon, and let them float away, it's gonna be all good

 

[ahofer]

It's not a matter of what you hear it's what you are looking for when you hear it, are you looking for details, are you looking for finishing notes, separation and range, I can tell you that 99% of the population is not.

Which usefully highlights just two problems of sighted/uncontrolled listening comparisons: expectation bias and selective attention.

As for Sommeliers, @keebz28, at least those that are certified actually had to do controlled testing (they can see the wine, but it has been decanted from the bottle and is devoid of all identifying info other than color, consistency, and taste).

 

[RickSanchez]

Onkyo doesn't follow to the 'T' the DAC implementation specs and that is what actually makes them sound better.

Interesting. Can you explain technically what Onkyo does in their DAC implementations? In other words: what are the specs Onkyo is given and then how do they vary their DAC implementation away from those specs? I'm just looking for some evidence that supports your claim.

 

[Skinner001]

I don't want you gone. If you join me in an exercise where we take our egos and anxieties, strap them to a helium balloon, and let them float away, it's gonna be all good

Whoops, when I said "we" I meant all of us trying to get the train going to pull away from these audiofool fluffy language, inconsistent fairytales
The train just hasn't left the station yet

 

[Killingbeans]

Haha yeah, that went completely over my head. I thought you were defending hwest's specific flavor of superiority complex

 

[Koeitje]

We can always write off good sound for similar if we don't pay attention to the details. It's not a matter of what you hear it's what you are looking for when you hear it, are you looking for details, are you looking for finishing notes, separation and range, I can tell you that 99% of the population is not. What I hear is the quality and seeing it on analyzer while hearing with my ears and comparing it to the brands mentioned just doesn't sound as clean. We can say if you had a live person in front of you vs an off the shelf big brand receiver you would be able to tell the difference if you closed your eyes, the closer you get towards not being able to tell the difference demonstrates how good your system really is. Everyone knows the standard brands are catering to the deaf so let's just stop denying it.

Can you hear a dog bark at over 200km away? Because that is the kind of hearing you need for what you are stating. A simple yes or no answer is all I need.