manisandher
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Thread Starter
- #101
Would you be testing the original file vs a recording or compare 2 recordings and consider one 'reference' ?
Against the original file.
Would you be testing the original file vs a recording or compare 2 recordings and consider one 'reference' ?
The one time I happened to evaluate PK Metric, it hadn't worked that well for me. I didn't hear a difference at the point where it indicated -47 or -52 dBFS difference, but had no problem at one point with -56 dBFS difference.You are given two DACs to home test by a dealer. You take some captures with a good-quality ADC, and then analyse these with DeltaWave. You get the following (totally repeatable and consistent) results across a whole range of different musical genres:
DAC A:
- RMS Difference = -50dB
- PK Metric = -70dB
DAC B:
- RMS Difference = -70dB
- PK Metric = -50dB
Which DAC would you be inclined to keep for your long-term listening pleasure?
[...]
In any event, I wanted to explore what might be contributing to the differences I’m hearing. So, I set up the following 2 chains:
[...]
- Roon (64-bit level-matching) -> RJ45 -> Auralic Aries G1.1 @0dB -> USB -> DUT @0dB -> XLR analogue output (2V) -> RME ADI-2 Pro BE @+13dBu -> USB -> RME Digicheck (on PC)
- Roon (64-bit level-matching) -> RJ45 -> Auralic Aries G1.1 @0dB -> USB -> DUT @0dB -> XLR analogue output (2V) -> Prism AD124 @+12dBu -> BNC -> Tascam DA3000 (SD card)
I played three different 24/44.1 tracks and captured the analogue outputs at 24/44.1 in order to perform null tests with @pkane 's superb DeltaWave software.
1. 1kHz sine @0dBFS
[...]
Could DeltaWave provide any insights? Well, here are the results:
View attachment 245311
[...]
2. Gearspace ‘Original2’
This is the track used on the Gearspace loopback thread: https://gearspace.com/board/gear-sh...ing-ad-da-loops-means-audio-diffmaker-76.html. This is real music, and not a test signal.
Here are the DeltaWave results:
View attachment 245312
[...]
3. Diana Krall – Temptation
Here are the DeltaWave results:
View attachment 245316
As I understand this, these are the captures compared to the original file.OK, but what are the two different captures your have compared in Deltaware to produce the above cited charts ?
Thanks for your effort.
What bothered me is that I have not read anywhere which two capture have been compared with each other to obtain each and every null difference, whatever the metric or the recording chain.
A quick question for anyone who's looked into the PK Metric...
You are given two DACs to home test by a dealer. You take some captures with a good-quality ADC, and then analyse these with DeltaWave. You get the following (totally repeatable and consistent) results across a whole range of different musical genres:
DAC A:
- RMS Difference = -50dB
- PK Metric = -70dB
DAC B:
- RMS Difference = -70dB
- PK Metric = -50dB
Which DAC would you be inclined to keep for your long-term listening pleasure?
Mani.
Serge Smirnoff proposed a DF metric, which is similar to the RMS null and has no perception-based weights applied to the result. DeltaWave also computes DF Metric, so you have your choice of which metric to useArchimago also started doing this a while ago (but not with Deltawave) but abandonned it.
There is also or Russian guy on this forum pushing his difference files. I believe just before Paul came with Deltawave. I am sure @pkane knows who this is. He already had quite a collection of data on phones, DACs, MP3 players.
When it is not an official standard way of testing I don't think Amir will adopt it.
The one with -50 is potentially audible different.
Whether it is RMS or PK metric it would warrant an investigation.
Would you be testing the original file vs a recording or compare 2 recordings and consider one 'reference' ?
Take Two...
For those of you who've had a chance to look into the PK Metric...
You are given two DACs to home test by a dealer. You take some captures with a good-quality ADC, and then compare the captures vs. the original in DeltaWave (using only 'match gain' and 'subsample offset' settings). You get the following (totally repeatable and consistent) results across a whole range of different musical genres:
DAC A:
- RMS Difference = -50dB
- PK Metric = -70dB
DAC B:
- RMS Difference = -60dB
- PK Metric = -60dB
Which DAC would you be inclined to keep for your long-term listening pleasure?
@pkane , I'd love to hear which you'd choose, and why.
Mani.
We listen with our brain trough our ears. Our brain interpret what the ears are sending, but not always the same way, depending on many aspect, one of them being what are concentrating on. Hard to trust what our own brain is interpreting when more than the ears are engaged for various reason that have been demonstrated scientifically.We listen to music with our ears
Surely not, particularly in trying to share objective information about anything related to earring.Ultimately, audibility and perception are the only things that matter, surely?
If PKMetric increases the error, this would be a very strange case where the device produces an error in the high audibility frequency range while decreasing it in the range where it’s normally not audible. Hard to imagine such a device, and can only happen if you use dBr units, since that’s relative to the signal level. dBFS PKMetric should not exceed RMS of the null signal.
If that’s the only thing I get to go by, then I’d pick the -70dB PKMetric.
But a single number is never going to tell the whole story, so I’d prefer to look at the full PKMetric plot over the entire time range.
Our brain interpret what the ears are sending, but not always the same way, depending on many aspect, one of them being what are concentrating on.
PK Metric is a time-based metric, doing 400ms SFFTs. For each 400ms interval, you can see the frequency content if you open the double-side view from the icon near top right. To select different time intervals, hold down the Ctrl key while moving the mouse over the desired time you want to review. The frequency content of the section under the mouse pointer will be displayed in the right window.Thanks.
Is there a way of seeing how the PK Metric changes with frequency?
PK Metric is a time-based metric, doing 400ms SFFTs. For each 400ms interval, you can see the frequency content if you open the double-side view from the icon near top right. To select different time intervals, hold down the Ctrl key while moving the mouse over the desired time you want to review. The frequency content of the section under the mouse pointer will be displayed in the right window.
SINADS at 115 dB and higher are strictly noise dominated. Distortion from such devices routinely clocks at 120 to -135 dB. Since the noise is measured across the full audible spectrum, this indicates inaudibility of noise regardless of test signal. On distortion, for the specific test where the comment is made, i.e. 1 khz, that is also full transparency. Such DACs also do superbly in THD+N tests relative frequency. And at any rate, listeners are horrible at detecting non-linear distortions in electronics. All of this points to high confidence statement of transparency base on what we know of human hearing.I suspect many people visiting this forum get the impression that SINAD is the only thing they need to be concerned about. Indeed, how many times has our host here (who I have a lot of respect for) and others claimed that once you've reached a SINAD of 115dB, everything is sorted as far as audibility is concerned?
Do a blind test, accept the reality, and move on.