-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Benefits of using expensive DACs
- Thread starter ciccio1378
- Start date
I think it's acknowledged quite often. Even in the reviews, there is sometimes a comment on a graph such as 'Jitter quite high but not audible'.
It is mentioned all the time. I alone probably multiple times per week (Most recently just a few hours ago), and I know I'm far far from the only one. (Including you
)How could we have so many saying the differences between well measuring DACs is inaudible AND that nearly all DACs qualify as well measuring, while at the same time as saying the thousandth degree of measurement is audibly important?
Last edited:
Indeed, Amir's job is to show us the measurements... and it's ultimately up to *us* to make up our mind. It's utterly pointless to argue with measurements, but they may mean different things to different users.
Multicore
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2021
- Messages
- 4,438
- Likes
- 5,677
I wonder if there are any that actually diagnose insanity. Imagine in the clinical setting...That's for experts (MD's) not me
"Ah! Mr Dobson, come in and sit down. I have your labs back and can now confidently confirm that you are insane."
Then what?
Well, with DACs it just matters so little anyway. Hundreds tested here and only a handful will actually sound 'bad'. But they are small, cheap and easy to ship, so lots get sent in for testing.
What's really needed is a Klippel-in-a-Van. Drive round the country measuring the speakers which we all want to see tested.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 12,491
- Likes
- 18,103
So how do you take account of those likely different output voltages in your listening to compare 2 dacs ?
Robin L
Master Contributor
Depends on the flavor of insanity - in some cases it will be Depakote and Gabapentin with a side order of Hydroxyzine. In others Stelazine, Zyprexa and too many other pharmaceuticals to mention. "Talking cures" don't do much, drugs do.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
- Messages
- 1,405
- Likes
- 1,188
Can one view software (e.g. REW) and room correction (e.g., ARC, Dirac, etc) as a defacto in-room Klippel?Well, with DACs it just matters so little anyway. Hundreds tested here and only a handful will actually sound 'bad'. But they are small, cheap and easy to ship, so lots get sent in for testing.
What's really needed is a Klippel-in-a-Van. Drive round the country measuring the speakers which we all want to see tested.
No. Both can measure the in room response, including room interaction.
A klippel is specifically designed to remove room effects from the measurements, so it can show us the speaker measurements as if it were not in a room.
"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad like the most of us
Very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad"
I am convinced every worthwhile human brain has a some madness programmed in. But there's (normally) a feedback cycle that ideally turns that madness (whether little or large) into something creative/innovative.
We can all defeat that feedback that keeps us totally "sane" (for lack of a better definition). Just drink too much or do certain drugs and you are a different person... but that person is still you because you stay accountable for your actions. And some people have chemical imbalances that make them be that "other" person more often...
I think all of us have had passing thoughts/impulses at time that make us doubt ourselves ("wow that was crazy!"), and we suppress them and forget about that portion of our brain.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2021
- Messages
- 1,405
- Likes
- 1,188
The distinction was made by calling it "in-room Klippel." I understand they measure two different aspects. I tend to think measuring in-room responses a more useful measurement to real world audio of gear and the room than simulated anechoic chamber, so mostly tongue in cheek comment. If designing and testing a speaker, no doubt such a machine is important if one can't spend the $ on anechoic chambers. I'll go back to reading the thread now.
Sorry - that completely passed me by.
And yet plenty of tests have allowed that, even though it actually makes it harder.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
filterless NOS is 'broken' for 44.1 and 48kHz.
Not so much for 192kHz and not even at 96kHz.
Ultrasonic crap that does not belong is well above the audible range and even above the range of most tweeters. There is no roll-off there.
When upsampling 44.1 and 48kHz to 192 it also is not broken as the reconstruction filter is present in that case in the upsampler.
They don't sound 'different' in that case any more though which is what NOS DAC buyers are looking for.
Isn't there a case though that the ultrasonic crap can inter modulate back into the audible band.
Have we seen a multitone comparison of a switchable DAC with OS and NOS modes compared.
Robin L
Master Contributor
Maybe, but I don't hear it. I suspect all of these potential problems are outside of my hearing range. I'm just glad to have so many good sounding recordings on tap for so little via streaming (and all those $1 CDs I've picked up recently). Certainly, compared to the obvious distortions of LP playback, this is all in another galaxy.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
For 192kHz the US crap is well above 300kHz and very low in amplitude.
One would have to have a very crappy amp to cause problems with that.
I don't think I have seen a multitone for 44.1 upsampled to 176.4 and that reproduced on a filterless DAC and checked up to 400kHz or so.
As said, when using a filterless DAC that way there are no benefits as the filter they try to avoid is still there but in software in the upsampler. It ensures there is no crap all the way up to 88.2 + 44.1 = 132.3kHz.
One would have to have a very crappy amp to cause problems with that.
I don't think I have seen a multitone for 44.1 upsampled to 176.4 and that reproduced on a filterless DAC and checked up to 400kHz or so.
As said, when using a filterless DAC that way there are no benefits as the filter they try to avoid is still there but in software in the upsampler. It ensures there is no crap all the way up to 88.2 + 44.1 = 132.3kHz.
Holmz
Major Contributor
Well maybe the speakers that one needs for a particular room are more easily found using the Klippel measurements?
Anechoic chambers may, or may not, show the radiation pattern.
I suppose one can start with speakers and then add a bunch of sound deadening panels to a room, or ways to liven up a room.
If the room is tiles or is dead, then that could also influence whether one chooses speakers are of a narrow or wide radiation pattern respectively.
What does that have to do with expensive DACs though?