Best value streamer with no DAC

[Phorize]

That’s just a tautology. If we are not just to talk across each other, we are going to need to adopt a shared framework for discussion. I’m trying to enable you to present the strongest version of the argument you believe you have so I can understand the basis of it.

So far I’m my understanding is that you don’t accept that, a dac for example, can be measured sufficiently to rule out the possibility that it will contribute something unexpected to what goes on to be heard.

Is that a fair summary of what you are saying?

 

[Deleted member 24508]

What it sounds like perhaps?

That’s just a tautology. If we are not just to talk across each other, we are going to need to adopt a shared framework for discussion. I’m trying to enable you to present the strongest version of the argument you believe you have so I can understand the basis of it.

So far I’m my understanding is that you don’t accept that, a dac for example, can be measured sufficiently to rule out the possibility that it will contribute something unexpected to what goes on to be heard.

Is that a fair summary of what you are saying?

I didn't say unexpected I said different. I find it odd that you can accept that different inputs of the same signal to a device both supposedly bit perfect in fact do not sound the same and then saying that if measured the same they must sound the same.

 

[Phorize]

I didn't say unexpected I said different. I find it odd that you can accept that different inputs of the same signal to a device both supposedly bit perfect in fact do not sound the same and then saying that if measured the same they must sound the same.

OK. So you saying that the there are properties of the signal that cannot be measured but can be heard?

 

[BDWoody]

I listened to Raspberry Pi players before buying a microrendu. The difference is more than noticeable.

How would you describe the difference, and did you use any controls?

What you are claiming would need more than you are presenting to be taken seriously. It's the difference between anecdote and evidence.

 

[Bamyasi]

I didn't say unexpected I said different. I find it odd that you can accept that different inputs of the same signal to a device both supposedly bit perfect in fact do not sound the same and then saying that if measured the same they must sound the same.

They will sound the same but with one important caveat you are trying to avoid mentioning: both types of input ports should be well-implemented and should not malfunction (same caveat for the rest of device, of course, e.g. DAC). Numerous examples of poorly designed devices exist, some of them sold under major "high-end" brand names, and you could find several of such devices measured (and performed poorly) on this forum. Sure they will sound "different", but that's because they are broken by design. There are also occasional examples of broken ports due to QC issues during manufacturing or because of damage during shipping. These things happen and there is no doubt they cause audible effects. They are also easy to measure. But any fairly recently designed and manufactured DAC should be completely transparent on all of its inputs.

 

[sophie smith]

https://snakeoilsound.com/

Snake Oil Streamer $99

Based on RPi. Pretty cheap and turn key solution. Assembled in US.

 

[RoyB]

I was using a Amazon Firestick 4K with a CableMatters HDMI audio stripper into a Schiit DAC.....One of the best sounding streamers I ever heard. You run the video into nearby TV and control the whole thing with the FireStick remote.....Total cost with cable, under $100......Plug and Play!

 

[Deleted member 24508]

They will sound the same but with one important caveat you are trying to avoid mentioning: both types of input ports should be well-implemented and should not malfunction (same caveat for the rest of device, of course, e.g. DAC). Numerous examples of poorly designed devices exist, some of them sold under major "high-end" brand names, and you could find several of such devices measured (and performed poorly) on this forum. Sure they will sound "different", but that's because they are broken by design. There are also occasional examples of broken ports due to QC issues during manufacturing or because of damage during shipping. These things happen and there is no doubt they cause audible effects. They are also easy to measure. But any fairly recently designed and manufactured DAC should be completely transparent on all of its inputs.

If all DACS sound the same, and if you can measure how a DAC will sound then surely all DACS should measure the same, they don't.

 

[Phorize]

If all DACS sound the same, and if you can measure how a DAC will sound then surely all DACS should measure the same, they don't.

If you examine the dac review section you’ll see that even the bottom quartile dacs add distortion or jitter artefacts at the lowest end of human audibility where most people won’t be able to detect them. You can absolutely forget about hearing different between most dacs and certainly mainstream dacs. All of this is well evidenced. Have you considered that why you mind is so closed to this evidence? I find that a more interesting question than the resolved issue of dac audibility .

 

[Deleted member 24508]

If you examine the dac review section you’ll see that even the bottom quartile dacs add distortion or jitter artefacts at the lowest end of human audibility where most people won’t be able to detect them. You can absolutely forget about hearing different between most dacs and certainly mainstream dacs. All of this is well evidenced. Have you considered that why you mind is so closed to this evidence? I find that a more interesting question than the resolved issue of dac audibility .

I have owned many DACs and still have 4, I can reliably tell which one is being used.

 

[Deleted member 24508]

If you examine the dac review section you’ll see that even the bottom quartile dacs add distortion or jitter artefacts at the lowest end of human audibility where most people won’t be able to detect them. You can absolutely forget about hearing different between most dacs and certainly mainstream dacs. All of this is well evidenced. Have you considered that why you mind is so closed to this evidence? I find that a more interesting question than the resolved issue of dac audibility .

Find a dealer that sells Chord DAC's listen to them all, they all sound different in exactly the same system.

 

[Deleted member 24508]

If you examine the dac review section you’ll see that even the bottom quartile dacs add distortion or jitter artefacts at the lowest end of human audibility where most people won’t be able to detect them. You can absolutely forget about hearing different between most dacs and certainly mainstream dacs. All of this is well evidenced. Have you considered that why you mind is so closed to this evidence? I find that a more interesting question than the resolved issue of dac audibility .

If there is no difference between DAC's why does this site test and measure them? Why bother?

 

[Phorize]

Find a dealer that sells Chord DAC's listen to them all, they all sound different in exactly the same system.

Another tautological statement I’m genuinely interested in why you seem to be refusing to even consider the possibility that entire bodies or peer reviewed scientific research don’t override your fantastically flawed ‘test’ in a chord dealership.

Can I ask, quite genuinely, are they any areas of life where you do accept that scientific research matters?

 

[Phorize]

If there is no difference between DAC's why does this site test and measure them? Why bother?

Firstly that’s not a relevant consideration if the question is about the audibility of electronics. To answer your question though, If you pay attention to the content of the reviews, you’ll see standard engineering tests being applied to validate designs (as generally manufacturers don’t publish measurements)-as well as usability, build and ‘value’ considerations. The picture forming is that:

1) most electronics are indistinguishable from each other, so non technical reviews pertaining to sound (ie the industry standard) are fatuous.

2) where differences exist, they either matter (such as when a headphone amp is too underpowered for an inefficient headphone, they may matter in some circumstances such as an amp with marginally audible distortion, or they tell a wider story about the engineering values of the manufacturer, such as with the appallingly engineered chord huei.

3) probably most importantly to me (as it’s actually hard to pick bad electronics even if choosing at random) it’s fun look at graphs and count the increasing number of cheap dac using off the shelf technology to out perform high priced offerings from the likes of chord for its own sake.

 

[Kegemusha]

I have a new topping E30 and an old cambridge dacmagic 100, I think I would never hear any difference in a blind test.

 

[Phorize]

We live in an era where some people reject expertise as if that were a virtue.
The proposition from traditional audio philes, whipped up by a financially and socially motivated legion of charlatans like John Darko etc, is that engineers and scientists can’t tell them what they can hear. The fact Nobel prizes have been awarded for showing the precise mechanics of the errors that they are making doesn’t deter them. I suppose that privately some must have misgivings but as the field of organisational psychology tells us, people will buy in very easily to group think. Let’s say that someone like Steve Gutenberg suddenly accepts that he can’t hear a dac. How likely is he to actually take the brave step of renouncing his faith? It’s far easier to just dig in. Again this is all on the literature on cognitive neuroscience.

From an aesthetic point of view I find it both frustrating and amusing in a dark sense. Expecting someone like John Darko to have something useful to say about the Harman research is like expecting a dog to critique Rachmaninov’s Symphony No. 2 in E minor.

 

[Deleted member 24508]

Another tautological statement I’m genuinely interested in why you seem to be refusing to even consider the possibility that entire bodies or peer reviewed scientific research don’t override your fantastically flawed ‘test’ in a chord dealership.

Can I ask, quite genuinely, are they any areas of life where you do accept that scientific research matters?

You have made 3 statements, All Days sound the same, you can measure the differences between Dacs and therefore predict what it will sound like, all Days don't measure the same. Surely these statements are mutually exclusive?

 

[Phorize]

You have made 3 statements, All Days sound the same, you can measure the differences between Dacs and therefore predict what it will sound like, all Days don't measure the same. Surely these statements are mutually exclusive?

I’m going to focus on how you are going about this rather than the substance of your questions, which whether you intend them to or not are bordering on the vexatious.

I have been extremely clear and specific about what I’m saying, yet your responses do not engage with what I am saying at all, but instead focus on developing tangential arguement from semantics rather than substance/produce non sequitur points and falsely summarise what I have said.

This approach is often used by someone who is arguing in bad faith and for whatever reason is using logical fallacy and theatrics to give the illusion on a discussion, and often to convince their own side that ‘they won’ because they were able generate a large amount of words. It’s not uncommon for people to do what you are doing in good faith because they haven’t been taught to think critically. I have no idea what your intentions are of course, however, a persistent refusal to engage with what is being said and the persistent presentation of false dichotomy, straw man and non sequitur argument are often a good sign of a bad faith actor. If that is the case then I expect you to declare victory very soon,

So I say again;:

The scientific consensus in all related matters should lead us to conclude that electronics don’t have a sound if well engineered. The total lack of evidence in the form of controlled tests showing that people can detect even 00s of dbs of difference supports this rather than undermines it. Case closed unless evidence of either a change in the scientific assumptions triggered by a new theory or empirical evidence (from a controlled trial) is produced.

You may wish to notice that I have made specific efforts to ‘iron man’ your argument-ie by spending time checking what you mean etc. This is because. I’m not looking to point score or prove you wrong, but to understand what you arguement is.

So far I am taking your argument to be that you can hear differences between dacs in a feat of hearing that any engineer or scientist would regard as impossible...

 

[Deleted member 24508]

I’m going to focus on how you are going about this rather than the substance of your questions, which whether you intend them to or not are bordering on the vexatious.

I have been extremely clear and specific about what I’m saying, yet your responses do not engage with what I am saying at all, but instead focus on developing tangential arguement from semantics rather than substance/produce non sequitur points and falsely summarise what I have said.

This approach is often used by someone who is arguing in bad faith and for whatever reason is using logical fallacy and theatrics to give the illusion on a discussion, and often to convince their own side that ‘they won’ because they were able generate a large amount of words. It’s not uncommon for people to do what you are doing in good faith because they haven’t been taught to think critically. I have no idea what your intentions are of course, however, a persistent refusal to engage with what is being said and the persistent presentation of false dichotomy, straw man and non sequitur argument are often a good sign of a bad faith actor. If that is the case then I expect you to declare victory very soon,

So I say again;:

The scientific consensus in all related matters should lead us to conclude that electronics don’t have a sound if well engineered. The total lack of evidence in the form of controlled tests showing that people can detect even 00s of dbs of difference supports this rather than undermines it. Case closed unless evidence of either a change in the scientific assumptions triggered by a new theory or empirical evidence (from a controlled trial) is produced.

You may wish to notice that I have made specific efforts to ‘iron man’ your argument-ie by spending time checking what you mean etc. This is because. I’m not looking to point score or prove you wrong, but to understand what you arguement is.

So far I am taking your argument to be that you can hear differences between dacs in a feat of hearing that any engineer or scientist would regard as impossible...

No if all days sound the same why bother testing them, they all sound the same, test over. I'm serious.

 

[BDWoody]

No if all days sound the same why bother testing them, they all sound the same, test over. I'm serious.

To see if they are competent.

If all DACS sound the same, and if you can measure how a DAC will sound then surely all DACS should measure the same, they don't.

That's the kind of silliness that just illustrates what you don't understand.

I have owned many DACs and still have 4, I can reliably tell which one is being used.

Do it with proper controls and you'll become an overnight star.

Until then, you don't seem to be engaging in a good faith effort to actually meaningfully engage. Continued insistence on claims with no evidence and ignoring the substance of the responses you are getting will lead you to ban-land.