Both DAC are transparent as measures by Amir, why one not as clean sounding as the other?

[Pdxwayne]

Has a significative effect on original/records matchings (jitter/drift solving), and on the nulls. Seems the audio track need to be 2min for that feature to work the best. Yours is to short. Any track is audio.

View attachment 144182

Did that work for your own DAC comparison?

 

[b4nt]

Did that work for your own DAC comparison?

See around #1,165. I used your own published files to figure this out

 

[Pdxwayne]

See around #1,165. I used your own published files to figure this out

I thought it was mentioned a few times that the clock drift and jitter do not matter in term of audibility?

Anyway, I will see if I can test it out.

 

[b4nt]

I thought it was mentioned a few times that the clock drift and jitter do not matter in term of audibility?

Anyway, I will see if I can test it out.

You have a streamer / DAC / ADC chain. Adding clock drifts, jitter and phase shift (plus noise and quantization errors). And you want to evaluate up to very minimal changes in your signals, compared to original file.

If it isn't audible, it may compromise the final math or plot done by DW. But it seems DW has the adequate options and features to deal with, as long as your track/record is 2min long, plus you select the options.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Engaging level EQ and Phase EQ attempts to fix the compare file so its frequency response and phase differences are made to match the reference file. If those are the main or only differences you'll see the match improve by a large amount. You do commonly see that. If otoh, you get little difference then something other than FR and phase are causing differences.

And that is how to think about using DW. Try it a few ways and figure out what is causing a poor null or what gets a really good null. Now keep in mind if you use level and phase EQ getting a really deep null, the devices still might sound different because as you listen to them the FR and phase is not corrected. This feature is more a way to find out if FR and phase are the primary reasons two devices don't null out better.

 

[b4nt]

@Pdxwayne I beleive DW is a great tool. May have limitations, or obscure features for newbies. Before comparing apples to apples, I would first check what all is available in there, and how to get the best out of DW.

DeltaWave is a tool, and it is most certainly not perfect. But it has enough information and controls in it for you to troubleshoot issues like this for yourself. If you see something that doesn't look right, try to troubleshoot it first, before making any far-reaching conclusions. Try to learn what measurements make sense and why. Try to repeat the measurement to ensure it's consistent. Use other tools to corroborate the results. This is how real measurements are done. But I agree, the laptop power supply isn't making much of a difference here.

And I took note, laptop PSU made no difference. I beleive it was worth to check (as environmental part, susceptible to alter measures).

So as a next point, @Pdxwayne I'd now push DW to its limits, again, to see. See also around #1,165.

 

[Blumlein 88]

To use non-linear EQ option? Where is that set? Why do I need to care? This 2 minutes song is a very busy song. Very different from my "whale" song. So, if that show something different, then what do we conclude?

At this point you have learned a lot about how to use the software and do testing. I understand trying to keep comparisons apples to apples. However, 2 minutes lets DW get better results. I'd suggest picking a different song, or the one I suggested so you get 2 minutes to work with. I think Paul has said 2-3 minutes is optimum. No substantial benefit going longer. So by now you are somewhat abandoning your earlier tests if you change songs, but I think it is a good time to do that.

Having done a good bit of this with several DACs, unless the song or test signal is very extreme in some way changing songs doesn't greatly effect the results you get in DW.

 

[b4nt]

Engaging level EQ and Phase EQ attempts to fix the compare file so its frequency response and phase differences are made to match the reference file. If those are the main or only differences you'll see the match improve by a large amount

I clearly saw matchs improvements compared to original files. And in jitter/clocking from origninal files. Not knowing the DW internals, I beleive it is something that can improve the results. Not solving, but helping one to point to other potential and more real issues.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Initially Deltawave was fairly simple. Some of us beta testing it for Paul kept asking for this or that feature. Paul gave us nearly anything we'd ask for or anything possible. It has lots of settings and capabilities now so it does take some time to learn how to make use of those. When used at its default settings it does do a good job of what its aims were initially.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I clearly saw matchs improvements compared to original files. And in jitter/clocking from origninal files. Not knowing the DW internals, I beleive it is something that can improve the results. Not solving, but helping one to point to other potential and more real issues.

Yes, but once you engage level and phase EQ, if you are getting well over a -100 db result there isn't much better that can be done. At that point there isn't much left to investigate. Aligning, fixing clock drift, gain, FR and phase has given you a practically perfect result. So those factors are responsible for practically all the difference with the rest being unavoidable noise differences from run to run.

 

[b4nt]

Initially Deltawave was fairly simple. Some of us beta testing it for Paul kept asking for this or that feature. Paul gave us nearly anything we'd ask for or anything possible. It has lots of settings and capabilities now so it does take some time to learn how to make use of those. When used at its default settings it does do a good job of what its aims were initially.

PO may have to go down to -90 / -100dB for his matchs. Might be a specific need. Stressing so DW and its ADC (plus its environment).

If he cannot, it will be either a DAC, or a tools/environment limitation. I suppose it is that basic.

And instead of comparing apples, i'd now focus first on this, pushing, to reach and to evaluate the tools limits.

 

[Pdxwayne]

@b4nt and @Blumlein 88, thanks for the comments.

I captured using 2min test file. Node2i Coax to DAC , XLR to Forte.

Go ahead and play with the files as you wish. : )
https://we.tl/t-h2cSNHDRKM

Here are a few plots I got. Looks like again X16 is better?

Edit: I noticed that some of my plots only show line out to 1 minute mark....but the pkmetric numbers should be correct.

d30pro vs d30pro, left:

d30pro vs d30pro, right:

d30pro capture2 vs Orig, Left channel, without non-linear eq and phase:

d30pro capture2 vs orig, left channel, using non-linear eq and phase:

X16 vs X16, Left channel:

X16 vs X16, Right channel:

X16 capture 2 vs Orig, Left channel, without using non-linear eq or phase:

X16 capture 2 vs Orig, Left channel, using non-linear eq and phase:

 

[b4nt]

Here are a few plots I got. Looks like again X16 is better?

Make some more tests. X16 seems to be different. To be confirmed, with fine tuned tests like described above.

But is any difference audible in what the D30 outputs? That will be your challenge, you will have to convice us

 

[Blumlein 88]

@b4nt and @Blumlein 88, thanks for the comments.

I captured using 2min test file. Node2i Coax to DAC , XLR to Forte.

Go ahead and play with the files as you wish. : )
https://we.tl/t-h2cSNHDRKM

Here are a few plots I got. Looks like again X16 is better?

Edit: I noticed that some of my plots only show line out to 1 minute mark....but the pkmetric numbers should be correct.

d30pro vs d30pro, left:
View attachment 144196


d30pro vs d30pro, right:
View attachment 144197

d30pro capture2 vs Orig, Left channel, without non-linear eq and phase:
View attachment 144198


d30pro capture2 vs orig, left channel, using non-linear eq and phase:
View attachment 144199


X16 vs X16, Left channel:
View attachment 144200


X16 vs X16, Right channel:
View attachment 144201



X16 capture 2 vs Orig, Left channel, without using non-linear eq or phase:
View attachment 144202


X16 capture 2 vs Orig, Left channel, using non-linear eq and phase:
View attachment 144203

You can place your mouse pointer below the graph where the time is labeled. Scrolling at that point expands or contracts the length shown in the window.

 

[Pdxwayne]

Make some more tests. X16 seems to be different. To be confirmed, with fine tuned tests like described above.

But is any difference audible in what the D30 outputs? That will be your challenge, you will have to convice us

I don't care about this 2min song. Why would I assume I could hear a difference for all type of songs?

I already did ABX for the song I noticed a different.
: P

 

[b4nt]

I don't care about this 2min song. Why would I assume I could hear a difference for all type of songs?

I already did ABX for the song I noticed a different.
: P

Now again the ABX magic trick

Either the D30 is corrupting the signals, or it is not. Indeed, more or less perceptible depending on the track and masking.

But we are waiting for you to demonstrate the D30 is that bad, a no go

PS: I'm sure some people will help you to tweak your setup and procedures to ease your demo

 

[Pdxwayne]

Now again the ABX magic trick

Either the D30 is corrupting the signals, or it is not. Indeed, more or less perceptible depending on the track and masking.

But we are waiting for you to demonstrate the D30 is that bad, a no go

PS: I'm sure some people will help you to tweak your setup and procedures to ease your demo

I never said d30 is "bad". See my first post.

 

[b4nt]

I never said d30 is "bad". See my first post.

I was thinking my D50s was bad, sent a mail. Topping answered me, by email: "its inside your test track."

I don't think all my audio setups are exact the same. Main question: is the sound acceptable?

 

[Pdxwayne]

I was thinking my D50s was bad, sent a mail. Topping answered me, by email: "its inside your test track."

I don't think all my audio setups are exact the same. Main question: is the sound acceptable?

Initially, I prefer my X16. Without having my X16 to compare, I would say I would get used to d30pro.

: )






..........................
Latest summary:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...clean-sounding-as-the-other.24778/post-861227

 

[b4nt]

Initially, I prefer my X16. Without having my X16 to compare, I would say I would get used to d30pro.

: )

I'm now used to the buzzing sounds of indigo. But I get still confused if I switch to another setup and speakers