Can Amir, as a trained listener, spot audible difference between DACs?

[pozz]

This kind of thread won't settle the question of audibility and unfairly places attention on Amir.

Something more serious would be to study existing psychoacoustic publications to understand audibility in general and refer newcomers and others to it. JJ and Toole have both stated THD+N (or SINAD or SFDR) are not referenced to our hearing. Geddes and Lee also did work in this area and showed that, if using THD, the detection level is variable.

There's no point in having a debate if we don't take time to understand the existing body of knowledge on the subject.

 

[Krunok]

This kind of thread won't settle the question of audibility and unfairly places attention on Amir.

Something more serious would be to study existing psychoacoustic publications to understand audibility in general and refer newcomers and others to it. JJ and Toole have both stated THD+N (or SINAD or SFDR) are not referenced to our hearing. Geddes and Lee also did work in this area and showed that, if using THD, the detection level is variable.

There's no point in having a debate if we don't take time to understand the existing body of knowledge on the subject.

That is true, it would put some attention on him, and all sorts of comments that go along with that.

I know JJ and Toole's attitude toward SINAD but SINAD chart is in spite of that present on this site suggesting it is the most single important criteria.

It would be better if such test is done with 5-7 trained listeners without knowing their votes. But IMO such test is desperately needed otherwise this whole measurement thing becomes as much detached from the reality of hearing as is religious alike objectivists stuff.

 

[Krunok]

This kind of thread won't settle the question of audibility and unfairly places attention on Amir.

Btw, even this kind of measurement/testing done with AP analyzer is also placing attention on Amir. It is simply unavoidable.

Besides, Amir is always emphasizing the fact he is a trained listener, so he should be listening, right?

 

[Julf]

My son and I did this. I have a Matrix Audio X SABRE PRO MQA and a Dragonfly Red. He swapped them out several times playing different tracks from Tidal then I did the same for him and we both got 100% correct. They sound completely different.

That sounds like simple blind, not double blind. Remember Clever Hans?

 

[Sal1950]

When a trained listener is conducting a proper DBT the result is NOT his personal preference.

You are correct, brain fart.
What I was more thinking was that his level of acuity is only relevant to him personally. Some might be able to do better and others worse in identifying deference's. This would be from the database of 1.

 

[Krunok]

You are correct, brain fart.
What I was more thinking was that his level of acuity is only relevant to him presonally. Some might be able to do better and others worse in identifing deferences. This would be from the database of 1.

LOL

Of course, it would be desirable to have test results from more listeners, but in my eyes having one relevant test result is better than having zero.

 

[RayDunzl]

Poll needs a "Maybe" choice.

 

[Krunok]

Poll needs a "Maybe" choice.

Indeed it does, so edited accordingly.

 

[30 Ounce]

level matched within 0.1dB (measured, not by ear) and both stayed within the maximum output level of the DFR ?
How was the latter determined and which speakers/headphones/amplifier were used

Yes, they were level matched. We had to reduce the Matrix a couple dB.

 

[beefkabob]

Step 1.
One person sets up a system with one digital source, however many DACs, and a few different source files. Say 3 songs and a multi-tone. He level matches. Then he hides the source and DACs behind a blanket. RCA or balanced output cables are marked as 1, 2, 3, etc. into a switch. Preferably a switch with buttons instead of a knob, so there can always be two clicks, even if there's the same component twice in a row.
Step 2.
A second person, who doesn't know the components, controls the switch and playing the music, using a randomly generated order of DACs. I don't know what number of listens statistically would be meaningful. They are hidden from Amir or whomever the listener is. The only signal allowed is the start of the music.
Step 3.
Amir listens critically to each DAC, writing impressions of sound quality in the various ways he's trained.

I think that would get sufficient blindness. I'd be curious to see the results. I'll even host at my house in the SF Bay Area.

 

[amirm]

Walk in the park.... PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC versus Matrix Audio Sabre-X MQA Pro. Outputs captured using AP analyzer:

======================

WASAPI (push) : Speakers (DX3 Pro), 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

09:37:27 : Test started.
09:37:44 : 01/01
09:37:54 : 02/02
09:38:03 : 03/03
09:38:12 : 04/04
09:38:18 : 05/05
09:38:24 : 06/06
09:38:33 : 07/07
09:38:38 : 08/08
09:38:43 : 09/09
09:38:50 : 10/10
09:38:55 : 11/11
09:39:01 : 12/12
09:39:09 : 13/13
09:39:14 : 14/14
09:39:24 : 15/15
09:39:32 : 16/16
09:39:32 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 16/16
p-value: 0 (0%)

-- signature --
bbaf4e8d400e7e010aecfa8a9da2a61e16fa2025

================

Zero chance of guessing.

Next!

 

[Blumlein 88]

This kind of thread won't settle the question of audibility and unfairly places attention on Amir.

Something more serious would be to study existing psychoacoustic publications to understand audibility in general and refer newcomers and others to it. JJ and Toole have both stated THD+N (or SINAD or SFDR) are not referenced to our hearing. Geddes and Lee also did work in this area and showed that, if using THD, the detection level is variable.

There's no point in having a debate if we don't take time to understand the existing body of knowledge on the subject.

In a recent thread J_J was asked what SINAD would ensure equivalent performance. Going from memory I hope I'm not misquoting, but he said something at or better than -110 db might do it. The person questioning wanted to know about lesser levels. J_J's opinion seemed to be to be sure without knowing more -110 db was a good number, and only if you properly characterized the error spectrum of two bits of gear could you say so with lesser specs. I don't know that he has tested that in particular, but his seems an informed opinion.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Walk in the park.... PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC versus Matrix Audio Sabre-X MQA Pro. Outputs captured using AP analyzer:

======================

WASAPI (push) : Speakers (DX3 Pro), 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

09:37:27 : Test started.
09:37:44 : 01/01
09:37:54 : 02/02
09:38:03 : 03/03
09:38:12 : 04/04
09:38:18 : 05/05
09:38:24 : 06/06
09:38:33 : 07/07
09:38:38 : 08/08
09:38:43 : 09/09
09:38:50 : 10/10
09:38:55 : 11/11
09:39:01 : 12/12
09:39:09 : 13/13
09:39:14 : 14/14
09:39:24 : 15/15
09:39:32 : 16/16
09:39:32 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 16/16
p-value: 0 (0%)

-- signature --
bbaf4e8d400e7e010aecfa8a9da2a61e16fa2025

================

Zero chance of guessing.

Next!

A pair of the top 5 in the SINAD chart next please.

 

[Krunok]

Walk in the park.... PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC versus Matrix Audio Sabre-X MQA Pro. Outputs captured using AP analyzer:

======================

WASAPI (push) : Speakers (DX3 Pro), 24-bit
Crossfading: NO

09:37:27 : Test started.
09:37:44 : 01/01
09:37:54 : 02/02
09:38:03 : 03/03
09:38:12 : 04/04
09:38:18 : 05/05
09:38:24 : 06/06
09:38:33 : 07/07
09:38:38 : 08/08
09:38:43 : 09/09
09:38:50 : 10/10
09:38:55 : 11/11
09:39:01 : 12/12
09:39:09 : 13/13
09:39:14 : 14/14
09:39:24 : 15/15
09:39:32 : 16/16
09:39:32 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 16/16
p-value: 0 (0%)

-- signature --
bbaf4e8d400e7e010aecfa8a9da2a61e16fa2025

================

Zero chance of guessing.

Next!

LOL That was quick and impressive, thank you!

May I suggest Topping D10 as next?

 

[Krunok]

A pair of the top 5 in the SINAD chart next please.

Ehh, I don't think we can expect Matrix to differ from Benchmark or ADI, but some budget champs from the green league may present a tough task to hear the difference..

 

[Blumlein 88]

Ehh, I don't think we can expect Matrix to differ from Benchmark or ADI, but some budget champs from the green league may present a tough task to hear the difference..

Well the oft heard complaint is gear with great specs doesn't sound great and we aren't measuring everything important. Also that gear with great specs sound very different from one another. So it might be futile, but it would be interesting if Amir did get positive results between some of the top tested units.

 

[Krunok]

Well the oft heard complaint is gear with great specs doesn't sound great and we aren't measuring everything important. Also that gear with great specs sound very different from one another. So it might be futile, but it would be interesting if Amir did get positive results between some of the top tested units.

I agree. Let's hope he has the patience to do it..

 

[solderdude]

Now I am curious what Amir listened to in his test...
I am surprised nobody asked this.
He is going to make me laugh when the -120dB test signal was the AB-ed track (hint look at the link and the ABX log and supplied data).

 

[Krunok]

Now I am curious what Amir listened to in his test...
I am surprised nobody asked this.
He is going to make me laugh when the test signal was the one he posted earlier.
I would not be surprised if it was real music though.

Or maybe that key juggling flac file?

 

[solderdude]

Yes, they were level matched. We had to reduce the Matrix a couple dB.

within a measured 0.1dB (approx 1%) ?