DAC audible differences are finally proven with ABX?

[pjug]

I have no idea....

Maybe there is a logistics company in the USA that is used by museums to loan unique items.

Amir mentioned that Erin might have one. If so it seems the best way would be to try to get Erin to measure it, and maybe even do some ABX himself.

 

[Thomas_A]

I would as other suggest
DAC->comparator A->Cosmos ADC
DAC->comparator B->Cosmos ADC
DAC->Cosmos ADC

And run Deltawave.

 

[Thomas_A]

Are there timing differences between the DACs?

 

[kemmler3D]

@Josh83 just want to say thanks for coming by to share details and participate in the discussion. You've posted a remarkable result and naturally the interest in running down all potential variables is commensurate. It's a lot to ask but if you can look past any rude or rude-adjacent comments I am sure we can get a lot out of the discussion as a community.

I would +1 the ask for recordings to compare with Deltawave, as in any case where an audible differences is demonstrated where none was expected, the most interesting thing to me is to see what the difference is and how it works!

Lots of people asking things of you and offering little but backchat in return, but it is not every day that there's an opportunity to chip away at audio science / knowledge in this way.

 

[HalSF]

On whether the differences matter: I don’t think what I heard was irrelevant to the music. But I also don’t claim the differences are large, that most people would hear them, or that they’d find them meaningful if they did. I touched on this near the end of the article, and whether such differences are worth caring about is exactly the question I tackle in a follow-up.

I'm very much looking forward to this follow-up because it seems like you're offering a conundrum at this point. The tale of testing was really interesting, but there's an unresolved tension between the surprising success and certainty in hearing differences between DACs, and the strong implication that the differences were basically trivial in terms of sound quality — that despite detectable differences each DAC was doing its job competently.

It's strange to me to present a very impressive batting average in hearing the differences, on the one hand, but the key question of whether the differences matter in terms of fidelity and musical enjoyment is still up in the air, though your implicit conclusion seems to lean in the direction of no, they don't much matter. Quite different than the standard audiophile move of offering confident verdicts on what sounds worse and what sounds better.

If the differences were relevant to the music, how so?

 

[solderdude]

What's interesting is that Goldensound also has such a box for this purpose yet does not seem to use it, at least not openly and have not seen him AB anything other than the 2 filters which he seemed to be able to tell apart (young ears).

It would be interesting if the used excerpts were posted so others can give it a try.

 

[amirm]

I don't think it is so much logistics as risk of damage or loss of rare equipment. Maybe you could travel to test it? I know that is a big ask.

The risk of damage to my $30K+ analyzer is far, far higher than his ABX tester.

Ultimately me testing it is to add more credibility to his test results. Without it, this haze hangs over it as nothing is more critical and the comparator not introducing any "tells." So the benefit is for him, not me.

As I said, Erin has one so I can likely get his. The problem with that plan is that there is always some chance that the two units are not the same.

 

[Salt]

The risk of damage to my $30K+ analyzer is far, far higher than his ABX tester.

Ultimately me testing it is to add more credibility to his test results. Without it, this haze hangs over it as nothing is more critical and the comparator not introducing any "tells." So the benefit is for him, not me.

As I said, Erin has one so I can likely get his. The problem with that plan is that there is always some chance that the two units are not the same.

Comparing both of them would be the cherry on the cake

 

[amirm]

Level matching is accomplished using the remote and the display on the box. Here's what the manual says about the volume control:

I read that but it doesn't say what you said, i.e. it is a passive system. That fact that it doesn't amplify doesn't mean it is passive. It can and likely has a buffer (1:1 unity gain).

 

[pablolie]

But the consensus here seems to be that even many inexpensive dacs are audibly transparent. I share that view too. But this guy has been able to tell several dacs apart with near perfect results. If they all sound different they cannot be audibly transparent.

I actually don't think ASR regulars share much consensus, it's obvious from thousands of dicussions. No "tribe" here.

Second of all, I never ever trust these tests. Anybody can publish anything on the internet. Not my intention to call anyone a liar, but with lights indicating which source is being used... do I *really* trust that didn't ave any effect? Curiously enough, every single time I have been present in such tests, the result was complete failure. I also find it weird (i.e. suspect) that he can remember the different sound signatures of several different DACs. Come on, how long would that really take? I find that very questionable. If the test was simpy done between two "identically measuring DACs", ok... but *several* of them? I find the notion downright laughable. What kind of audiophile would enjoy spending that much time merely comparing gear with the type of focus and obsessive attention to detail such tests require? And shouldn't at least two respected DACs sound identical or at least pose a bigger challenge to tell apart? The fact they *all* sound different is very suspect, IMO.

Personally, with tracks of my own choosing I can differentiate between FLAC and 256VBR+/320k MP3 pretty much 100% of the time, but I find the exercise so utterly and abominably unentertaining that I shall never again waste a second of my time doing it. I can fully enjoy music either way. Which is also the case why I am not sure why these DAC ABX tests are so interesting to many. Come on, do you really listen to music, or just test tones to establish minuscule differences that have *zero* impact on music enjoyment?

 

[krabapple]

It has be obvious to me for many years that, in general, there are audible differences between amplifiers. However one given amplifier might sound more or less like another given amplifier such that perhaps nobody will be able to distinguish between them.

When comparing one given amplifier to another given amplifier I have always believed that a careful, experienced listener may hear differences and be able to tell the apart. I refer again to the January 1987 Stereo Review article, "Do All Amplifier Sound the Same?". The obviously valid overall conclusion was that people could not reliably tell amplifiers apart, but when comparing specific pairs of amp, differences could be heard with high probably.

The test results are on page 83 here

Which pairs of amps fit your description?

It will irritate some people that I say this, but whereas blind testing can prove that amps, (speakers, whatever), sound different, but it can only prove prove that they sound the same under the specific test conditions, NOT under any and all conditions

But we can never test 'any and all conditions'. This is why statistics are used.
And btw, no one says amps sound the same under 'any and all conditions', in the first place.

 

[krabapple]

Or are they? Interesting experiment with positive results (according to the author):

https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/bits-and-bytes/can-i-tell-audibly-transparent-dacs-apart-blind-testing-with-the-van-alstine-abx-comparator-r1440/

As such, the results seem very convincing. In all the tests the author reached almost a full score. In 112 trials combined he only failed twice. This seems to suggest that the differences were pretty obvious and easy to hear.

The author (to his credit) writes:

" With the ABX box, time, and effort, I could reliably tell DACs apart. That’s all my testing shows. It doesn’t mean most people — or even many — could do the same. The test is easy to fail if you’re not concentrating, don’t think DACs can sound different, or don’t know what to listen for."

Indeed. How *much* time and effort does it take, and does that time and effort bear any resemblance whatsoever to the time and effort it takes golden ears to proclaim they 'hear' DAC A vs DAC B?

Again, another example of -- something being possible to do by someone doesn't mean it was done by another who claims he did, under a quite different detection regime.

(Could it even be 'done' by Josh afterwards, in his normal listening, without investing time and effort in forensic methods again?)

IOW, is it ever the case that one can just walk into a room containing two level-matched DACs, and 'right away' correctly tell A from B consistently, by their sound alone?

Because THAT is the sort of thing the Absolute Sound/Stereophile tribe claims to routinely be able to do.

THIS does not support THAT. Not even close.

Failing 'transparency' in a forensic detection situation doesn't mean it won't be 'transparent' to YOU in the normal case. If it takes the sort of 'time and effort' as typically described (e.g. like Amir's detecting 320 Mbps mp3) you ain't likely hearing it, sunshine.

 

[Josh83]

I read that but it doesn't say what you said, i.e. it is a passive system. That fact that it doesn't amplify doesn't mean it is passive. It can and likely has a buffer (1:1 unity gain).

Sorry. I meant that it doesn’t amplify.

 

[Josh83]

Second of all, I never ever trust these tests. Anybody can publish anything on the internet. Not my intention to call anyone a liar, but with lights indicating which source is being used... do I *really* trust that didn't ave any effect?

The lights do not indicate which source is being used.

Indeed. How *much* time and effort does it take, and does that time and effort bear any resemblance whatsoever to the time and effort it takes golden ears to proclaim they 'hear' DAC A vs DAC B?

Again, another example of -- something being possible to do by someone doesn't mean it is done by another.

Indeed, this is why I’m not claiming my experience is transferable to anyone else.

 

[pablolie]

Indeed, this is why I’m not claiming my experience is transferable to anyone else.

But your test oddly enough shows *no* DAC sounds the same as any other. That extreme I find extremely questionable. From the "all DACs sound the same" that the OP claims is the universal ASR opinion, we suddenly get "proof" that "no DAC ever sounds the same as any other DAC". That extreme seems way over the top.

 

[firedog]

But your test oddly enough shows *no* DAC sounds the same as any other. That extreme I find extremely questionable. From the "all DACs sound the same"that the OP claims is the universal ASR opinion, we suddenly get "proof" that "no DAC ever sounds the same as any other DAC". That extreme seems way over the top.

If you read the actual article, there is no claim that “no DAC ever sounds the same as any other DAC”.

 

[pablolie]

If you read the actual article, there is no claim that “no DAC ever sounds the same as any other DAC”.

It's not claimed, but given the results it's a very valid interpretation: 6 DACs (I think), *none* of them sound the same when compared with each other. Hmmm... Sorry but I don't buy that result at all. I'd put money down on the fact that, with someone present in the ABX text to validate, it would not be replicable. That's happened every time. Check the Archimago archives, he's debunked every golden eared claim out there, pretty much.

 

[Josh83]

It's not claimed, but given the results it's a very valid interpretation: 6 DACs (I think), *none* of them sound the same when compared with each other. Hmmm... Sorry but I don't buy that result at all. I'd put money down on the fact that, with someone present in the ABX text to validate, it would not be replicable. That's happened every time. Check the Archimago archives, he's debunked every golden eared claim out there, pretty much.

To be clear, I’m sure there are some DACs that sound the same, and if I had enough DACs on hand, I’d run into that result.

 

[krabapple]

Indeed, this is why I’m not claiming my experience is transferable to anyone else.

What were the tells? Were they different for different pairs? How much time/effort would you say went into finding them?

It's not claimed, but given the results it's a very valid interpretation: 6 DACs (I think), *none* of them sound the same when compared with each other. Hmmm...

Your point is entirely valid, and such result is quite odd, to say the least.

 

[Josh83]

What were the tells? Were they different for different pairs? How much time/effort would you say went into finding them?

I discussed this a little in the article, but it was different for different pairs. Sometimes it was the texture or decay of a particular instrument, other times it was a slight soundstage difference, etc.

I’d heard all of the DACs before, though usually from their XLR, not RCA, outputs. After I’d hooked them up to the ABX box and level-matched, I’d take some time flipping back and forth between the two DACs, note what I thought was different, then enter the formal ABX test mode. Each 8-round test took approximately 5-10 minutes. I wouldn’t characterize any difference as “obvious” as in “my wife came running in from the kitchen…,” but some seemed clearer than others. However, that could lead to overconfidence and running through the tests too fast, as I mentioned in the article. So I tried to remain deliberative and flip between A, B, and X several times before writing down my answer.