DAC audible differences are finally proven with ABX?

[Talisman]

....

I personally wrote that Josh's attitude, in some situations, really resembled that of a troll, and it wasn't a lazy insult at all, but an observation.
The troll has the ability to insert himself into a community and touch raw nerves by saying enough and convincingly enough, returning to some points and deliberately glossing over others, sparking discussion and then returning to the shadows.
Even if that wasn't his intention, for long stretches Josh behaved EXACTLY like a high-profile troll would.
First throw a bomb that is a very strong trigger on ASR "I can hear the differences between competent DACs in the blind in Abx"
then he begins to respond to the (inevitable) explanations and requests for data and clarifications, he responds with incredible precision to some but without ever really providing useful information. When he is forced to provide recordings that he evidently possesses, he barricades himself behind a
"I'm sorry, I don't have time for this, I have other things to do"
however he continued to stay on the thread and reply with dozens of lines to other things, a very strange and in some ways inconsistent behavior.
Even the idea that a user so immersed in this sector as to buy an abx box, test some DACs, write on a specific site like AS obtaining exceptional results and then, when faced with requests for peer review, say things like "no, I'm not interested in reviewing the results, I only did it for myself and I'm fine with that" is very strange and not very coherent.

When he was asked to borrow his box, he refused, using the excuse that he "doesn't lend his things" because he had a lot of trouble getting them and uses them normally, not even in the face of a $10,000 guarantee in case of damage or loss. This is a legitimate position, but when a user offered to buy it for 3000 dollars he immediately asked for information, it's a strange attitude from someone who doesn't want to sell because he uses it and needs it so much that he can't lend it for a month....
As the discussion progressed Josh continued to defend his position by explaining in detail how and why he wanted the money, which then became a donation, which then became more money. And throughout this situation people kept asking him if he could simply upload the DAC recording files, which would probably have simply resolved (but maybe not) doubts and provided answers, but Josh knowingly and systematically completely glossed over these requests without even answering, instead continuing to talk about how and why to pay for the box.

So Matt, no, it wasn't a lazy insult, it was simply an observation of behavior that (whether intended or not) closely resembles that of a good troll.

 

[pma]

Great analysis!

 

[antcollinet]

sometimes people are still gonna people…even on ASR

That is a simple fact of life. Unavoidable.

Just by way of an example, I used the word "despicable" up thread in relation to a valid criticism of publishing PM's.

In retrospect, I could have used a less emotionally charged word.

But as you say - even objectivists are people. And sometimes I also suffer the symptoms of a patience bypass.

 

[antcollinet]

(That also goes for other lazy tropes like accusations of “ Sealioning”

I have used that accusation more than once - but only (I still believe) appropriately. It is particularly characterised by a form or relentless opinion pushing which conveniently (for the sealion) ignores all posts that reasonably (and often convincingly) counter those opinions, thereby refusing to actually engage with discussion - while continuing to demand "proof" from those who have already provided good faith arguments.

I am quite comfortable with the use of the word. It is a form of trolling designed to engage people in pointless effort, and it is reasonable to point that out.

 

[firedog]

No. Just no. You are confused about who we are and our promise. We have never said we are saints. We are a professionally run forum and that requires certain amount of decorum. But no way do we turn the other cheek when comment after comment is made about us. To do so would be to agree to be bullied and reward the bully.

As for firedog, he was the top dog, pun intended, that started the antagonism there. I post about it way early in the thread:

You see how he puts even our politeness in bad light? And how he misstated our intentions.

I have known him for many years. The man just does this. And doesn't deserve any of the wind you are trying to put in his sail.

It is my style to be very professional with people until they cross a line. Both Josh and Firedog have done so. Once there, I will still stay professional but will push back, and strongly so on unreasonable positions taken by individuals like this. I see no reason to be passive as again, that reward bad behavior.

I started the "antagonism" because it was obvious how this thread would go - even beoming full of ad hominem attacks on Josh. It's par for the course here. The thread only proves me right.

The content of this site is very useful. The non-content aspects are off putting and damaging to your declared mission.
Suggesting the box should be checked and that there could be issues with it is fine. Saying that the test is an outlier and needs to be repeated is fine.
All the rest is unnecessary, not on topic, and negative.

People who express any doubts about some of the agreed upon assumptions at this site are relentlessly attacked or ridiculed. For instance, there is actual science showing issues with using SINAD as a one stop shop for judging audio equipment. SINAD isn't flawless. Why is it important if it's in the "inaudible" range among various pieces of equipment? Your certainly know this, but the hidden assumption here is that it is the be and end all of rating equipment. I assume you will deny this, but that's what comes thru here and what many people take away. It's reflected in many posts here.

As an alternative, you could just decide on a level at which it makes no difference, and grade electronics as "pass" and "fail". Or some other presentation. Your bar graphs - possibly unintentionally - promote the POV that every db of SINAD is important and that the -119 rated DAC is better than the -116 measured DAC.

You haven't "known" me - you know next to nothing about me. What an arrogant statement on your part.

Your supposed knowledge is based only on your personal prejudices and all sorts of baseless assumptions resulting from those. Very "scientific".

Professional - includes misrepresenting what Josh wrote to you and then accusing him of dishonesty, greed, etc?

In my case, you did the "professional" thing once of searching the web for something I wrote 10-15 years before, then said that very old posts and an AC filter/protection unit I had "proved" that I believed in snake oil and knew nothing about audio.
Of course it never occurred to you that a person could learn something during his time in the hobby and change his position.
Nor did it occur to you that I'd never claimed that piece of equipment improved the sound of my system. I had it here for protection, as I live in a rural area with power issues.
You simply assumed and posted.
Is that typical your "knowledge" of me?

You found it very important to search old posts on other sites and find a way to attack me, even though your attacks were false and baseless. Very professional.

 

[ppierre]

I started the "antagonism" because it was obvious how this thread would go

Good help, nice work. Good T____ !

 

[Mart68]

People who express any doubts about some of the agreed upon assumptions at this site are relentlessly attacked or ridiculed. For instance, there is actual science showing issues with using SINAD as a one stop shop for judging audio equipment. SINAD isn't flawless. Why is it important if it's in the "inaudible" range among various pieces of equipment? Your certainly know this, but the hidden assumption here is that it is the be and end all of rating equipment. I assume you will deny this, but that's what comes thru here and what many people take away. It's reflected in many posts here.

Entirely fabricated but you accuse others of misrepresentation?

 

[Talisman]

IFor instance, there is actual science showing issues with using SINAD as a one stop shop for judging audio equipment. SINAD isn't flawless. Why is it important if it's in the "inaudible" range among various pieces of equipment? Your certainly know this, but the hidden assumption here is that it is the be and end all of rating equipment. I assume you will deny this, but that's what comes thru here and what many people take away. It's reflected in many posts here.

And since when do we use SINAD as the only evaluation parameter?
is the foolish belief of any casual detractor of the site who hasn't spent more than three minutes reading a review, if this is the level of your criticism please try harder or stop

 

[Mart68]

if this is the level of your criticism please try harder or stop.

Based on his previous posts I think that is the best he can do.

 

[solderdude]

The content of this site is very useful. The non-content aspects are off putting and damaging to your declared mission.
Suggesting the box should be checked and that there could be issues with it is fine. Saying that the test is an outlier and needs to be repeated is fine.
All the rest is unnecessary, not on topic, and negative.

Some of the off-topic remarks were about the unwillingness to provide requested information/files and easy to deliver proof and unwillingness to part with it unless a substantial amount of money was offered.
This begs for speculation does it not ?
Agreed that some of the remarks by some members can be seen as insulting etc. This is what happens when people are passionate.
Some of Josh's replies also appeared like sea-lioning to some which is frowned upon.
Personally I thought Josh's replies were on point, polite and informative.

People who express any doubts about some of the agreed upon assumptions at this site are relentlessly attacked or ridiculed. For instance, there is actual science showing issues with using SINAD as a one stop shop for judging audio equipment. SINAD isn't flawless. Why is it important if it's in the "inaudible" range among various pieces of equipment? Your certainly know this, but the hidden assumption here is that it is the be and end all of rating equipment. I assume you will deny this, but that's what comes thru here and what many people take away. It's reflected in many posts here.

Not a single person on ASR believes SINAD is the end-all-be-all rating of equipment. NO one.. this is only assumed by people that don't like this place and use it as a stick to whack the dog. Like you are doing right now.

As an alternative, you could just decide on a level at which it makes no difference, and grade electronics as "pass" and "fail". Or some other presentation. Your bar graphs - possibly unintentionally - promote the POV that every db of SINAD is important and that the -119 rated DAC is better than the -116 measured DAC.

You probably missed the 4 tiers !!! And even those 4 tiers are only about signal fidelity at 1kHz at 0dBFS at 2V or 4V.
Pass/fail requires a strict border and this isn't there so a rather pointless suggestion... besides that would only be true for a 1kHz sine at 2V or 4V(balanced) out.
Makes NO sense at all. The 4 tiers make more sense to me.

 

[antcollinet]

I started the "antagonism"

So an admission.

because it was obvious how this thread would go

Of course it was. A search for facts (relating to a pretty damned unlikely test result) and evidence for those facts - sadly unsupported by the person who carried out the test in the first place.

 

[Deleted member 93733]

I started the "antagonism" because it was obvious how this thread would go - even beoming full of ad hominem attacks on Josh. It's par for the course here. The thread only proves me right.

Have you actually read and absorbed what has been written over at Audiopile Style about Amir and others on this forum and thread? The hypocrisy is off the scale with you isn’t it! It has been one snipe after another, and still you come back with another monologue trying to stir the pot. There have been constant screen grabs posted by Josh over at AS which i have interpreted as clear attempts to paint people in a very bad light. Conversely, there was a post on here yesterday in relation to Josh’s choice of charity which I think was unnecessary. Josh even posted a screen grab of that to elicit an emotional response from his followers. It all adds to a messy picture, neither side wins. So just please stop with this and let’s wait for the test results.

 

[firedog]

And since when do we use SINAD as the only evaluation parameter?
is the foolish belief of any casual detractor of the site who hasn't spent more than three minutes reading a review, if this is the level of your criticism please try harder or stop

I didn't say you did. But why is each db of SINAD often reacted to as if it's significant? And it sometimes is. The bar graphs promote that idea. Not all readers or visitors go in depth. It's pretty easy to get the idea here that SINAD is THE most important value. There are explicit and implicit messages.

 

[pma]

Please let me now remind readers that there are now files from one original vs. DAC/ADC path test and three DAC vs. DAC tests in my parallel thread. Open to anyone who would wish to check by listening or analysis. However I am afraid that arguing turmoil is rather a goal.

 

[firedog]

Have you actually read and absorbed what has been written over at Audiopile Style about Amir and others on this forum and thread? The hypocrisy is off the scale with you isn’t it! It has been one snipe after another, and still you come back with another monologue trying to stir the pot. There have been constant screen grabs posted by Josh over at AS which i have interpreted as clear attempts to paint people in a very bad light. Conversely, there was a post on here yesterday in relation to Josh’s choice of charity which I think was unnecessary. Josh even posted a screen grab of that to elicit an emotional response from his followers. It all adds to a messy picture, neither side wins. So just please stop with this and let’s wait for the test results.

It would be good if your critical faculties were not only fully turned on when reading AS. What you accuse Josh of was done here. In fact it was started by Amir with misleading characterizations of Josh's interactions with him.

 

[solderdude]

I didn't say you did. But why is each db of SINAD often reacted to as if it's significant? And it sometimes is. The bar graphs promote that idea. Not all readers or visitors go in depth. It's pretty easy to get the idea here that SINAD is THE most important value. There are explicit and implicit messages.

Isn't it up to the reader to inform themselves about the 'value' of SINAD numbers ?
If readers draw the wrong conclusions whose fault is that ?
This goes for every measurement result in any field of science b.t.w.
Interpretation of measurement results is everything.

There are several threads that specifically discuss this single SINAD number.

 

[Deleted member 93733]

It would be good if your critical faculties were not only fully turned on when reading AS. What you accuse Josh of was done here. In fact it was started by Amir with misleading characterizations of Josh's interactions with him.

I am agreeing with you! Neither side is painted in glory. But your posts here are not helping matters. Let’s park it and wait patiently.

 

[Coltr@ne]

"don't feed the troll"

 

[amirm]

I started the "antagonism" because it was obvious how this thread would go - even beoming full of ad hominem attacks on Josh.

He is being criticized for one and only one thing: unwillingness to help us figure out what was going on in his test. We are razor focused on that.

So I ask you again: why hasn't he given us his captured files?

If we get the files, we can make forward progress as the comparator will not get here before I leave for China.

Make yourself useful. Stop whining. Get the files.

 

[amirm]

Of course it never occurred to you that a person could learn something during his time in the hobby and change his position.

Anyone reading this post of yours from nearly 10 years ago on AS, will conclude you haven't changed one bit:

"I've read Amir's forum, and his explanations of how he does his work. I've also read criticisms of his work and methods.

I've come to the conclusion that his methods aren't trustworthy and that he seems to have an agenda. You regard him more faorably. We can agree to disagree. Doesn't mean I have an agenda about Amir. Means I have an opinion based on what I've read. It is as legitimite as yours.

I've read Stereophile for years and haven't yet seen any reason I shouldn't trust JA and what he does. So I trust him and not Amir. The fact that they produced similar measurements of the Regen is one data point among many. Not enough to outweigh what I consider to be many negative data points I've come across in getting to my conclusion about Amir."

Useless, emotional complaining then, and now.

Get the files. Get... the... files.