DAC blind tests? EVER?

[Killingbeans]

Was that test also blind? You didn't know what DAC you were listening to, only that one was louder than the other?

 

[Blumlein 88]

Ok. I used db meter. But this is not the point. I can purposely increase the volume of the worst unit and it doesn't help. As I said with amp comparison the better amp sounded better with a lower volume (based on db meter again). How about that?

db meters are the first thing most people grab. They aren't a good choice. Did you use a test signal or music? With music it is not really workable. With a test signal absolutely precise positioning is necessary. A fraction of an inch will change the signal level read indoors.

Now in sighted tests once you have prejudiced yourself something is better or worse it is harder to change your opinion.

Otherwise, if you want to know match levels, if you really want to know blind yourself to the sources. There are a multitude of ways to be influenced by something other than the sound. Lots of us here have heard and experienced all the excuses and ideas when you do tests otherwise. Uncontrolled listening is just not the right tool for this issue. Use the right methods and you'll have something worthwhile. You've told us enough to say your listening comparison is uncontrolled. Working thru the issues to see if something you heard is actually real is not very productive. It is what it is. Everyone needs good methodology.

 

[akosinskiy]

Was that test also blind? You didn't know what DAC you were listening to, only that one was louder than the other?

Blind test was on volume matched. The difference was too obvious to make a mistake. After that I was trying to push up the volume to improve situation and nothing could help. Obviously at that point based on volume one could know which DAC is playing but the difference still was too obvious.

 

[12Many]

Reasonably priced, modern DACs have been measured extensively, with the results published in the public domain (largely thanks to @amirm).
Even with all of this data, there is still conjecture in the audio community that a $150 Topping or SMSL DAC will not sound as good as a more expensive DAC. "Distortion measurements don't tell the whole story", etc.
So we are now at a point where I believe controlled blind comparative tests of DACs would be the best thing to help improve the audio community's understanding of DACs.

I know that performing these tests properly is resource intensive, so I appreciate why they aren't commonly conducted. I certainly don't have the knowledge or resources to volunteer to do such a test myself.
Still. I personally think that there would be more value in a single blind test comprising 5 or more popular DACs at different price points than another 50 individual DAC tests. There is merit in having measurements for as many products as possible, but at this point I think what the broader audio community really needs is a better understanding of how these measurements translate to what is actually heard.

You have my vote.

 

[Killingbeans]

After that I was trying to push up the volume to improve situation and nothing could help.

It's natural that it won't help if you're already biased by the result from the previous test. Not saying that's the only explanation, but it's definitely a possibility.

Obviously at that point based on volume one could know which DAC is playing but the difference still was too obvious.

It could have been fun to randomly make one louder than the other and see if you would still be able to identify them correctly in a blind test. A tedious procedure though.

But again, you'll just be running around in circles if the fancy DAC has a doctored frequency response to begin with.

 

[MattHooper]

I’ve been searching near and far via google and can’t find any blind abx tests done on DACs with statistically significant results favoring one DAC over another.

Does anyone know of any? If so can you please paste a link. If one DAC can significantly improve sound quality of my 2-channel system I want to find it!

I don't have ABX results to give you.

But FWIW, in the late 90's, with a helper, I did a few blinded shoot outs between a Sony and Meridian CDP, and also a Museatex DAC. Level matched with a voltmeter at the speaker terminals. I was easily able to tell them apart. (In fact, in one set of blind tests I could reliably tell the tonal difference apart from outside the listening room!).

I wouldn't leverage those results out to all DACs sounding different, or to todays DAC/CDPs. I replaced a Benchmark DAC1 with a Benchmark DAC2L. I didn't blind test them, but I'd be surprised if I could hear a difference under blinded conditions.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Blind test was on volume matched. The difference was too obvious to make a mistake. After that I was trying to push up the volume to improve situation and nothing could help. Obviously at that point based on volume one could know which DAC is playing but the difference still was too obvious.

I must have missed the details as I skimmed over this thread. What "fancy living" DAC and Amp outclassed the NAD and the Cary? Oh, and what loudspeakers?

 

[akosinskiy]

I must have missed the details as I skimmed over this thread. What "fancy living" DAC and Amp outclassed the NAD and the Cary? Oh, and what loudspeakers?

The speakers are System Audio Explorer Master. The electronics are Eon Art Quark amp and their DAC.

 

[Bob from Florida]

The speakers are System Audio Explorer Master. The electronics are Eon Art Quark amp and their DAC.

Interesting speakers - 70 watt minimum amp indicates they want some current to “come alive”. Looking at the Eon Art web page I get the sense of ”intense” audiophile marketing. All the check boxes are “checked”. High dollar caps - check, tube buffer - check, tube power supply for the tube buffer - check, ladder volume control - check, best mix of tubes and transistors - check, fancy casework - check, claims of environmental responsibility due to long life if you have us maintain it - check, pictures of planets and fancy yacht’s - check, handmade in limited quantities - check, etc……. The amp is using a digital output stage - earlier versions used hypex, but I did not read a reference to what they are using now. There is a reference to test equipment being used but no detailed specs other than some ratings in the brochure that while likely not audible will fail to impress anyone chasing ultimate numbers. The DAC uses 2 Wolfson WM8741 chips - no idea where that rates in the current environment.
Unlikely to impress the “objective” crowd unless backed up by meticulous testing and results. Personally, I would use to money for a truck, but if you like it - it is your choice and money.

 

[Hotwetrat]

The issue in that is that any decent DAC uncolored from maybe $100 and up sounds the same as any other decent uncolored DAC.

This kind of message always makes me pleased I use a Topping E30

 

[Koeitje]

I think if you want to find audible differences between DACs your best bet is to find one with a much higher noise floor than another, then do an ABX listening test with an extremely high dynamic range track that's mostly really quiet, but also recorded recently and released in a good digital format (so the recording will have very low noise.) Crank up the gain, and maybe you could pick them apart.

Other than that, I rate the odds of anyone successfully telling DACs apart as extremely low.

This is the audible difference I can hear between my processor (IOTA something something) and several other DACs. Only have my NC400's on and I don't hear noise from the tweeters. Turn on the processor without anything playing and I can hear noise through the tweeters. Do the same but with another DAC (like M500, E30 etc) and it stays quiet. I can't hear it at my listening position though, because I have to keep my ear close to the tweeter.

 

[Talisman]

Blind test was on volume matched. The difference was too obvious to make a mistake. After that I was trying to push up the volume to improve situation and nothing could help. Obviously at that point based on volume one could know which DAC is playing but the difference still was too obvious.

If you think about it, if you really think about it, the amplifier takes a signal at a certain (low) voltage from the preamp, and it must AMPLIFY it, that is, it must increase the output voltage in the most linear way possible and without its presence. in between you modify the signal in some way.
once an amplifier has sufficient power, which does not vary its response as the load varies, and which guarantees a flat frequency response, it has finished its task, stop, no more is asked of it, it does not have to dust our magic with magic music, neither to make it "sweet and sweet" nor "rhythmic and engaging". It just needs to amplify an error-free signal. And now many amplifiers, even inexpensive ones, do it very well.

At this point my question arises spontaneously.
If the two amps clearly sound different, one of them is not doing his job well, there is no getting away from this overwhelming logic. Considering that we have all the tools to evaluate INFINITELY BETTER than the human ear the capabilities of the instrument through measurements and that all high level (technical not economic) amplifiers measure well in the required ranges, how do you explain this EVIDENT to your ear, difference in sound?

 

[akosinskiy]

Interesting speakers - 70 watt minimum amp indicates they want some current to “come alive”. Looking at the Eon Art web page I get the sense of ”intense” audiophile marketing. All the check boxes are “checked”. High dollar caps - check, tube buffer - check, tube power supply for the tube buffer - check, ladder volume control - check, best mix of tubes and transistors - check, fancy casework - check, claims of environmental responsibility due to long life if you have us maintain it - check, pictures of planets and fancy yacht’s - check, handmade in limited quantities - check, etc……. The amp is using a digital output stage - earlier versions used hypex, but I did not read a reference to what they are using now. There is a reference to test equipment being used but no detailed specs other than some ratings in the brochure that while likely not audible will fail to impress anyone chasing ultimate numbers. The DAC uses 2 Wolfson WM8741 chips - no idea where that rates in the current environment.
Unlikely to impress the “objective” crowd unless backed up by meticulous testing and results. Personally, I would use to money for a truck, but if you like it - it is your choice and money.

I don't want to spend that much money. Both amps are 200W into 8 Oms, Bryston with 300W into 8 Oms doesn't make things better than Cary (in fact it just makes things more bright). So if you can point me into the right direction for upgrade I would be owing you a big one!

 

[akosinskiy]

If you think about it, if you really think about it, the amplifier takes a signal at a certain (low) voltage from the preamp, and it must AMPLIFY it, that is, it must increase the output voltage in the most linear way possible and without its presence. in between you modify the signal in some way.
once an amplifier has sufficient power, which does not vary its response as the load varies, and which guarantees a flat frequency response, it has finished its task, stop, no more is asked of it, it does not have to dust our magic with magic music, neither to make it "sweet and sweet" nor "rhythmic and engaging". It just needs to amplify an error-free signal. And now many amplifiers, even inexpensive ones, do it very well.

At this point my question arises spontaneously.
If the two amps clearly sound different, one of them is not doing his job well, there is no getting away from this overwhelming logic. Considering that we have all the tools to evaluate INFINITELY BETTER than the human ear the capabilities of the instrument through measurements and that all high level (technical not economic) amplifiers measure well in the required ranges, how do you explain this EVIDENT to your ear, difference in sound?

I do love idea of measuring things. But are we measuring all the attributes which affect final result? I'm not technical enough to understand all the measurements done on this site and more reading into conclusions; I'm not afraid to admit that.

If I have to describe in one word speakers and this amp it would be "fast".
I use sub in my setup. It is required to get better soundstage feeling; having sub on and off is easy to distinguish. What we noticed that before it was really required and made the difference in depth; I guess there are certain clues about the objects in lower frequencies. With the amp it feels like the speakers are able to go lower by themselves. The sub still makes a difference but not for helping with the image. It becomes more preferential as like using of EQ.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I don't want to spend that much money. Both amps are 200W into 8 Oms, Bryston with 300W into 8 Oms doesn't make things better than Cary (in fact it just makes things more bright). So if you can point me into the right direction for upgrade I would be owing you a big one!

A friend of mine just purchased a Benchmark ABH2 stereo amp to use with the matching Benchmark preamp. Speakers are Ref 3A Nefes 2's. That combo does a fantastic job. You may need to use them in bridged mode for 400 watt monoblocks. Total investment for all 3 is $9000 and Benchmark offers a 30 day return window. I use a Schiit Modius $200 DAC and am quite satisfied. If you need to play DSD files then pick something else.

 

[Adi777]

In order to be able to reliably hear the difference between DACs your system has to be very resolving.

What is resolving? Which system audio is resolving? I hear this very often, but nobody can explain me this.

 

[Doodski]

This kind of message always makes me pleased I use a Topping E30

It's the reason I bought a JDS labs Atom DAC+ for USD $109 plus shipping, plus RCA cable and plus import taxes. I don't see better value anywhere else.

JDS Labs Atom DAC+ Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the JDS Labs Atom DAC+ desktop USB DAC. It was sent to me by the company and is an early production sample. The product was just announced at a retail cost of US $109. I accepted the sample in the interest of getting this information to you early...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Killingbeans]

I do love idea of measuring things. But are we measuring all the attributes which affect final result?

In DACs? IMO, yes. It's an electrical signal. It's only comprised of information in two dimensions. Time and amplitude. If those two don't deviate from the target in ways that exceed the thresholds of human hearing, the logical conclusion would be that any difference heard is caused by placebo.

It's a never ending discussion. Some will say that science is in its infancy, and that we don't know how to measure all the things that determine the quality of audio gear. And when blind test show those unknown attributes as being non existent, you get refutes pointing at blind tests as not being sophisticated enough to avoid giving false results.

Ultimately it comes down to what you believe is the best indicator of something being a waste of time, and whether that time is worth wasting.

Personally I see DACs as one of the most insignificant components in a home audio system, and I'd rather put my time, money and effort in things that has indisputable benefits.

 

[FrantzM]

What is resolving? Which system audio is resolving? I hear this very often, but nobody can explain me this.

Because your audio system is not resolving enough. It’s just like pornography. You’ll know

 

[tallbeardedone]

What is resolving? Which system audio is resolving? I hear this very often, but nobody can explain me this.

Because your audio system is not resolving enough. It’s just like pornography. You’ll know

That's because they don't provide any measurements to back up their claims. It's all just subjective. If they provided measured in-room data like this (my room measured from my listening sweet spot):

In which all distortion is below the 50dB hearing threshold and all audible frequencies are being reproduced at the correct volume (flat response across the entire band), then we'd know that their system is indeed very "resolving". If it's just them telling us this, then it's all subjective BS. Our ears are connected to our brains and our brains lie to us.