But aren't the similar claims made in relation to a Topping D90SE vs a D50, for example?I think it's only you making this assertion? The argument is about claims that these DAC's sound different from others.
But aren't the similar claims made in relation to a Topping D90SE vs a D50, for example?I think it's only you making this assertion? The argument is about claims that these DAC's sound different from others.
Sure, there are all kinds of claims out there about all kinds of magic properties of DAC's. What of it?But aren't the similar claims made in relation to a Topping D90SE vs a D50, for example?
But aren't the similar claims made in relation to a Topping D90SE vs a D50, for example?
Maybe (maybe), it feels like there are double standards around here sometimes?Sure, there are all kinds of claims out there about all kinds of magic properties of DAC's. What of it?
Don't think so. Claimed magic differences between D50 and D90SE should be dealt with the same scrutiny as to the R2R DAC's.Maybe (maybe), it feels like there are double standards around here sometimes?
If you talk about "magic properties" of a DAC or AMP that measures significantly well, that's "ok", but if they're in reference to R2R dacs, or class-a amps, it can get quite heated.
Maybe (maybe), it feels like there are double standards around here sometimes?
If you talk about "magic properties" of a DAC or AMP that measures significantly well, that's "ok", but if they're in reference to R2R dacs, or class-a amps, it can get quite heated.
I have done an informal blind test. The results were that I gave up halfway through because listening to the same track over and over again is no fun, and the differences were imperceptible. It's funny how people can't hear or don't care about the myriad of flaws with their headphones' frequency response which are universally crappy yet claim to be able to hear the differences between dacs... yeah not sure about that one cuhhas there been that many blind test done? it definitly requires more time and proper setup, organizing. measurement are important and love them as a reference as to what to expect for sure, but dont believe they are be all end all, i wish anyone of you lived nearby here and we could do real blind test (in quebec, canada). i understand the psychological involvement, even when your tipsy, high, sober, relaxed, depressed, happy, anxious, tired, etc.. you will perceive sound differently. which is why measurement are an excellent common ground and reference for said component.
having said that, i mean there cant be that many crazy people comparing dacs and different sound, espiecially when there is a lot of common ground between different people and audio equipment(referring to real people, not paid reviews etc).
also, going with your argument that of "confirmation bias", whos to say that your way of thinkin and confidence of that thinkin indirectly forces your brain to not hear a difference between components, even though there is?
The moment you throw the towel getting pissed off by the laboratory rat emotions you know the test design has gone wrong. You only can skip the long testing and training period when you have gross differences and you find a music track that specifically highlights it. Then one usually can run a 10/10 ABX easily right away with no preparation, concentrating on the snippet where felt the difference is largest. With small differences it is much harder to find a highlighting snippet and that takes training and patience and the more important it is that there is no test stress. Proper blind tests make take days to weeks all in all.I have done an informal blind test. The results were that I gave up halfway through because listening to the same track over and over again is no fun, and the differences were imperceptible.
I just realized my time is better spent finding and correcting small imperfections in my headphone's frequency response as that is orders of magnitude more important to sound quality than whatever my source is doing.The moment you throw the towel getting pissed off by the laboratory rat emotions you know the test design has gone wrong. You only can skip the long testing and training period when you have gross differences and you find a music track that specifically highlights it. Then one usually can run a 10/10 ABX easily right away with no preparation, concentrating on the snippet where felt the difference is largest. With small differences it is much harder to find a highlighting snippet and that takes training and patience and the more important it is that there is no test stress. Proper blind tests make take days to weeks all in all.
Absolutely. First things first.I just realized my time is better spent finding and correcting small imperfections in my headphone's frequency response as that is orders of magnitude more important to sound quality than whatever my source is doing.
Yes, I got bored and stopped it. Usually when the performance has temperature dependency, it is obvious out of the gate.
Hmmm…. Today I realized that my Ares II becomes quite a lot quieter following a warm up period. Upon startup, with my LA4 preamp at -12db, I was getting audible hiss with my ears a few inches from the tweeters of my 88db sensitive Paradigm Premier 700Fs. After about a half hour of warm up, I turned the volume up to “+2db” on the LA4 (these speakers are quite loud at -13db on average) and placed my ear right up to the tweeters—there was zero hiss, absolutely zero.
My room is quiet enough to hear a mouse fart so no anomalies going on there.
LA4 and AHB2? Doubtful.Maybe hiss was from LA4 or power amp until they warmed up!!!!!
It's a nice-looking, expensive DAC. Bias does a lot. Also, GoldenSound on his blog measured some funky DSP so for all we know, the sound is rounded off enough for there to be an actual change in resolution.so those youtube subjectivists seem to like Denafrips. I wonder why? Probably hear those harmonics for added "musicality"?
But aren't the similar claims made in relation to a Topping D90SE vs a D50, for example?
The Ares II gets very positive/enthusiastic reviews, like this one from the "cheapaudioman" and I wonder if there is some truth to it.
Will some fancy DAC like the ARES II make any sense at all then?
or they have a combination of features that you are willing to pay extra for.
Pardon my ignorance, but are you saying that all you will ever need to spend on a DAC is $100.Some people like the warm fuzzy feeling they get from knowing their DAC has crazy high SINAD numbers and some people like the warm fuzzy feeling they get from knowing their DAC works differently and people they like online endorse it.
Hasn't this site shown that if you are paying much over $100 you are doing so for differences you can't hear either imaginary or real?