• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Distortion Listening Test

Koeitje

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
2,292
Likes
3,880
Got to -12dB using a the ****** Muse TDA1543 NOS DAC and Tangent Evo5's I use at my computer.
 

stevenswall

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1,366
Likes
1,075
Location
Orem, UT
This song sounds like a poorly recorded analogue tape master digitized years later, but I did okay. They have better options for 6" speaker when that is selected.

1579426584451.png

1579426612464.png


Edit: None of these are particularly clear. Owl City "Fireflies" seems like it would work better. Also, the bass is distorted during recording and doesn't sound anything like a modern recording on most of these. Bit of noise floor it seems too. Cool test though.
 
Last edited:

lszomb

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 17, 2020
Messages
41
Likes
63
Location
Singapore
I really cannot tell anything beyond that with buildin speaker on my macbook pro.

Screen Shot 2020-01-20 at 7.49.41 PM.png

Screen Shot 2020-01-20 at 7.49.52 PM.png
 

imrul

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
35
Likes
23
So if we get a result like -30, does this mean that we won't really benefit from DACs that go much lower in dynamic range?
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
It means you need transducers with better performance, room treatment and/or training in listening.
That will probably get you in the -51dB segment, as you can see there is a statistical oddity there.

This is not caused by DACs nor can it be blamed on amplifiers (unless they aren't at least decently designed) or by cheating.
 
Last edited:

JEntwistle

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
133
After watching a portion of the video: Does this mean that you could have a DAC that performs relatively poorly in Amir's SINAD measurements, but by "sheer luck" happens to have its noise in frequencies that don't stand out to our hearing?

I'm not sure if any of the tested DACs actually meet those criteria. And if they do, I'd bet not by intentional design...

If this is correct, then it seems to me the idea is to purchase a DAC with minimal SINAD across the frequency spectrum so as to have all bases covered, as opposed to hoping some DAC designer is able to put the noise only in frequencies where it doesn't matter. And with so many excellently performing lower priced DACs available, why would you take a chance on a noisier DAC these days?

On a side note, I really like his characterization of "accuracy" vs. "preference"; let the user decide their preference, but don't argue with the math of accuracy.
 

xr100

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
518
Likes
237
Location
London, UK
After watching a portion of the video: Does this mean that you could have a DAC that performs relatively poorly in Amir's SINAD measurements, but by "sheer luck" happens to have its noise in frequencies that don't stand out to our hearing?

"Noise" may well be at less sensitive frequencies and not by sheer luck... noise shaping. (Dither can also be spectrally non-flat.)

as opposed to hoping some DAC designer is able to put the noise only in frequencies where it doesn't matter.

That's fundamentally how delta-sigma DAC's work.

1581793919204.png


Source: Texas Instruments.

To quote from the linked page:

"Any DAC will produce noise that extends well above audio frequencies, and this effect is strongest in delta-sigma DACs. These converters use noise-shaping techniques to improve in-band signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) performance at the expense of generating increased out-of-band noise."

The page then discusses the need to filter "out-of-band" noise for automotive application regulatory compliance.



In the "multi-bit" world, even the first CD player from Philips used noise-shaping. So, you'd be stuck with off-the-wall "No Oversampling" (NOS) "multi-bit" designs. (=POOR measured performance.)
 
Last edited:

JEntwistle

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
133
"Noise" may well be at less sensitive frequencies and not by sheer luck... noise shaping. (Dither can also be spectrally non-flat.)



That's fundamentally how delta-sigma DAC's work.

View attachment 50307

Source: Texas Instruments.

To quote from the linked page:

"Any DAC will produce noise that extends well above audio frequencies, and this effect is strongest in delta-sigma DACs. These converters use noise-shaping techniques to improve in-band signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) performance at the expense of generating increased out-of-band noise."

The page then discusses the need to filter "out-of-band" noise for automotive application regulatory compliance.



In the "multi-bit" world, even the first CD player from Philips used noise-shaping. So, you'd be stuck with off-the-wall "No Oversampling" (NOS) "multi-bit" designs. (=POOR measured performance.)

Yes. But I thought in the video you posted he was saying that at certain frequencies - even in the lower ranges - high noise levels would not be noticeable, even before noise shaping. So if you have a poor implementation that does not take advantage of even the most basic noise shaping and other signal processing techniques, conceivably not all of the noise would be audible to most people. And that leads to arguments like "well, it doesn't matter" or "it sounds better to me", which are all just excuses for poor engineering efforts.

Anyway, thanks for posting this video and for the additional information. I am still learning about this and reading all I can, and I greatly appreciate it.
 

xr100

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
518
Likes
237
Location
London, UK
Anyway, thanks for posting this video and for the additional information. I am still learning about this and reading all I can, and I greatly appreciate it.

You're welcome. Your questions deserve a far more elaborated response than the one I gave, but I'm too tired at the moment to do so.

Perhaps @j_j might notice this thread...
 

JEntwistle

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
133
Wait a minute - is the j_j here on ASR the same as James D. Johnston in the video? I didn't put that together....

One of his threads sent me down a rabbit hole to learn more about dithering. I read the excellent master's thesis by Cameron Nicklaus Christou that someone posted here. While I can't follow all of the math, he really does a great job of explaining what is happening.
 

xr100

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
518
Likes
237
Location
London, UK
Wait a minute - is the j_j here on ASR the same as James D. Johnston in the video? I didn't put that together....

Indeed he is. :)

One of his threads sent me down a rabbit hole to learn more about dithering. I read the excellent master's thesis by Cameron Nicklaus Christou that someone posted here. While I can't follow all of the math, he really does a great job of explaining what is happening.

Have you a link, please?
 

JEntwistle

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
133
Indeed he is. :)



Have you a link, please?

Here is the link to the paper. It is really about dithering as used in image processing, but the first section has an overview of dither as used in audio processing:
Optimal Dither and Noise Shaping in Image Processing by Cameron Nicklaus Christou
https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstr...d=25572771711789E8989DB2878126304E?sequence=1

I don't know if this will be advanced enough for you, but other than some of the higher level mathematics, it was a good intro for me.

I can't find the thread where I was referred to this paper, and now I wonder if I just googled it on my own. But I became interested in the topic from this thread:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...l-process-not-a-psychoacoustic-process.11169/
 

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,267
Likes
4,759
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.
Wait a minute - is the j_j here on ASR the same as James D. Johnston in the video? I didn't put that together....

One of his threads sent me down a rabbit hole to learn more about dithering. I read the excellent master's thesis by Cameron Nicklaus Christou that someone posted here. While I can't follow all of the math, he really does a great job of explaining what is happening.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/823976 (take a deep breath and have a cup of coffee (tea, whatever) first!)

http://users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~pappas/papers/pappas_ist94.pdf

I'll be quiet now. :D

The irony of dither is that it's been a known thing for many, many years, and the need for linearization is very, very old, and can be implied from Shannon's original paper.
 

xr100

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
518
Likes
237
Location
London, UK

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,267
Likes
4,759
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.

A.West

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
81
Likes
132
I took the test with a cheap Fiio dac/amp dock with Senn HD800 headphones. The two tone test was easier than the less than pristine recordings. (The Chapman recording sounded like crap compared to Amazon Prime Music HD streaming, I thought.) I scored better when I turned the volume up, but that also made the test more unpleasant. Using 2 tone, at my typical workday listening vols, amp at about 10 o clock, I could only get to about -18db. When I turned the amp to 1 o'clock I could test to about -33db. But my ears didn't like the nasty sounds and got fatigued. I suspect if I kept turning up the volume to more painful levels, I could have scored even better. But my ears are ringing and I don't want to donate my hearing to this test.

Does this mean that I don't need to worry about SINAD scores any more, as just about any product will surpass my acuity?
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
I took the test with a cheap Fiio dac/amp dock with Senn HD800 headphones. The two tone test was easier than the less than pristine recordings. (The Chapman recording sounded like crap compared to Amazon Prime Music HD streaming, I thought.) I scored better when I turned the volume up, but that also made the test more unpleasant. Using 2 tone, at my typical workday listening vols, amp at about 10 o clock, I could only get to about -18db. When I turned the amp to 1 o'clock I could test to about -33db. But my ears didn't like the nasty sounds and got fatigued. I suspect if I kept turning up the volume to more painful levels, I could have scored even better. But my ears are ringing and I don't want to donate my hearing to this test.

Does this mean that I don't need to worry about SINAD scores any more, as just about any product will surpass my acuity?

Generally speaking, you never need to worry about SINAD, the only thing you are actually worrying about in sighted tests, is your OCD and effects of psychological nature. Like there are people who will sell a DAC that is transparent, simply because the SINAD is higher on the new one and they feel perhaps it's nice knowing they are now at a state where no stone is left unturned for the pursuit of perfection. They cannot rest easy if they aren't sound.

For SINAD I'd actually argue, you can get a device with better SINAD and not like it more than one with worse SINAD but better build and more features/connectivity/build quality.

Just depends. Like you for instance. You have a threshold where you're passing some sort of preference test. But you admit this is just killer on your ears. So now all you have to do is weigh your value judgement. Do you care about performance at levels you will never use? That I think will make everything 100% clear when you can answer such question.
 
Top Bottom