Do you think that a dac / amp can really be "airy, sound stage, laid back" etc?

[john5220]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure?

Reading reviews of dac all over and I read things like an amp isnt just for volume, quality amp give headphones ability to reproduce bass cleaner and more detailed that an otherwise more powerful wouldn't if it wasnt a quality amp

Then I read different fac has better sound stage is airy, laid back, smooth whatever smooth really means

Do you think these reviews have real merit?

Amir said the D30 is a joy to listen to and it made him listen to an entire playlist without stopping

This leads me to believe that good dac maybe has things science cannot measure?

 

[SIY]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure? Highly unlikely- there are exactly ZERO instances of something that's been demonstrated to be heard that wasn't reflected in very straightforward measurements.

Reading reviews of dac all over and I read things like an amp isnt just for volume, quality amp give headphones ability to reproduce bass cleaner and more detailed that an otherwise more powerful wouldn't if it wasnt a quality amp

Then I read different fac has better sound stage is airy, laid back, smooth whatever smooth really means

Do you think these reviews have real merit? Not unless the comparisons are done ears-only, that is, double blind and level-matched. Which is approximately zero of the "subjective" reviews.

Amir said the D30 is a joy to listen to and it made him listen to an entire playlist without stopping

This leads me to believe that good dac maybe has things science cannot measure? That's a bad chain of logic. "Enjoyment" is a function of many non-auditory things. I enjoyed the hell out of listening to the RME ADI-2 Pro I reviewed and wish I could have afforded to keep it, but there's no way it actually sounded any different than an Apple dongle as long as neither was driving an unsuitable load.

 

[solderdude]

airy, laid back, smooth are descriptors used to describe sounds.
They have nothing to do with electronics but more with personal perception, recording and speaker/headphone qualities.

The 'we don't know how to measure it' nonsense comes from people that evaluate things by ear and found their observations can not be linked to measurements... therefore it cannot be measured (yet) is their flawed deduction.
The real reason they cannot find a relation between measurements and perception is because their perception isn't as accurate as they think it is and have no clue as to what a measurement suite can tell them.

Ignore the buggers and just enjoy what you bought. In time you only need/can upgrade your headphone.

 

[BDWoody]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure?

Reading reviews of dac all over and I read things like an amp isnt just for volume, quality amp give headphones ability to reproduce bass cleaner and more detailed that an otherwise more powerful wouldn't if it wasnt a quality amp

Then I read different fac has better sound stage is airy, laid back, smooth whatever smooth really means

Do you think these reviews have real merit?

Amir said the D30 is a joy to listen to and it made him listen to an entire playlist without stopping

This leads me to believe that good dac maybe has things science cannot measure?

Nope, no merit. None.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but learning just a little science will help you immensely. Rather than read reviews that truly mean nothing, a bit of time spent reading some of the articles in the site research libraries would go a long way.

You are at the right site.

If someone REALLY believes the earth is flat...do they have a chance of convincing you?

Cheers, and keep reading.

 

[Gabs]

Hi,

Rtings changed recently their reviews, and now you can find measured imaging, soundstage, etc. I dunno if it's accurate or not, but there are measurements.

Example : https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/beats/solo-pro-wireless

 

[solderdude]

I found the correlation between imaging and soundstage is not something that is easily captured in measurements without including time domain measurements which they don't have yet (I know they are working on it).
They HAVE to do a rating with numbers so this is what they came up with.
That doesn't mean there is a full correlation, there is some correlation though the measured aspects (frequency response) but certainly is not the only aspect.

 

[Pluto]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure?

NO! But any piece of audio equipment may have properties that escape a careless or incomplete measurement process which is why Amir's rigorous and consistent methodology is to be applauded.

But it is a question of understanding and interpreting test results* accordingly. If you find a subjectivist true believer who is able and willing to help in the pursuit of scientific precision (a surprisingly rare beast – IME many subjectivists fly off the handle rather quickly when you try to discuss science and engineering), you will find that “air” distils down to nicely extended HF response combined with very low noise. “Laid back” implies no nasty dominant mid-range peaks. “Smooth” means whatever you want it to mean, when you like what you're hearing.

The important thing is that there is no correlation between these weasel-words and actual sound quality. If you were to blind test a dozen subjectivists and ask them to describe certain sounds without consulting one another [tricky, as audio subjectivism appears to be a highly group-think orientated phenomenon] it is highly likely that the verbalization would be highly inconsistent. Review journalists are masters at using words that mean whatever you want them to mean – everything and nothing.

*assuming those tests to be fit for purpose which is a much tougher exercise for a power amp than a DAC as the tests must, to an extent, simulate potentially nasty real-world load conditions

 

[JJB70]

Of all the parts of the audio chain the DAC is the one for which audible transparency is available at the lowest cost. Once you achieve audible transparency then any further improvement is technically interesting and certainly the measured performance of DACs can achieve vanishingly low levels of distortion, remarkable SNR etc but it is actually quite hard to get a DAC which doesn't offer perfectly satisfactory audible performance. Even on ASR, many of the DACs which return mediocre or poor measured performance appear to be fine in audible terms. Personally, and some will disagree, I find onboard DACs of devices such as smartphones are perfectly satisfactory. Unless you need certain esoteric functions, or desire premium/luxury build and industrial design then I really see no reason to stress about DACs, just use what you've got.

 

[Pluto]

I found the correlation between imaging and soundstage is not something that is easily captured in measurements

I would argue that image and soundstage are essentially functions of identical performance on the [two] channels. Provided this is satisfactory (and technologically speaking, this is a solved problem), it's largely down to the recording itself (some are so much better than others in this respect), plus the speakers and the room they're in.

 

[Killingbeans]

Rtings changed recently their reviews, and now you can find measured imaging, soundstage, etc. I dunno if it's accurate or not, but there are measurements.

They just rephrase actual measurements of frequency response, groupe delay etc. in layman's terms

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

I would argue that image and soundstage are essentially functions of identical performance on the [two] channels. Provided this is satisfactory (and technologically speaking, this is a solved problem), it's largely down to the recording itself (some are so much better than others in this respect), plus the speakers and the room they're in.

yeah I'd agree. If a system is functioning properly and reproducing recordings accurately, and the speakers are set up well in a room with reasonably good acoustics...image and soundstage will be as good as the original recording allows really.

 

[raif71]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure?

Reading reviews of dac all over and I read things like an amp isnt just for volume, quality amp give headphones ability to reproduce bass cleaner and more detailed that an otherwise more powerful wouldn't if it wasnt a quality amp

Then I read different fac has better sound stage is airy, laid back, smooth whatever smooth really means

Do you think these reviews have real merit?

Amir said the D30 is a joy to listen to and it made him listen to an entire playlist without stopping

This leads me to believe that good dac maybe has things science cannot measure?

In the spirit of keeping the flame alive...my short answer is yes but I cannot say more than that if you know what I mean.

 

[solderdude]

I would argue that image and soundstage are essentially functions of identical performance on the [two] channels. Provided this is satisfactory (and technologically speaking, this is a solved problem), it's largely down to the recording itself (some are so much better than others in this respect), plus the speakers and the room they're in.

In case of headphones (not speakers and the OP is planning to listen to HD58X which aren't the widest headphones around) that would mean the image and soundstage would be very position dependent and also could vary substantially between headphones of the same type.
Driver angle also seems to be a contributor as well as driver/ear distance and effective driver size as well.
Complex and also not all individuals rate each model the same so while there are some indicators there seem to be a few factors that determine this and not simply L-R similarities.

 

[BDWoody]

In the spirit of keeping the flame alive...my short answer is yes but I cannot say more than that if you know what I mean.

I give you the same suggestion I gave the OP.

More reading and education will help...

Unless you're ready to make a bet...?

 

[Killingbeans]

Can quality dac and amp really possess things that science cannot measure?

Not in relations to audio.

It's nothing but frequency and amplitude, relayed either electrically or acoustically. It's easy to measure, especially at audible frequencies.

I once heard someone quote an electrical engineer who said that everything below 50MHz is DC, implying that anyone designing serious RF electronics will feel like being on vacation when asked to make a piece of audio equipment. If audio electronics really had some unmeasurable property with real impact on functionality, it would also pester every other piece of circuitry in the world. Nothing would work as intended.

Some things, like neutrinos and gravitational waves, are immensely difficult to measure, and there are probably plenty more of those particles/phenomena that are yet to be discovered, but they have practically zero interaction with the human body (or anything else), which again means that they have absolutely nothing to do with audio reproduction.

That leaves only magic. Please don't go down that rabbit hole

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

While (some of) those notions have been trivialized, overused and beat to death by the High-End Audio community they do have some roots in real, measurable perceptions. Stereo images is now thought as 2 channels by most. The term wasn’t meant to be. Stereo is Greek for solid as in a solid, in a volume ... by extension and stretching a bit a space . A good number of early "stereo" recordings were in 3 channels... 3 channels were difficult to fit on the most popular medium of the times , the LP, they moved to 2-channels and to these days when we mean stereo, we see 2-channels , more channels and we call it surround ... which in fact is stereo ... 2-channels does produce an impression of a stage in which music is reproduced, the soundstage and some speakers do acquit themselves better than others all things being equal. The way this soundstage is presented is perceived as forward, laidback, etc .. terms to suggest an aural impression.

A DAC perforce has an analog stage .. It is possible to design an analog stage that is not transparent ... in fact, this seems to be the modus operandi of most High End Audio manufacturers these days with components that deviates from linearity/transparency, what with amplifiers with 3% of THD and purposefully high harmonic content that are deemed by the press "musical", "organic", "mellow", etc ... Some DACs are fitted with tubes for the purpose of deviating from linearity to have that sound full of distortion that is said to have all the attributes above.
From there the extension and salesmanship starts ... The reviews aka marketing materials assigns all kind of attributes to any DAC that their authors encounters .. It doesn't matter that the attributes disappear under blind conditions: The reader is influenced, the potential sales underway... of course, said reader/audiophiles is not satisfied and move on to (always), a more expensive DAC with different "attributes"… Under blind conditions, they sound the same but after a review and a good view, it helpts that the items under consideration espouse a certain aesthetics, glows or shines in a certain way and ...

What many have come to understand thanks to this website in a good part is: Past a certain level of competency .. say a SINAD of 90 db.. a flat Frequency Response within plus of minus 0.5 dB from 20 to 20 KHz and THD of -95 dB or less, the capacity to produce 2 V on down a 1 KOhms
load .. DACs sound the same .. Be they in an iconoclastic box such as the Chord Dave

box or bare bone to the point of indecency like the Khadas Tone Board

...
However non intuitive this has come to "sound" pun intended, once you remove the visual clues and biases .. Even other electronics sound the same ...
For the enthusiast it is confusing at first, liberating when she/he fully embraces the approach: Good electronics are transparent.. DAC, amps. preamp are transparent ... Once they fit some criteria in term of linearity (This will be define later by other or perhaps I).... they sound the same , it hurts (It shouldn't) but that is what Truth does .
Focus on transducers and the room... That is where the sound is... That is what produces the sound. I doesn't have to cost so much .. On the DAC side start thinking at what a $9 dongle (yeah! I like the term) can do as compared to a $15,000 (!!!?? WTF) component of, surprisingly, lesser competence.

Peace

Enjoy the music.

 

[KxDx]

OP, in layman's terms...

The majority of audio reviewers hear dollar signs. Quality is proportional to price. If it costs 10x more, it has to be 10x "better." If you believe that, then spend away. If not, it's easy to see just how fraudulent the audio reviewing industry is. They are the enablers that allow sham artists to sell magical quantum fuses and wood volume knobs.

 

[KxDx]

Use objective review sites like this one to set a baseline for performace. After that, pay for the features and appearance you like. there's always personal preference involved to a degree. A $75 DAC may well be just as good or better than what I'm using (which cost a few times more than that), but I like looking at the one I have. Kind of like I won't ever buy a red car.

 

[Pluto]

the OP is planning to listen to HD58X which aren't the widest headphones around

I have little experience of ‘serous’ headphone listening so this is something of a grey area for me. Your theory that.…

Driver angle also seems to be a contributor as well as driver/ear distance and effective driver size

… is interesting but doesn't really add up, to my mind, if the two transducers are identical and their physical placement, with respect to the ear, is equal. I wonder if differences between the characteristics of the two ears themselves are more significant than some audiophiles would care to admit…

 

[Frank Dernie]

In the spirit of keeping the flame alive...my short answer is yes but I cannot say more than that if you know what I mean.

Nice try, but no.
The output of a DAC is an ac voltage which has frequency, amplitude and phase. There is nothing else. All of these can be measured to a higher level of accuracy than anybodies hearing.
When it comes to speakers in rooms, perhaps some amp's reaction with speakers, then the measurement field is probably too complex and varied to predict much in your room, but DACs definitely not.