Equal measurements is not the same as equal sound quality

[oldsysop]

I can take an example, from 2 DACs I have listened to myself, the Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 Digital and the Schiit Yggdrasil. Looking at measurements the Pro-Ject DAC looks to sound better, but it does not. Not even close! The sound stage, clarity and detail retrieval from the Schiit is several steps ahead, as it should based on the price difference. And if you don't believe me, do yourself a favor and listen yourself.

You've convinced me.
I'll keep the Schiit Yggdrasil and throw the Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 in the trash.
Wait, I don't have either.
I will solve it by buying both and staying with the Schiit.

It is done. Happy ?

 

[March Audio]

Another fact is that the only way how to apply a "scientific and controlled method" properly is a test above sound files in a technically properly set DAC system, including SW and drivers. Like Foobar ABX with its new protocol and ASIO or WASAPI drivers. Even then there will always be doubts, by some members, that one was cheating.

ABX is impossible to apply properly to hardware tests. Glitches, small DC differences, long time between component exchanges, you name it. Trained person can quite easily get oriented by switching glitches and get the result based on this and not on a sound difference. Oversimplified labelling by "scientific" or "non-scientific" is not helpful. Balanced approach is needed, both extremes are wrong, regardless they are listening-only or measuring-only oriented. Both have caveats.

Yes some of your points are valid but it is eminently possible to perform proper hardware tests when care is taken. What about your own op amp comparator????

However this isn't about the detail. That's not what we are discussing.

Until the OP accepts the few fundamental facts outlined above the thread is never going to progress into anything more meaningful or "helpful" as you put it.

The issue we have encountered here is far more fundamental and extremely pervasive amongst the Audiophile community.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Sound quality is personal preference.

This is very true, but in the case of measurements the only thing coming out of your device is an electrical signal which has magnitude, frequency and phase. We can measure all of these to accuracy levels way beyond our ears. If two devices do not change any of these 3 signal parameters by an audible amount we know the pressure fluctuations from the transducer, headphones or speakers, hasn't changed.
The one thing we can't measure is the placebo effect. There is no doubt it is powerful, though it varies from person to person, in some people a sugar pill actually cures certain illnesses.
It means some people can hear a sound quality difference even when the sound hasn't changed.

 

[MagnusH]

Why are people talking about hearing impressions like they have to be scientific tests? I am not writing a scientific publication, nor have I any interest to do so. My claim is that sound quality and measurements can show differences, and I have used my ears to back up that claim by listening to different DACs. This is not scientific proof, just an opinion.

If you don't share my opinion, I think you would do yourself a favor and do some objective listening yourself. Make the listening double blind test in NASA controlled environment if you like, it won't matter because you will reach the same conclusion as I have.

That I use Yggdrasil as an example is just because I have listened to it and it sounds great but measures poorly. I don't own Schiit and don't plan to buy one, its just a convenient example. For DACs that measure well but with bad sound quality, pretty much any Topping DAC can be used.

But you need a decent HiFi setup for this, a simple studio setup with Adam A7X monitors will not be enough for this kinds of tests.

 

[MagnusH]

in the case of measurements the only thing coming out of your device is an electrical signal which has magnitude, frequency and phase. We can measure all of these to accuracy levels way beyond our ears.

I think Rob Watts made a study some years back, that stated that you need up to 300dB of dynamic range to be able to get full 3d effects of the sound. I don't know if that's true or not, but I do think that ears are extremely sensible in some regards, especially when it comes to sound stage.

For example, are there tests that can measure why some DACs have a wider sound stage than others? Or their ability to place instrument with pinpoint accuracy in the sound stage (including up/down)? Maybe there are tests that can measure all aspects of sound quality, but if so Amir is not using all (or any?) of them.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Why are people talking about hearing impressions like they have to be scientific tests? I am not writing a scientific publication, nor have I any interest to do so. My claim is that sound quality and measurements can show differences, and I have used my ears to back up that claim by listening to different DACs. This is not scientific proof, just an opinion.

AudioScienceReview.com

I'm not sure if any kind of constructive end will come of this one

Everybody knows it won't.

The same story repeats over and over. I quit.

 

[Thomas savage]

So thats your answer? I have a listening impression that contradict your view, and your only argument is you don't believe me?

Funny, if I had said the opposite, that the DAC that measured well also sounded more transparent, I am sure you would believe me

It's not a matter of believing you , simply your conclusions can not be verified and are thusly limited in their value beyond' you'.

This can be frustrating but it's the way it is here, there's millions of other places that are different from this place.

 

[Thomas savage]

Everybody knows it won't.

The same story repeats over and over. I quit.

Ha ha is their a space on the boat for me captain.

 

[March Audio]

Why are people talking about hearing impressions like they have to be scientific tests? I am not writing a scientific publication, nor have I any interest to do so. My claim is that sound quality and measurements can show differences, and I have used my ears to back up that claim by listening to different DACs. This is not scientific proof, just an opinion.

If you don't share my opinion, I think you would do yourself a favor and do some objective listening yourself. Make the listening double blind test in NASA controlled environment if you like, it won't matter because you will reach the same conclusion as I have.

That I use Yggdrasil as an example is just because I have listened to it and it sounds great but measures poorly. I don't own Schiit and don't plan to buy one, its just a convenient example. For DACs that measure well but with bad sound quality, pretty much any Topping DAC can be used.

But you need a decent HiFi setup for this, a simple studio setup with Adam A7X monitors will not be enough for this kinds of tests.

Because they need to be of value beyond you.

So you like Kale. I hate it. Both are valid views to the individual but no one else. That's what you are presenting.

You are conflating personal preference with transparency and quality. Transparency is both measurable in technical objective terms and in subjective terms. However you are doing neither. In fact its worse than that. You are covering the kale with tomato ketchup (your sighted biases and lack of controls etc) and claiming it is representative of the actual taste of kale.

 

[Thomas savage]

Because they need to be of value beyond you.

So you like Kale. I hate it. Both are valid views to the individual but no one else. That's what you are presenting.

You are conflating personal preference with transparency and quality. Transparency is both measurable in technical objective terms and in subjective terms.

Have you tried it in a smoothie ?

 

[MagnusH]

You measurbating guys have a catch-22 you know: if it can't be measured, it can't be proven. With that in mind, of course any claim (like in this thread) that measurements don't tell us everything can never be proven.

I know this is a shocking suggestion, but try listening with your ears a little more

 

[March Audio]

You measurbating guys have a catch-22 you know: if it can't be measured, it can't be proven. With that in mind, of course any claim (like in this thread) that measurements don't tell us everything can never be proven.

I know this is a shocking suggestion, but try listening with your ears a little more

It's ironic that you haven't listened to a single word that has been said.

So let's be crystal clear.

Subjective listening tests are absolutely valid and compliment technical objective tests. We embrace listening.

What you are doing in terms of listening tests however is fundamentally flawed which is why your subjective opinions, and therefore your views on the validity of technical objective measurements, are of no interest to us.

There's nothing further to say.

 

[March Audio]

Interestingly enough, "transparency" is a purely subjective measure, without any units defined, without scaling. Even though this fact it is widely used by in-measurement-only believers as an argument. Because the term seems to sound scientific.

It's absolutely scientific.

If people can't tell the difference between a reference and the DUT under scientifically controlled conditions, then the DUT is transparent. Subjective doesn't mean unscientific.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It's OK to use both.

The problem is that you have not used a scientific and controlled method to form your subjective opinion. It's therefore faulty.

You need to accept that fact.

I have tested many audiophiles and the moment controls are introduced they struggle to hear differences. So I wouldnt be so confident.

The second point you are ignoring is that even if you can reliably hear difference between these 2 dacs you still won't be establishing which one is more transparant or indeed higher quality. You have no reference. You may have a preference for one, but again that still doesn't indicate transparency or quality.

I think @Blumlein 88 might have some interesting test tracks for you to listen to and see if you can spot the difference.

@MagnusH perhaps try these.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-choose-the-8th-generation-digital-copy.6827/

Three files for a snippet of music. Two digital originals, and one 8th generation copy having gone thru 8 DAC/ADC loops with inexpensive devices. Should be a piece of cake. Don't know what system you have to listen, but I use Soundlab Electrostats.

 

[MagnusH]

You are all claiming that I don't have any proof (which I don't), and because of that my claims are worthless. I mean, I use my ears to determine sound quality, how utterly stupid!

Well, where is your proof? Show me the proof that prove measurements can measure everything that ears can hear? If you can't, then that would (by your own logic) make measurements worthless as any kind of tool for determining how our ears perceive music.

 

[March Audio]

You are all claiming that I don't have any proof (which I don't), and because of that my claims are worthless. I mean, I use my ears to determine sound quality, how utterly stupid!

Well, where is your proof? Show me the proof that prove measurements can measure everything that ears can hear? If you can't, then that would (by your own logic) make measurements worthless as any kind of tool for determining how our ears perceive music.

No.

It's not about proof. It's about your methodology which means your conclusions are flawed.

For someone who claims to listen so well why is it you repeatedly ignore what's being said?

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

You are all claiming that I don't have any proof (which I don't), and because of that my claims are worthless. I mean, I use my ears to determine sound quality, how utterly stupid!

Well, where is your proof? Show me the proof that prove measurements can measure everything that ears can hear? If you can't, then that would (by your own logic) make measurements worthless as any kind of tool for determining how our ears perceive music.

Ok my turn …...

I think you need to forget about the measurements for the moment and focus simply on how the Project and the Schiit sound.
If you compare them "sighted" and/or not level-matched then your notion of how they sound will be affected by things other than how they actually sound (your listening will be biased).
If your listening is biased then you may be preferring the Schiit for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with how it sounds. You may like how it looks, it might be a bit louder, Rob Watts might be whispering sweet nothings you… whatever.

So, before you can state that measurements don't tell us which DAC sounds good, you need to make sure that your preference is actually based on how the dac sounds and not on some other bias

 

[SIY]

Guys, this is deliberate (and to be honest, not terribly creative) trolling. I strongly suggest ignoring.

 

[solderdude]

Not silly but provoking. Sometimes it seems that people forget what this hobby is all about, which (at least for most of us) is listening to music.

I use my ear to determine how a HiFi setup sounds, and listening objectively is not at all as hard as some of you seems to think (not for me anyway).

But instead of taking my words for it, try it yourself. Take the Yggdrasil for example, looking at the measurement it would seem to be horrible but it sounds very transparent and revealing, far more than many other DACs that measure well.

On the other hand, take the Topping DACs which Amir seem to like. They sound uninspired and boring (at least the one I have as a TV DAC), devoid of life. If that is transparency, I think the recording studio needs to hire better people for mastering.

Yes, the hobby is all about listening and enjoying music. That is not a provoking thought at all.

Perfectly fine to use your ears to listen to music and determine what you like best. Everyone does that. I have not heard the Yggdrasil nor the vast majority of DACs out there. Nor do I need to.
You say it measures horrible. You never read me telling others it measures horribly. In fact I have always stated that it conforms to being audible transparent. The reason I say this is because below a certain point things are indistinguishable when compared properly.
I have also mentioned that when we know what is playing (substantial) differences can be heard. Unfortunately this is not related to technical performance at all.

For that reason I don't take your word for it nor will the majority of folks here. At SBAF everyone will agree with you for certain. That is where you can get 'confirmation'.

Once someones mind is made up something sounds poor or good it really takes a LOT of effort on that person to look further than ones conviction and test using other methods. I have been there.

You will not be able to convince most regulars here your personal experience is valid.. why try when most are convinced or know your test method is flawed to the core ?
When you want validation go visit SBAF, they will fully concur with your Yggy-Topping findings.
Here you will be asked to test non sighted which in case of DACs is very very difficult to do despite you saying 'is not at all as hard as some of you seems to think (not for me anyway)'
It is provable wrong.

 

[cryptout]

One can also enjoy listening and don't care about opinions of others that appear not to agree with your findings.

Best advice!