General question about a DAC

[Spirit84]

The measurements that Amir had made on Topping products (D30, D50, etc) have shown that these products are scientifically very sound (pardon the pun).
Help me out here: so if a D30 which sells for around $130.00 with superb numbers, does that mean that if a $10,000 DAC had the same great measurements that the 2 units would sound very much alike?

 

[amirm]

If you matched their levels, then they will sound awfully alike. Whether they do in the absolute, is something people debate. But any differences if they exist will be very small.

 

[Spirit84]

Wow. What does that say about the audiophoolery and of the audio industry as a whole? I think that all those so called experts who review these outrageously priced components have a lot to learn from the real experts on ASR. Bless you Amir for all the great work you do and also for establishing this indispensable forum.
Let true science reign!!

 

[Morphine]

I have the Topping D10 dac and I am delighted with it...
it can with any type of file, it is well built, it looks very nice on my table connected to the Musical Fidelity V90 HPA ...

I agree with you, thanks to Amirm and this forum that helped me to decide with the measurements and comments.

Ahh I forgot ... 60 USD in an offer.

 

[jsrtheta]

Wow. What does that say about the audiophoolery and of the audio industry as a whole? I think that all those so called experts who review these outrageously priced components have a lot to learn from the real experts on ASR. Bless you Amir for all the great work you do and also for establishing this indispensable forum.
Let true science reign!!

There are damned few, if any, experts among them. If they were experts, they would employ double-blind testing ("DBT") to determine if they can actually hear any difference between one DAC, say, and another. Almost to a man (or woman), they don't. They don't want to know. They want to keep their advertisers happy and keep that audio jewelry coming, and keep their readers shelling out big bucks on those advertisers' products, so they can keep that audio jewelry...

You get the picture. And keep in mind that those reviewers know damned well that they are not testing the equipment in any meaningful way, and that the science and engineering communities are laughing at them.

 

[RayDunzl]

You get the picture.

Sure.

You get to Feel Good™ about yourself whichever side of the fence you occupy.

 

[Spirit84]

There are damned few, if any, experts among them. If they were experts, they would employ double-blind testing ("DBT") to determine if they can actually hear any difference between one DAC, say, and another. Almost to a man (or woman), they don't. They don't want to know. They want to keep their advertisers happy and keep that audio jewelry coming, and keep their readers shelling out big bucks on those advertisers' products, so they can keep that audio jewelry...

You get the picture. And keep in mind that those reviewers know damned well that they are not testing the equipment in any meaningful way, and that the science and engineering communities are laughing at them.

I try to be positive about people. It is not easy for me to criticize people that I dont know. But it appears that you are 100% correct. Even if a person had auditory memory that allowed them to accurately recall what they had heard weeks ago - which they can't - it is such a fraud as to what is going on. Scientific measurements are the only way to determine the biiled quality of a component. And DBT is the only way to compare the sound merits . shame on those who take us for suckers.

 

[TBone]

God forbid this becomes a DBT based board, I'd leave in a nano-second. DBT is a tool, nothing more.

Most Reviewers fail because they speak in silly fairy tales narratives. If you've read 1 of there reviews, you've read em all. They make a living chasing ghost.

But let's not paint ALL reviewers with the same brush. As an example ... Fremer has moved past that old fairy tale model and provides rips of the products in question, therefore allowing the public a relative tool with his review. And as far as pressing knowledge is concerned, I can't think of anyone more versed.

DBT are fine, but far from being a prerequisite when reviewing.

TB1

 

[Wombat]

God forbid this becomes a DBT based board, I'd leave in a nano-second. DBT is a tool, nothing more.

Most Reviewers fail because they speak in silly fairy tales narratives. If you've read 1 of there reviews, you've read em all. They make a living chasing ghost.

But let's not paint ALL reviewers with the same brush. As an example ... Fremer has moved past that old fairy tale model and provides rips of the products in question, therefore allowing the public a relative tool with his review. And as far as pressing knowledge is concerned, I can't think of anyone more versed.

DBT are fine, but far from being a prerequisite when reviewing.

TB1

In your experience which methods of testing are more conclusive than controlled blind-listening for evaluating opinions on characteristics of sounds?

 

[TBone]

Conclusive? I been involved in a few DBT meetings and they were anything but conclusive. In fact, I found everyone of em flawed, from items within the setup and especially the compressed nature of the many pressings used for eval.

Most people who run and setup these events didn't have any clue about what they were hearing from a pressing point of view ... never mind the eq used to eval the music.

I'm not dismissing DBT, if you or anyone else finds em useful ... bingo ... but not only did they not provide me any real insight ... they bore me silly.

 

[Sal1950]

Most people who run and setup these events didn't have any clue about what they were hearing from a pressing point of view ... never mind the eq used to eval the music.

If your speaking of vinyl pressings, they can and do vary a lot. Those differences should be easily measurable so a DBT is unnecessary to determine IF there are differences. Now if you want to identify if the differences are audible, then yes, trained listeners using proper DBT procedures would be needed.

Sure.
You get to Feel Good™ about yourself whichever side of the fence you occupy.

But I feel even "Gooder" knowing I'm on the right side.

 

[TBone]

Sal ... digital pressing can vary in terms of dynamic (measurable) differences just as much as vinyl.

 

[Sal1950]

Sal ... digital pressing can vary in terms of dynamic (measurable) differences just as much as vinyl.

I'm not sure I understand your definitions? If you refer to "pressings" as different masterings, then yes, absolutely.

 

[Wombat]

Conclusive? I been involved in a few DBT meetings and they were anything but conclusive. In fact, I found everyone of em flawed, from items within the setup and especially the compressed nature of the many pressings used for eval.

Most people who run and setup these events didn't have any clue about what they were hearing from a pressing point of view ... never mind the eq used to eval the music.

I'm not dismissing DBT, if you or anyone else finds em useful ... bingo ... but not only did they not provide me any real insight ... they bore me silly.

You are dismissing DBT. DBT conducted by incompetents is invalid and shouldn't be used as an argument against it.

You did not answer my question re what have you experienced that is better than DBT(not the flawed ones you were involved in).

 

[TBone]

Yes ... pressings/mastering ... perhaps I should've been more clear.

As far as "interesting" goes ... after using many types ... I now use pro Maxell 650 CDRW exclusively for a reason, a decision not determined using DBT.

 

[Wombat]

Pressings/masterings can be studied and compared using spectrum analysis.


CD jitter measurement software example: http://qpxtool.sourceforge.net/faq.html

CD jitter meter: http://www.kikusui.co.jp/common/product/pdf/kjm6235a.pdf


I think at least one ASR member has this product which has a jitter analyser module:

https://www.xivero.com/musicscope/

 

[TBone]

Pressings/masterings can be studied and compared using spectrum analysis.

Yes, but they dont always reveal dynamic capability which requires other measuring tools. And honestly, how often have you spectrum studied the very pressings you are evaluating?

 

[Wombat]

Yes, but they dont always reveal dynamic capability which requires other measuring tools. And honestly, how often have you spectrum studied the very pressings you are evaluating?

Use other tools then. Lack of knowledge and understanding of electronic signal measurement capability at audio frequencies seems to be still present in audiophile-land.

 

[TBone]

I do use other tools ... frequently ... as apparent within many of my prior posts. If you consider em audiophile-land "incompetent" ... who am I to argue.

 

[Wombat]

Yes, but they dont always reveal dynamic capability which requires other measuring tools. And honestly, how often have you spectrum studied the very pressings you are evaluating?

What do you recommend for revealing dynamic capability of recordings?