• 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!

God of SINAD vs. reality we get from most available music files

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,050
Well ... not really. As both a clueless artist and clueless recording engineer since the late 1970s, I suggested, in answer to @Blumlein 88's question about the entrenchment of the kind of nth degree compression we hear today, that it's being used as a panacea for unskilled and inexperienced mixers.

Heavy compression has been around a long time, but nth degree is new. Not driven by natural evolution, either, because the problems compression traditionally solved, CDs in cars and Top 40 radio etc, are long forgotten. They get zero consideration. Everything is a pretty standard streaming mix now, which needs to be competitive, sure, but as @j_j alluded, given more than a snap to judge, especially between substantially different options, more people migrate toward heavy-ish compression than subtle, but no one likes approaching the maximum, and it was never heard commercially, because it's like getting hit in the head with a fencepost. Oftentimes the preferred mix was somewhat less compressed than it could have been.

But now we're heading for the max. I feel the only reason can be a kind of software-driven logic that says that if the quietest parts and the loudest parts are almost identical in amplitude, then the mixing stage can be bypassed, thereby saving time and money.
But now we're heading for the max. I feel the only reason can be a kind of software-driven logic that says that if the quietest parts and the loudest parts are almost identical in amplitude, then the mixing stage can be bypassed, thereby saving time and money.

I don't really think that is the reason. The people doing this spend considerable time compressing and limiting. It isn't a case of just jam it up tight and be done with it. I think if anything the mixing might be more involved than previously. Mastering traditionally is the final mix to two channels turned over to the mastering person. Any compression there is global. Mixing will have different amounts and types of compression done to each track that contributes to the final mix. Of course stem mastering is often done now where the mastering has more than a single stereo track to work with.

Compressors have attack and release times, different knees in how they operate and levels. It can be frequency filtered as well as level dependent. Just getting drum sound you want is almost a specialty type of using compression and limiting. Side chain compression is common now too. Side chain compression is when another track has the compression of that side chain activated by what is going on in another track. All of that is rather complex and making adjustments to all the elements and giving it a listen takes time and effort. In a sense it is amazing the people doing this can compress something so much and it not sound worse (which still doesn't mean I like the sound of it).

I'm just an amateur who records a little. I've tried doing some of this just to figure it out, and it is hard to do without a complete and total mess as a result. Maybe it is a fashion in the sense those developing these skills are just trying to out-do each other. Rather like a male peacock or fiddler crab where evolutionary competition gets out of hand. But make no mistake, there is skill in doing this even as it is something at least some of us don't want done.

If you are interested here are a couple of basic explanations of how some of this is done.

 
Last edited:

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Most of us needn't get in a tizzy over SINAD ranking, in the scheme of things that need fixing in our home systems.
We do need to get in a tizzy where for no reason performance is left on the table, while in many cases more money is charged as well.
 

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,267
Likes
4,758
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.
And how/on what devices and in what environments is streamed content being listened to? That's still playing a role, surely.
Well, the place to do that is with a sensor at the actual environment, doing sensible things (this is not rocket science, never mind how poor the stuff in cars is) to adapt the material to the environment.

 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,168
Likes
3,714
We do need to get in a tizzy where for no reason performance is left on the table, while in many cases more money is charged as well.

Now you're conflating two things. I was talking about stuff we're likely to hear versus not. Now I'm supposed to care about people who believe that the more money they spend, the better something must sound.

Yes, we should call out *manufacturers* when their claims don't measure up. If they claim their DAC to be manufactured to the highest standard of measurable performance, but it isn't, go get 'em . ( Though I don't recall any whose ad copy is 'behold our SOTA SINAD!')

But when what matters most to us is what 'we' will *hear*...I would ask, why 'we' are paying so much in the first place for a commodity item like a DAC?

Or from another perspective:
Does my heart bleed for the superyacht owner who gets into a tizzy when the gold plating on his boat's cleats measures only 0.3 mm instead of 0.5 mm? It does not. Find something else to worry about.
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,822
Likes
4,514
We do need to get in a tizzy where for no reason performance is left on the table, while in many cases more money is charged as well.
I agree. The performance I see left on the table, however, is not solving a solved problem a little better, but the absence of tools to improve fidelity from the weakest links.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Now you're conflating two things. I was talking about stuff we're likely to hear versus not. Now I'm supposed to care about people who believe that the more money they spend, the better something must sound.
No, I covered two scenarios. One where the product is expensive, and one where it is not. Think of me as the food inspector. I don't care if you are not going to get sick if there is a violation of food safety. My job is to make sure that doesn't happen. You as a consumer can decide if you still want to eat at a restaurant with such violations. Don't tell me to not do my job.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
I agree. The performance I see left on the table, however, is not solving a solved problem a little better, but the absence of tools to improve fidelity from the weakest links.
It is not either or though. In testing headphones and speakers, I always provide EQ to solve their response issues for example. And in the next review I point out a DAC that could do better.
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,822
Likes
4,514
It is not either or though. In testing headphones and speakers, I always provide EQ to solve their response issues for example. And in the next review I point out a DAC that could do better.
Again my point is if the hardware can’t apply the fixes they’re useless. So hardware needs to be designed to be more useful. See my earlier post for the long form on that.
 

blueone

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 11, 2019
Messages
1,179
Likes
1,494
Location
USA
They are already a pain to fix. They want me to ship the monsters to some repair shop in LA as Harman no longer services them. I am sure they just going to swap boards and charge thousands of dollars for each. I don't think they will give me the service manual but I will ask at some point.

Boy do I wish I had some lightweight, module based class D amps.
I feel your pain. I loved my Levinson No39 CD player/DAC/preamp, but when the digital board failed, Harman's shop wanted nearly $1400 to replace it, and that was years ago. I replaced the board, but then sold the No39 for about 80% of what I paid for it new from the dealer. No more luxury electronics for me since then, especially Levinson.
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,822
Likes
4,514
That requires making a business case that such enhanced product creates a bigger business for the company. I am loathe to try and make a case and be accountable if it becomes otherwise.
You’re looking at it from the industry side, not the consumer side.

Look at it this way - you created demand from whole cloth for stuff that measures better than other essentially perfect stuff. That is valuable to weed out the real junk, but also created incentives for companies to improve measured performance without regard to utility. However, a lot of us see the next DAC/headphone amp or integrated DAC/amp that measures another dB SINAD closer to the AP’s limits but with nothing to address the remaining big problems in sound reproduction as just yet another pointless me too who cares whatever.
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
990
Likes
572
Location
So called Midwest, USA
You’re looking at it from the industry side, not the consumer side.

Look at it this way - you created demand from whole cloth for stuff that measures better than other essentially perfect stuff. That is valuable to weed out the real junk, but also created incentives for companies to improve measured performance without regard to utility. However, a lot of us see the next DAC/headphone amp or integrated DAC/amp that measures another dB SINAD closer to the AP’s limits but with nothing to address the remaining big problems in sound reproduction as just yet another pointless me too who cares whatever.

Well, even when the industry makes that "integrated everything I want" product, bet you want Amir to measure it so you can get the best one!
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,822
Likes
4,514
Well, even when the industry makes that "integrated everything I want" product, bet you want Amir to measure it so you can get the best one!

Amir already does measure them. He’s measured several miniDSP products for example and noted the functionality. More problematically, sometimes he reviews something without indicating why one should care about it over something with similar (or much better) performance of digital to audio conversion. Quedlix 5k for example.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
SINAD ... and cognitive dissonance (!)

A really good top notch speaker gets potentially down to 0.5% THD... aka SINAD no better than 46

Classic (and really good sounding) amps get THD to circa 0.05% aka SINAD no better than 66

Based on the speakers, the utility of SINAD as a measure is questionable!

So what, in fact, are we measuring?

Good engineering Hygiene?, Careful selection of components, and the use of SOTA components?
Manufacturing methods and choice... price based?

So you have an amp with a SINAD of 112db ... fantastic, wonderful design and engineering!
Then you run your preamp into it ... which achieves a SOTA SINAD of 120...
And your DAC source - again SOTA SINAD - 122

and we feed it into our audiophile speaker - say the highly regarded Revel F208.... SINAD equivalent based on THD @ 95db (roughly 5W as per the amp) - around 47 above 100Hz, and around 36 from 40Hz.

Above 200Hz the THD for the speakers are below measurable threshold (what is the measurement threshold in SINAD for speakers?)

So using SINAD on its own without some detail understanding of the underlying measurements that it is summarising, becomes a problematic issue, on a system wide perspective!

Aside from looking at the components from an academic sense of how good are they, relative to the SOTA, it is debatable how useful that raw figure is in terms of selecting components and setting up a cohesive synergistic system.

The THD and Noise data from the individual components are more useful in terms of determining what the end result would be - and shortlisting based on SINAD alone, is likely to exclude quite a large number of excellent components, which might in fact be superior in other areas/specifications, which might be critical to the ultimate outcome.

A device with a higher SINAD is definitely objectively "better" - but it also obfuscates the old adage that "Perfect is the enemy of Good"

(OK I will get off my soapbox....)
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,579
Likes
38,278
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
A really good top notch speaker gets potentially down to 0.5% THD... aka SINAD no better than 46

Classic (and really good sounding) amps get THD to circa 0.05% aka SINAD no better than 66

A passive speaker has no noise component, so it's just distortion.

0.05% is pretty poor for a 'classic' amplifier. At least another leading zero and they can do that full bandwidth (20-20k)
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
A really good top notch speaker gets potentially down to 0.5% THD... aka SINAD no better than 46
What? Where do you get that from? Here is Revel 328Be:

index.php


Measurements at 86 dBSPL hug near 0.0% in critical listening range. I heave measured actual SINAD of headphones at 80+. This is the limit of acoustic measurements btw. So don't compare them to electronic ones that are not polluted by noise and microphone non-linearities.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
A device with a higher SINAD is definitely objectively "better" - but it also obfuscates the old adage that "Perfect is the enemy of Good"
Wrong adage. You can do a sloppy job of washing a dish and leaving soap and dirt on it. Or wash it properly. It doesn't cost more to do it right so there is no enemy.
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
A passive speaker has no noise component, so it's just distortion.

0.05% is pretty poor for a 'classic' amplifier. At least another leading zero and they can do that full bandwidth (20-20k)
To be fair it's a bit hard to tell with Classic amp specs, as their THD is at rated output... whereas Amir's measurements are at a much more reasonable 5W...

But having said that:
Nakamichi PA7 stasis... 0.1% THD @ rated output (SINAD 60 - given noise was at over 100db)
Quad 909 : 0.01% @ rated output (that's SINAD 80... given that noise is at 108db)
Quad 606: 0.03%@ rated output (that's SINAD 70... given that noise is at 105db)
Krell KSA250 : 0.1% @ rated output (SINAD 60 - spec SN=120db)

Still... I remain a fan of the current dumping designs... (which makes the AHB2 particularly interesting... as a close relative!)

So which classic designs are you referring to? - getting the THD below 0.01% is pretty rare!
(I picked a couple of my favourites, and the legendary Krell as a "Class A" example)

P.S. having said that I looked up another classic... Sansui B2302 - THD 0.003% SN120db - SINAD circa 90 so yes there are classic examples! (to be checked whether they tested as good as they claimed!)
 

dlaloum

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 4, 2021
Messages
3,092
Likes
2,353
What? Where do you get that from? Here is Revel 328Be:

index.php


Measurements at 86 dBSPL hug near 0.0% in critical listening range. I heave measured actual SINAD of headphones at 80+. This is the limit of acoustic measurements btw. So don't compare them to electronic ones that are not polluted by noise and microphone non-linearities.

Here is the F208 I referred to:

Revel F208 Tower Speaker distortion percentage THD audio measurements.png



And Amir, are you trying to make my point for me? the charts you posted of the 328Be show THD peaking at around 0.6% above 50Hz...

Your own comment on one graph is how well it is performing at only 3% THD @ 30Hz... which unless I am much mistaken, calculates to a SINAD of around 30?... and yes if we ignore the bass the rest of the frequency range manages a very decent 0.2% THD.... (SINAD 53...)
 
Top Bottom