GoldenSounds passes apparently ABX test for DACs (NOT Really)

[VientoB]

I found it a very disappointing video as he failed to compare DACs. Specifically, recently he has said on more than one occasion that the Topping D90SE measures superbly but he doesn’t like its sound compared to other, more expensive DACs. This video completely failed to address that claim.

Also worth noting that he did not specifically inform us what he noticed that was different and how it affected the music during a normal listening session.

 

[VientoB]

We can do that as well... but I don't expect any different results than what we already know: If there is anything that might easily explain perceived differences between DAC then it's the reconstruction filters.

Surely it’s important to to ABX with several different DACs then and see what the reconstruction filters affect is? Also if he could explain how this affects his actual listening enjoyment that would be good to hear.

 

[KSTR]

Surely it’s important to to ABX with several different DACs then and see what the reconstruction filters affect is?

Methodically it is better to reduce/eliminate unnecessary variables, just test the filters without changing anything else. It's also the only option we have if we want to take part in those ABX listening tests ourselves.

 

[VientoB]

Methodically it is better to reduce/eliminate unnecessary variables, just test the filters without changing anything else. It's also the only option we have if we want to take part in those ABX listening tests ourselves.

But he didn’t compare DAC filters. What he did was compare two extremes, really.

I’m not interested in taking part myself,I’d like to see him compare DACs.

 

[Mnyb]

Can someone change the title of the topic .
Its missleading

Its about comparing two software filters not DAC’s as amir pointed out several times already .

To many people jumps on such clickbait/fud as they really really want it to be soo that there is some hitherto unknown variable that suddenly “explains” everything

@AdamG ?

 

[amirm]

I found it a very disappointing video as he failed to compare DACs. Specifically, recently he has said on more than one occasion that the Topping D90SE measures superbly but he doesn’t like its sound compared to other, more expensive DACs. This video completely failed to address that claim.

The video is quite ironic as well. He spends the first 14 minutes talking about how unreliable sighted listening tests are. Yet, throughout his reviews he has constantly claimed this and that about an audio product in sighted testing. Either he has gotten religion lately or he has no appreciation for how odd this video is given his history.

 

[amirm]

Can someone change the title of the topic .
Its missleading

Its about comparing two software filters not DAC’s as amir pointed out several times already .

To many people jumps on such clickbait/fud as they really really want it to be soo that there is some hitherto unknown variable that suddenly “explains” everything

@AdamG ?

Good suggestion. I changed the topic and added text to OP indicating what he is really doing.

 

[Jeromeof]

Seems such a waste of time and I agree the video is sadly click-bait. Though for the first section of the video was a nice setup to what I had hoped really was something special, the later half of the video was effectively - I have manipulated the Frequency Response using 2 extremes DAC filters and recorded those differences and 'amazingly' I am able to hear the difference in an ABX test.

Effectively, he should just call his video - "Hearing the differences between 2 Frequency Responses in an ABX test" - bet he would not get as many views with that title

 

[Sokel]

I see he's using Deltawave also (best app on the known Universe) and I also saw something like the AP's meters.
Does he uses AP5xx?

Cause if he does that could explain his shift into more objective views.

 

[Bernd]

Very interesting discussion! The amount of technical information pertaining to the setup of measurement, measurent protocols and measurement analysis is actually quite overwhelming for someone like me who is not really educated in this matter. But 1 point comes to my mind:
1. I did not count how many members of this forum are participating in this discussion, but I suppose we have more than half a dozen extremely knowledge people people here! I really wonder how all these small audio companies (less than 25 people), which have probably only 1 or 2 engineers on the same level can get it all right.

 

[goat76]

I see he's using Deltawave also (best app on the known Universe) and I also saw something like the AP's meters.
Does he uses AP5xx?

Cause if he does that could explain his shift into more objective views.

I think he has always had technical skills, he did well in revealing the problems with MQA as an example.

 

[Purité Audio]

I see he's using Deltawave also (best app on the known Universe) and I also saw something like the AP's meters.
Does he uses AP5xx?

Cause if he does that could explain his shift into more objective views.

He is not going to make any money if he starts concluding that all properly engineered dacs sound the same.
Keith

 

[JSmith]

he did well in revealing the problems with MQA as an example

Not really... he botched that "test" up as well (see mega MQA thread).


JSmith

 

[solderdude]

I actually agree with (almost) everything he says... except for the hasty conclusion and 'bridge' towards the incorrect title of the vid.
Just because he was able to distinguish 2 measurable different files does not mean that competent measuring DACs thus still may sound different.
The guy seems to be perfectly on 'our side' about 95% of the time in that video.

Of course he could be kind of right because a DAC that measures perfectly well, with certain filter settings, may not measure that well and be audibly distinguishable when a not so good filter is used.
That filter may well even be a default filter for some manufacturers that want to distinguish themselves or have weird notions based on whatever theory they might have.

Filters can make a difference and some of them could be audible different for young folks.
The conclusion that DACs do sound different is a long stretch and the wrong conclusions as is the clickbait title he gave the video.
That video is going to get a lot of hits, 'fame' and possibly even some small extra income ?

At least he seems to have grown in knowledge after the 'incident' at ASR. Which by the way was a spin-of from the MQA test he snuck in a official file for MQA rendering. I liked that a lot.

 

[Tell]

Not really... he botched that "test" up as well (see mega MQA thread).


JSmith

Care to give us a tldr?

 

[JSmith]

Care to give us a tldr?

Keep in mind too this bloke threatened Amir, quite unnecessarily;

MQA Deep Dive - I published music on tidal to test MQA

What is a lossy "masking" algorithm? @amirm how about “CD doesn’t apply a lossy masking algorithm to the audible music spectrum”? Because TBH that is the convention when distinguishing CD from “lossy compression”. Where does MQA sit against that criterion? So anyone with an older DAC/MQA...

www.audiosciencereview.com

It's in a number of Amir's posts in that thread... 18 pages of comments to go through;

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?search/44161915/&page=18

JSmith

 

[goat76]

Not really... he botched that "test" up as well (see mega MQA thread).


JSmith

He was technical enough to make a revealing report on what MQA really was, and he was probably the single strongest force in making most audiophiles aware of that bluff.

 

[Paffi]

He made an ABX test and proofed, that he can hear differences in different oversampling filters, created on his PC. Now he should do some ABX test of two identical DACs with different filters choosen, to proof that he can hear differences between DACs, as his video title claimed. That´s kind of strange, that he explains the test environment with an automated switcher for two different DACs, but didn´t use it. Or maybe I got something wrong...

 

[JSmith]

the single strongest force in making most audiophiles aware of that bluff

I'd suggest that was Archimago.


JSmith

 

[Sokel]

He made an ABX test and proofed, that he can hear differences in different oversampling filters, created on his PC. Now he should do some ABX test of two identical DACs with different filters choosen, to proof that he can hear differences between DACs, as his video title claimed. That´s kind of strange, that he explains the test environment with an automated switcher for two different DACs, but didn´t use it. Or maybe I got something wrong...

I am more interested in his ABX device than DACs.
Do we have info about it?