How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent?

[Tinker]

I’m talking about your claims regarding power cables (as well as some other equivalent nonsense). Which do absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, to the sound. Of course they don’t, there is no engineering mechanism for them to do so.

The one speaking nonsense is you. You're mixed up with someone else. I've never made ANY comments regarding power cables or any cables for that matter.

 

[antcollinet]

Ah! The age-old method of making things easy for one's self by allowing the original recording to define correctness.

OK - as others have pointed out. Make any changes you like. Tone controls, EQ, distortion, room equalisation.

But don’t try to do that usining random “colouration” of gear. Do it deliberately, thoughfully, specifically. IE Start with gear that reproduces the recording correctly - then apply whatever specific effects you might want to that. But trying to do that with random “colouration” of the reproduction gear is an expensive hiding to nothing. And is the opposite of HIFI.

 

[antcollinet]

The one speaking nonsense is you. You're mixed up with someone else. I've never made ANY comments regarding power cables or any cables for that matter.

You are right - that was not you,, and for that I apologise.

However, you’ve made equally nonsense statements regarding op amps and differences between DACs (probably more - I find I lack the will to trawl further through your post history), and I admit to finding it difficult to separate the paddlers of nonsense no matter what the type. For that I struggle to feel the need to apologise.

 

[Tinker]

It's probably because you said "I also attribute this change to the addition of the Sparkos SS2590 discrete Op-amp. The level of improvement is stunning" which does seem unlikely.
I get your point about phase reversal which is, as you say, a different thing.

Ok, fair enough.

Playing with many different op-amps in most cases did little to nothing. The difference that stunned me is when I switched to the Sparkos but now I realize I should have kept that to myself. None the less, the change that did occur was in fact significant enough to require a reversal of the phase in the subwoofers. This is NOT suggesting that it's was caused by changing of the op-amp. This audible change led me to investigate further.

 

[SIY]

now I realize I should have kept that to myself.

Or check to see if it's real. Of course that involves a willingness to test your perceptions.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

That to me seems just a matter of definition, i.e., whether you define 'sound signature' as something measured or something perceived.

It can even be more subtle than that: The visual illusion picture does contain a 'signal' (pattern of colors and shapes) that causes the illusion of movement. So, in some sense you could argue that the visual perception of movement is actually encoded in the picture.

In a similar way you can encode auditory perceptions in a DAC output signal by (dynamic) manipulations of phase, frequency response, etc.
You could even disable these signal changes if the DAC detects a measurement signal. Such implementations do exist, like in this test of a Denon CD player on Audioscience review:

It's not a matter of definition.
If a "sound signature" is only perceived but not able to be verified by blind tests or measurements it does not exist but is merely imagined.

The "encoding of auditory perceptions" in a DAC would show in measurements. It is not possible to do illusion tricks (like the moving picture) with audio without being able to measure the difference.

What is a matter of definition though, is when we speak of a DAC, do we think of it as a unit, in a box, with in and outputs or do we think of it as the DAC chip component.
DAC = Unit. Ready to use.
DAC chip = Component.

 

[antcollinet]

It's not a matter of definition.
If a "sound signature" is only perceived but not able to be verified by blind tests or measurements it does not exist but is merely imagined.

The "encoding of auditory perceptions" in a DAC would show in measurements. It is not possible to do illusion tricks (like the moving picture) with audio without being able to measure the difference.

What is a matter of definition though, is when we speak of a DAC, do we think of it as a unit, in a box, with in and outputs or do we think of it as the DAC chip component.
DAC = Unit. Ready to use.
DAC chip = Component.

I wish people would stop using the word "imagination" in this context.

Differences in perceived sound coming from perceptive biases are NOT imagined.

Imagination is a deliberate, active, creative process that the “imagineer” knowingly takes part in. Perceptive biases operate subconsciously to actually change the perception of the sound before it reaches the conscious brain. But the perceptions are genuine.

The problem with describing this as imagination is it is often used to disparage the listener: “you are just imagining it”. More importantly, the listener knows they are perceiving what they are perceiving. That they are not making it up due to some weakness of mind. It doesn’t help them to understand what is going on.

Don't make me post Mckgurk again.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I wish people would stop using the word "imagination" in this context.

Differences in perceived sound coming from perceptive biases are NOT imagined.

Imagination is a deliberate, active, creative process that the “imagineer” knowingly takes part in. Perceptive biases operate subconsciously to actually change the perception of the sound before it reaches the conscious brain. But the perceptions are genuine.

The problem with describing this as imagination is it is often used to disparage the listener: “you are just imagining it”. More importantly, the listener knows they are perceiving what they are perceiving. That they are not making it up due to some weakness of mind. It doesn’t help them to understand what is going on.

Don't make me post Mckgurk again.

View attachment 394244

I'll meet you half way and call the biased perception phenomenon unconscious imagining..

 

[Blumlein 88]

I'll meet you half way and call the biased perception phenomenon unconscious imagining..

That still isn't really good enough. I too don't think this is somewhere for halfway. The people are perceiving not imagining. It is a biased perception that doesn't match physical reality. It is not imagined. It is hard enough to discuss it with people without using a term that sounds more like an indictment of their intelligence rather than just their perceptions.

 

[mikemcsw]

i had that feeling that something was fishy about the OP

agree 100%...to me, i am co

I suggest reading OP's posting history before putting much effort into a response.

For example, see here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-wireless-usb-dac-2-review.34460/post-1244061

"People can believe whatever they want about objective measurements, but until i hear about any measurements thtat actually determine how well instrument separation and soundstage is, i believe in both objective and subjective impressions, and it is not just bias. Even my wife who never does critical listening, she immediately stated that when i introduced either of the 2 amps mentioned that she could hear a dramatic difference."

I agree 100%. So many people here don't believe a dac can make a difference, where in my humble opinion, i am "confident" that there can be differences. I believe there is little to no differences of similarly designed dacs, but i can clearly hear differences between a cheap ess dac and a schiit or chord. I don't know how people feel about AMPS here, but i equally believe big differences can be heard with amps, and like you said, my wife immediately heard a difference when i hooked up a high current macintosh amp...so i say "rubbish" to the naysayers, but, point of discussion....I do believe that there is "likely" little or no difference between digital sources, and looking for any arguments from anyone that believe there can be easily distinguishable differences between digital sources.

 

[BDWoody]

So many people here don't believe a dac can make a difference, where in my humble opinion, i am "confident" that there can be differences. I believe there is little to no differences of similarly designed dacs, but i can clearly hear differences between a cheap ess dac and a schiit or chord.

We're just going to split this out and move it to better suited thread.

 

[Tinker]

It seems that everyone has this flaw of "biased, perception phenomenon of unconscious imagining". (great term!) The overall consensus in this forum is that this is an extremely severe flaw and should be exterminated. I get that, after all, this is all about proven, measured science.

However, there is something to be said about the romantic fantasy of a new component. The science people seem to HATE the idea that pleasure could be had from something imagined. Lighten up. After all this is just a hobby. If you think putting space rocks on your speakers makes them sound better... go for it. I'm glad for you. Real or imagined. After all, it's a personal private fantasy and that's a big part of the fun for many people. Key word...FUN.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It seems that everyone has this flaw of "biased, perception phenomenon of unconscious imagining". (great term!) The overall consensus in this forum is that this is an extremely severe flaw and should be exterminated. I get that, after all, this is all about proven, measured science.

However, there is something to be said about the romantic fantasy of a new component. The science people seem to HATE the idea that pleasure could be had from something imagined. Lighten up. After all this is just a hobby. If you think putting space rocks on your speakers makes them sound better... go for it. I'm glad for you. Real or imagined. After all, it's a personal private fantasy and that's a big part of the fun for many people. Key word...FUN.

No NO NO.

Plenty of us here have said if it makes it fun or you just like something better then fine no problem. What we don't like is someone taking this route and then telling everyone science does not work, or something is so due to this faulty method which is prone to difficulties and arguing they are right with all the scientists wrong. That measurements are missing something humans easily hear when in fact they aren't hearing it because it is not there. They are hearing it because of how the human mind effects hearing for non-sonic reasons.

 

[Purité Audio]

But you could if you learn what measurements mean buy a new component that actually improves sound quality.
Keith

 

[ahofer]

The science people seem to HATE the idea that pleasure could be had from something imagined. Lighten up.

I don't think this is an accurate description of what is going on here- who has said here that you can't have fun with new stuff however you like? What people jump on is describing these experiences as if they were factual or relevant to equipment evaluation.

You'll see lots of people here (myself included) admitting they want the tube glow or blue level meters or just specs with way more headroom than necessary. You'll also find those (a few) who like a bit of tube distortion. But you'll generally find people like to keep the subjective and the objective clearly separated.

Now, if we could identify common factors that improve the subjective pleasure in the same way for a big chunk of the population, that's something...

Why does Cannabis make music sound way more detailed and hundreds of times more enjoyable?

It is well documented that cannabis allows you to hear details in music that your ears would not in anyway be able to pick up if not under the influence. The music even 1 single track can be listened to hundreds of times in 1 day and continue to be like the first time you hear it always putting...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Beave]

agree 100%...to me, i am co

I agree 100%. So many people here don't believe a dac can make a difference, where in my humble opinion, i am "confident" that there can be differences. I believe there is little to no differences of similarly designed dacs, but i can clearly hear differences between a cheap ess dac and a schiit or chord. I don't know how people feel about AMPS here, but i equally believe big differences can be heard with amps, and like you said, my wife immediately heard a difference when i hooked up a high current macintosh amp...so i say "rubbish" to the naysayers, but, point of discussion....I do believe that there is "likely" little or no difference between digital sources, and looking for any arguments from anyone that believe there can be easily distinguishable differences between digital sources.

And, to ask the same questions you've been asked before, how did you level-match for these comparisons? Was any effort made to implement blinding, so that you didn't know what you were listening to?

When you keep claiming your wife immediately heard a difference - not only is that a legendary audiophile cliche, but it also makes it VERY likely that it simply means you didn't level-match, and one amp was louder than the other.

(edited to fix typo)

 

[antcollinet]

I'll meet you half way and call the biased perception phenomenon unconscious imagining..

Why not just call it what it is - perceptive bias, or cognitive bias if you prefer..

 

[Tinker]

No NO NO.

Plenty of us here have said if it makes it fun or you just like something better then fine no problem.

Really? Word of caution for you... don't EVER mention, subjectively, that you enjoyed listening to ANYTHING WITHOUT MEASUREMENTS. Your ears are worthless and your opinion is "less than meaningless". This is not the place for subjective nonsense.

 

[BDWoody]

Really? Word of caution for you... don't EVER mention, subjectively, that you enjoyed listening to ANYTHING WITHOUT MEASUREMENTS. Your ears are worthless and your opinion is "less than meaningless". This is not the place for subjective nonsense.

Well, you have been here for a couple weeks now, so clearly need to straighten out one of our most long-standing members about how things are.

Maybe chill a bit and try to better understand what people are actually saying.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Really? Word of caution for you... don't EVER mention, subjectively, that you enjoyed listening to ANYTHING WITHOUT MEASUREMENTS. Your ears are worthless and your opinion is "less than meaningless". This is not the place for subjective nonsense.

As I have said before (several times), measurements are meant to weed out that which is not performant; the inferior, the dishonestly spec'ed, the grossly over-hyped and over-priced, etc.

If members here do not enjoy some things that have not been measured, then how do you explain these threads?

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/jazz-♫-music-only-in-the-now-or-recently-or-that-you-love.90/page-132
132 pages, 2,630 posts

Artists You Have Discovered Lately

As the title says, let's use the thread to post which new artists we have discovered lately that we love. Please post sample videos or links to some place we can sample them :).

www.audiosciencereview.com

46 pages, 906 posts

Best classical chamber music albums

Wow, so many Brahms enthusiasts, and trumpeters for the quartets too!

www.audiosciencereview.com

2 pages, 22 posts

Best Piano Recordings

Piano is difficult to record well and can be revealing of flaws in recording technique or playback systems. And there's so much great piano music nobody could listen to all of it in a lifetime. Here are some of the best piano recordings that I have heard. By "best" I mean they sound the most...

www.audiosciencereview.com

7 pages, 136 posts

Electronica/dance/techno/et cetera.

Ah both of these are awesome! Too bad those aren't on Spotify, but I did find some other tracks with those artist that I'll check out as well, thanks for the tips :) Brotip1: YouTube downloaders exist Brotip2: the 2nd one has download link hidden behind the three dots

www.audiosciencereview.com

60 pages, 1,183 posts

Classical ♫ Music only | Some you listen now or recently, some you love...

Mozart: Bassoon/Fagotto Concerto KV191; can it be performed as Cello Concerto?? Today, peaceful Sunday afternoon, we (me and my wife) listened twice, with great enjoyments, to this charming and impressive album of Mozart Bassoon/Fagotto Concerto KV191 Klaus THUNEMANN and Clarinet Concerto KV622...

www.audiosciencereview.com

35 pages, 682 posts

And the biggy ....

What are we listening to right now..

We Are the Fallen - Bury Me Alive

www.audiosciencereview.com

1.144 pages, 22, 867 posts.

Do you really believe that all these people have only equipment that has been measured? I don't. Some may have changed equipment to products that have been reviewed if they had problems, but that's the purpose of tests and measurements ... to help people make informed decisions.
OTOH, for the vast majority, we have no idea what the equipment they have. They don't trumpet it, and they don't use their choices as ammunition in arguments.

They just enjoy music.

Jim

p.s. - re: your comment ... this is not the place for nonsense, subjective or otherwise.