• 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!

How to connect a DAC to an integrated amplifier

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it's the other way around it's saying to trust your ears without relying on your other senses, mainly eyes, to evaluate what you hear.
We can worry about future devices after they're invented with science and engineering and how could it be invented without equipment to evaluate it?
The point is that the only one who can deny your own subjectivity is yourself. In other words, if I were to deny your eyesight and tell you to keep doubting the line you see rising at a 45-degree angle on a graph, even after weeks of continuous verification, would that be a legitimate doubt? No, it wouldn’t. The reason I don’t deny your eyesight is because I respect you.
 
Spiegel, you assert that you aren't an audiophile, yet you are reacting pretty much like an old-fashioned audiophile. And that means you admit "hearing" all kinds of nuances that vary with where you're auditioning a device, the reputation of the vendor, the esthetics of the device, salesperson's BS, your mood, the time of day, etc.

That was me for much of the 50 years that I have been an audiophile. But I learned after 35-40 years that all those above criteria are misleading and generally worthless.

Personally I believe that sound differences exist but the best sound I've experience is from devices that measure well according to objective criteria, and that device that measure very well are essentially indistinguishable from each other.

All that said, if you like the esthetics of the Chord Ultima and the cost isn't prohibitive, go for it.

01_ULTINT_Front_RS-900x675.jpg

.
 
In other words, if I were to deny your eyesight and tell you to keep doubting the line you see rising at a 45-degree angle on a graph, even after weeks of continuous verification, would that be a legitimate doubt?
Depends on the verification. If it's measurements of the angle that say otherwise I would doubt my own eyesight and get an eye exam or find out if it's an optical illusion. If the verification is just me saying I see something, you need to look for verification a controlled test or measurements. Since humans have biases you can respect someone while knowing we all have them. You have your answer, XLR output from DAC to amplifier reduces the chance of ground loops though RCA would be fine if that's not a concern. If you like the Chord then get that. I'm not trying to change your mind. Room correction could help and perhaps some treatments which could be as simple as upholstered furniture and rugs.
 
Very interesting read. The problem with "trusting your ears" as is usually stated by many visitors to ASR is that they are doing anything but that. Once one actually does that by having levels carefully matched and not knowing which of the choices one is hearing the "veils" are truly lifted. It is illuminating to say the least.
 
Here’s what I’ve realized through this brief exchange:
I mistakenly ended up on a graphics card benchmark forum.
Deny everything haven't experienced.
Thus, sound is wasted.
 
The point is that the only one who can deny your own subjectivity is yourself. In other words, if I were to deny your eyesight and tell you to keep doubting the line you see rising at a 45-degree angle on a graph, even after weeks of continuous verification, would that be a legitimate doubt? No, it wouldn’t. The reason I don’t deny your eyesight is because I respect you.

Using eyesight as an example; if you were comparing colors on two monitors side by side. Would you:

A) look at it and guess
B) get a Calman / Spyder calibrator and be sure

No, disrespect intended.
 
Here’s what I’ve realized through this brief exchange:
I mistakenly ended up on a graphics card benchmark forum.
Deny everything haven't experienced.
Thus, sound is wasted.

There's no need to exaggerate.

You've been presented with a great deal of information. You show no signs of understanding it or even having viewed it. Are you here in good faith? If you are, now is a good time to start behaving as such.
 
Here’s what I’ve realized through this brief exchange:
I mistakenly ended up on a graphics card benchmark forum.
Deny everything haven't experienced.
Thus, sound is wasted.
Actually if you really want to improve your audio system you've come to the best possible place, but it does require some 'unlearing' and there is a bit of a peanut gallery but I would not take that to heart.

When I mentioned a few years back that I use a Krell power amp I got a load of grief for that - 'It's too big, it's too heavy, it uses too much power, it's only got fifty wats, it's expensive etc etc'

I just thought it was funny.

Really I don't think your speaker are at all bad, you now have an amp that drives them properly, so that problem solved. They're not state of the art - but they are similar design (albeit smaller) to what I have so I'd probably enjoy them.

If there's things about the sound that irritate you then there's problems to fix otherwise dump the audiophilia about DAC differences etc and just enjoy it.
 
Spiegel, you assert that you aren't an audiophile, yet you are reacting pretty much like an old-fashioned audiophile. And that means you admit "hearing" all kinds of nuances that vary with where you're auditioning a device, the reputation of the vendor, the esthetics of the device, salesperson's BS, your mood, the time of day, etc.

That was me for much of the 50 years that I have been an audiophile. But I learned after 35-40 years that all those above criteria are misleading and generally worthless.

Personally I believe that sound differences exist but the best sound I've experience is from devices that measure well according to objective criteria, and that device that measure very well are essentially indistinguishable from each other.

All that said, if you like the esthetics of the Chord Ultima and the cost isn't prohibitive, go for it.

01_ULTINT_Front_RS-900x675.jpg

.
That reminds me I need a case for my Raspberry Pi.
1000034299.png
 
I mistakenly ended up on a graphics card benchmark forum.
Hahaha. That's us alright.

Deny everything haven't experienced.
Thus, sound is wasted.
That, not so much. As with the gamers we are interested in functional performance and measurements thereof. And like the gamers the trick is relating the numbers to the subjective experience of what we play. We are all subjectivists in the end.

I'm sorry you didn't find the answer you wanted here. What was the answer you wanted?
 
This is a great read. Maybe you will enjoy it @Spiegel . I did

 
And yet, this video tells me not to trust my own hands. If a future audio device, for which no proper equipment or research yet exists to evaluate it, were placed before you, would you really just wait for someone else to listen to it and assess it on your behalf?
We are not talking about mysterious alien technology; we are not even talking about transducers and acoustics. We are talking about audio DACs and power amplifiers. No mystery anywhere here.

And no one is telling you to accept some claims in a youtube video as gospel - feel free to try doing some (proper) blind testing and actually gauge the limitations of your hearing.
 
Last edited:
We are not talking about mysterious alien technology; we are not even talking about transducers and acoustics. We are talking about audio DACs and power amplifiers. No mystery anywhere here.

And no one is telling you to accept some claims in a youtube video as gospel - feel free to try doing some (proper) blind testing and actually gauge the limitations of your hearing.
I wasn’t talking about subtle excellence that no one can perceive.

Through Erin's speaker analysis video, I came to understand the reverberation unique to speakers based on my own experience. Previously, I didn’t think of such resonance as the characteristic sound of the speaker, and since I didn’t like it, I spent months searching for an amplifier that could compensate for it. As a result, I managed to pair the speaker with amplifiers that either minimized or eliminated reverberation and judged the resulting sound as good.

From that experience, I discovered a simple principle: the reverb of a (that) speaker is inversely proportional to the amplifier's output. I was even able to derive the average output of amplifiers with less reverberation, and it turned out to exceed the recommended power listed on the manufacturer’s official website by more than 50W. Based on this information, I concluded that the characteristic reverb of the speaker was not a desirable sound but rather a result of the speaker being inadequately controlled.

Thus, the analysis video caused confusion for me, and I was merely sharing that experience. Specifically, I began to wonder if the sound I judged to be good—less reverb—might actually be poor sound that stripped the speaker of its unique character. Does that seem mysterious?

And yet, the response to my concern was nothing more than a video filled with mockery of ear-based testing. Frankly, I don’t even feel like wasting more words on this. I don’t want to hear the arrogant reverb echoing anymore.
 
Last edited:
Sorry. Your "discovery" is simply incorrect. It contradicts physics.

See below snip from an article written by Dr Floyd Toole (in few weeks, the article will be 50 years old, and so this information has been available for half a century). In the article, he explained and provided measurements to show that the "damping factor" of an amplifier had no discernable effect to the physical damping of the mechanical motions of the drivers. Many incorrectly think the damping factor is as an indicator of how powerful an amplifier can "exert control" over the motion of the driver, and so your line of thought is just another variation of this. Good mechanical motion control of the drivers (resulting in well damped motion and sound) is the result of good loudspeaker design, not because of the "control exerted" by, or "synergy" with, an amplifier. The real reason you perceived better sound from your particular speaker/amplifier combo is somewhere else.

Source
amplifier_speaker.png
 
Sorry about I am a little bit out of the scope/theme of OP @Spiegel on this his thread.

I would like to thank you @NTK for your referring to the relevant article written by Dr Floyd Toole; it is my one of the deepest shames that this is my first time encountering this very important and impressive description by Dr. Toole. I should have read/learned this article long before starting my present multichannel fully active audio project, indeed.
WS924.JPG


BTW, even without knowing this article, however, I too actually (and accidentally!) have applied very similar 8-cycle (and 3-cycle, single-cycle) rectangular toneburst signals of various Fq in time-alignment tunings among SP-drivers and also in transient behavior evaluation of woofers and sub-woofers within my audio setup, and I have observed very similar transient responses of room air sound thereof; I am now rather pleased/relieved, therefore, by finding Dr. Toole's above article is retrospectively well supporting/validating my own primitive approaches.
Justb for your possible interest and reference...
- Precision measurement and adjustment of time alignment for speaker (SP) units: Part-1_ Precision pulse wave matching method: #493
- Precision measurement and adjustment of time alignment for speaker (SP) units: Part-2_ Energy peak matching method: #494
- Precision measurement and adjustment of time alignment for speaker (SP) units: Part-3_ Precision single sine wave matching method in 0.1 msec accuracy: #504, #507
- Measurement of transient characteristics of Yamaha 30 cm woofer JA-3058 in sealed cabinet and Yamaha active sub-woofer YST-SW1000:
(also to find optimal XO Fq between them) #495, #497, #503, #507

- Identification of sound reflecting plane/wall by strong excitation of SP unit and room acoustics: #498
You can find the latest setup of my audio rig here and here.
 
Last edited:
Just as my ramblings without reading a paper hold no meaning, so too does speaking without having listened — at least here, to me. Who am I conversing with? Am I speaking across time to an engineer from 50 years ago? To be naive, 50 years ago, the kind of high-performance drivers and amplifiers we have today didn’t exist, and I live in the SpaceX era. Don’t you? Never mind.

Hope everyone’s hearing and cognitive can be put to good use before they age beyond their prime.
 
Did you spend any time reading threads on this site? Why in the world would you come here, Audio Science Review and expect anything different than the responses you've gotten?
Hope everyone’s hearing and cognitive can be put to good use before they age beyond their prime.

The most obvious answer emerges, trolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom