Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?

[solderdude]

I’m just saying that steady‑state sine tests don’t show everything.

Indeed they don't and that's why we don't really look at SINAD as a test that tells all.
Who says or thinks 1kHz sine wave is the tell-all measurement ?
That's where there are many measurements each tell part of the story.

Real audio circuits don’t behave like ideal textbook blocks

Which circuits are real and which ones aren't real ?

The point is that some designs maintain microdetail and depth better than others

If that is the case and those microdetails can get lost then those microdetails must have been in the recording.
Only the Freya with special tubes does not remove anything and the amps behind the Freya obviously don't remove it either ?
In that case should a direct connection not be better ?

........ That is why my Gustard R26 DAC replaced my SMSL SU-10 DAC. It sounded better.

Ahh.. that's why... it all makes sense now.
Because the SMSL was driving your Freya with very long interlinks and the Gustard does the same but better ..

 

[antcollinet]

Try this in a simple experiment with two DACs that measure the same on a 1 kHz SINAD test but use different reconstruction filters.

First, pick DAC A with a slow‑rolloff linear‑phase filter, and DAC B with a minimum‑phase filter - verify that both show essentially identical THD+N and SINAD at 1 kHz.

Next, feed them an impulse or fast step and capture the output on a scope or use DAW software:

You will find that DAC A will show pre‑ringing and a longer impulse response, while DAC B will have no pre‑ringing and will settle faster after the transient.

Then run a multitone or wideband test and look at the time‑domain and FFT plots—you’ll see differences in how each DAC handles transients and energy distribution even though the 1 kHz SINAD number is the same.

Now listen to some well known music in a level‑matched, quick‑switch setup: those small, signal‑correlated differences in transient behavior can show up as subtle changes in audio imaging and clarity, despite both devices looking “identical” on the basic sine‑wave spec sheet.

Still waiting for your measurements and well controlled blind test report to demonstrate audibility.

But yes - differnet filters show different measurements - and some really slow non compliant filters MIGHT become audible from frequency response differneces (if they are 15 and have hearing that extends up to 20kHz). But no one is going to hear imaging differences from the simple difference of linear to minimum phase.

At least not from the sound-waves reaching their ears. They might from the processes in the wetware between them - which is why proper blind testing is needed.

 

[satow]

If this is a test you’ve run, can you share the data? If it is not, why are you claiming you know what it will show?

Nope. I don't have the data. But the experiment is easy to do if you have the equipment. I have nothing to prove. Just throwing it out there, so if people don't believe it they can try it for themselves.

If you’ve got a properly controlled blind test that specifically isolates reconstruction filter behavior in otherwise similar DACs, I’d genuinely like to see it. Until then, “they measure the same on 1 kHz SINAD, so they must sound the same” is an oversimplification, not a proven law.

 

[Ropeburn]

Until then, “they measure the same on 1 kHz SINAD, so they must sound the same” is an oversimplification, not a proven law.

Again, nobody said that. It's a claim you keep making that's just in your head. Maybe try getting rid of it, that would be helpful for communication.

 

[Redacted]

Nice AI response, I'm sorry to say it's not true

The man down the pub only speaks the truth

 

[Mort]

Oh!

This moving posts here makes a lot of sense. Thumbs up!

I do try not to derail topics but sometimes I can't help it. Please forgive your friendly neighbourhood Doge

It's basically the penalty box.

 

[Ropeburn]

It's basically the penalty box.

 

[Axo1989]

some people like added harmonic distortion, that is a fact. It's distortion, but if it pleases the listener, why would you be against it. It's a deviation from high fidelity in the strickt sense of the word, but if it brings more joy to listen to music, it's a good choice. And Satow is not the only one who does that, many do. It's a subjective preference, not an objective quality and that is not bad as long as you know it's subjective and an distortion.

I often enjoy (lashings of) harmonic distortion (and other kinds maybe) but I basically do that by selecting certain music genres—lo-fi, metalcore, shoegaze etc—more than by hardware. Not necessarily the golden glow of the vacuum tube, but if you do like that, then enjoy.

 

[satow]

Again, nobody sa

Again, nobody said that. It's a claim you keep making that's just in your head. Maybe try getting rid of it, that would be helpful for communic

No issue with communication or science. You just don't seem to want to learn anything that contradicts your own views and claims in your head.

 

[Sal1950]

Nope. I don't have the data. But the experiment is easy to do if you have the equipment. I have nothing to prove.

Well you kinda do, your the one making the claims of being able to hear certain things, making a claim here requires back-up data.

I use the Schiit Freya+ F preamp because it adds the spatial depth, dimensionality, and harmonic realism that a DAC’s digital volume control cannot provide. The Gustard R26 DAC's variable output is excellent, but running it direct sounds flatter and less holographic in my system. The Freya+ in tube mode introduces the exact kind of euphonic shaping that helps my Magnepan LRS disappear and form a true 3D image,

What your adding is a LOT of distortion and non-linearity in response.
Over 60db worth of noise and distortion going from the passive mode to the active tube mode.

Schiit Freya+ Pre-amp Review

This is a review, detailed measurements and listening tests of Schiit Freya+ selectable passive, active solid state, and tube pre-amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $1,199 plus shipping. I am a fan of the wide aspect ratio Schiit audio products. They look a lot more classy...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Why you would want to subject your music sources to this kind of a mess I have no idea.
Beyond that, if this is the subjective sound you find preferable there's really no sense in us beating this horse any further, you already killed him with that P/A switch on the front panel. SAD

 

[satow]

Electronic measurements are the first thing I look at when buying equipment. The second thing is cost. I don't want to buy something that looks great but measures poorly.
The third thing I look for is how it will sound in my system. If it measures excellently like my SMSL SU-10 DAC, it doesn't mean it will sound great in my system. Thus, I switched over to the Gustard R26 DAC it sounded far better that my SU-10. If you can't hear the difference, that is your problem, not mine.

 

[satow]

Well you kinda do, your the one making the claims of being able to hear certain things, making a claim here requires back-up data.


What your adding is a LOT of distortion and non-linearity in response.
Over 60db worth of noise and distortion going from the passive mode to the active tube mode.

Schiit Freya+ Pre-amp Review

This is a review, detailed measurements and listening tests of Schiit Freya+ selectable passive, active solid state, and tube pre-amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $1,199 plus shipping. I am a fan of the wide aspect ratio Schiit audio products. They look a lot more classy...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Why you would want to subject your music sources to this kind of a mess I have no idea.
Beyond that, if this is the subjective sound you find preferable there's really no sense in us beating this horse any further, you already killed him with that P/A switch on the front panel. SAD

All I’m saying is that measurements tell you what a circuit is doing, not whether it’ll actually work for a given system. The Freya+ gives you three very different modes, and in my setup the tube stage doesn’t turn the music into a crime scene—it actually lines up nicely with the gain and impedance of the rest of the chain. If someone prefers passive or solid‑state, that’s perfectly reasonable. I just happen to like what the active stage does in my system, even if the graphs look like they need counseling. My approach to excellent audio has always been first objective - technical specs and measurements, then subjective - finding the components that make the audio great.

 

[Sal1950]

All I’m saying is that measurements tell you what a circuit is doing, not whether it’ll actually work for a given system.

Modern systems aren't terribly dependent on checking these factors. Only if your using outlying things like passive preamps requiring good impedance matching to the source and amp, preamp output voltage vs amp sensitively for gain matching, a few more. But on a whole most gear can be connected together, turned on and it will function fine within it's design parameters.
Where the measurements are most valuable today is highlighting and separating the best from the good to the poor. If High Fidelity has any importance to the buyer, he looks first for that which behaves most like a straight wire with gain. A function the Freya sadly fails at most miserably in it's tube mode.
Nothing more to be said here on that issue.

 

[Beave]

Electronic measurements are the first thing I look at when buying equipment. The second thing is cost. I don't want to buy something that looks great but measures poorly.
The second thing I look for is how it will sound in my system. If it measures excellently like my SMSL SU-10 DAC, it doesn't mean it will sound great in my system. Thus, I switched over to the Gustard R26 DAC it sounded far better that my SU-10. If you can't hear the difference, that is your problem, not mine.

"Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three".

"Three, sir!"

 

[satow]

"Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three".

"Three, sir!"

Thank you sir! I corrected my error!

 

[sonitus mirus]

Yes, five is right out. Count to three. No more. No less.

 

[Keith_W]

Re: test signals vs. music and how test signals are not an accurate representation of reality.

First: tests like the multitone and J-test are designed to be complex and subject equipment to far more abuse than normal music signal.

Second: if you still want to make this argument, there is always the null test. Use any signal you want, run it through two pieces of equipment, and see if it nulls. If it nulls, it's the same!

Third: if you still don't believe in the null test, there's always the good old blind test.

 

[Newman]

The third thing I look for is how it will sound in my system. If it measures excellently like my SMSL SU-10 DAC, it doesn't mean it will sound great in my system.

So, the rest of your system is broken? Broken in such a way that you need to buy parts with a non-flat-response and extra-distortion-added, in a desperate attempt to partially compensate for what the rest of the system is doing wrong?

That's the only interpretation that comes to mind of your statement, "If it measures excellently ... it doesn't mean it will sound great in my system."

Thus, I switched over to the Gustard R26 DAC it sounded far better that my SU-10.

Unless, of course, your comparison listening tests were uncontrolled. If so, you could be responding to other issues than the pure issue of what you think of the sound waves themselves.

And I will wager 99% that they were indeed uncontrolled, and you were indeed responding to something other than audible changes in the level-matched sound waves themselves. Call it a rookie error.

If you can't hear the difference, that is your problem, not mine.

yeah yeah, sure. We have to deal with this sort of Dunning-Kruger put-down all the time.

cheers

 

[DavidEdwinAston]

Electronic measurements are the first thing I look at when buying equipment. The second thing is cost. I don't want to buy something that looks great but measures poorly.
The third thing I look for is how it will sound in my system. If it measures excellently like my SMSL SU-10 DAC, it doesn't mean it will sound great in my system. Thus, I switched over to the Gustard R26 DAC it sounded far better that my SU-10. If you can't hear the difference, that is your problem, not mine.

Odd that you think, "us" not hearing a difference is a problem for, "us"! Unless you are commiserating with us for not having "golden ears".
Don't worry, we'll manage!

 

[Ropeburn]

Not hearing a difference between audio electronics is actually a good thing. It means the stuff has gotten better than our ears, we can decide by practicality, features, price and aesthetics instead, save a lot of money, and focus on what really counts instead: enjoying some good fucking music.