No, and we'll likely never see one. It would take the discovery of a new property in audio science that has yet to be observed.
Last edited:
-
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!
Recommendation for MOST DETAILED, ANALYTICAL, X-RAY - 3D HOLOGRAPHIC DAC available?
- Thread starter insoc
- Start date
The testing that is performed on this site is done to determine if a DAC can do a conversion back to an analog signal from know input signals. How accurate of a conversion process is what is being tested (frequency response, distortion, etc.). The ideal DAC would recreate the known input signal(s) with perfect fidelity. Independent to this testing, peer-reviewed scientific studies have been done to determine the level of distortion, variations in frequency response, etc. which are audible to the humar ear. The combination of this data is what allows us to take measurements of a digital to analog conversion device (DAC) to determine if the output signal will have any audible difference from the known input signal(s).
If the science points to the answer as no, as it does in most modern competently designed DACs, then you will have to prove that the current accepted science and understanding of audio is wrong. The burden of proof resides on those challenging accepted peer-reviewed audio science.
As noted in the above post, I have never seen a statistically controlled listening experiment that has cast any doubt on the inaudibility of modern DACs that would be classified as audibly transparent per the peer-reviewed scientific data which is used to objectively measure DACs on this site.
Taking all that into account is why your original question regarding holograms and x-rays along with your ranting about zeroes and ones appears to come from a place of ignorance.
Last edited:
markk02474
Member
What was your source? I have found enormous improvement using a signal jitter reducer like the Ifi SPDIF iPurifier on a ESS 9028pro based DAC. The soundstage completely opened up. Some DACs have internal FIFO and reclocking of data, so the audible differences are more likely due to that than conversion accuracy and noise. I suspect that most DACs will sound alike to you if your source has mediocre jitter and noise levels.
I suspect all DAC's will sound different to you if you don't compare them with proper controls.
Sources varied, but none have ever induced any kind of audible jitter.
I don't believe those products do anything but take money from those who don't know better. Just like esoteric cables, power supplies/cleaners, etc.
markk02474
Member
Thanks for the link. I did indeed hear improvement of the SPDIF iPurifier when the allegedly low noise iPower wall wart was filtered through a DC iPurifier. The measurements confirm what my ears heard, and commenters using cleaner power also heard improvement. That is the only anti jitter device I tried, but it was an ear opener. I'm sure there are much better (and more expensive) devices out there. I used an Oppo BDP-83se with a modified Gustard X-20 (biggest improvement was replacing the standard diodes with fast, soft recovery ones). Even the choice of fast, soft recovery diode was audible. I tried a number and eventually damaged the circuit board traces. DAC chips are so low noise now that power supply noise becomes audible. BTW, my amp is a 25 year old modified Crown Macro Reference which has 120db S/N. I was shocked to hear the results of every modification to the DAC.
The bigger point is that while many good DACs are quite competent at data conversion, what differences people hear is the quality of the data stream plus the quality of the DAC. DACs have gotten so good now that the sound quality is mostly determined by the quality of the data stream. Well, with the caveat that clocking in the DAC needs to be good too, and many are with jitter under 1ps.
The system of data stream + DAC is what needs to be compared. With a poor data stream, DACs will sound alike, except for ones doing de-jitter internally, and DAC chips that are more or less sensitive to jitter. Read the reviews of the posh DACs. All of the review set-ups include data stream cleansers. The reason is that they matter. The hard part for consumers is choosing a DAC plus all that comes before it in the chain.
But, if people are just listening to sine waves, I'm sure current test results are capturing all that matters. If not, maybe we need some better tests which can better correlate to what people are hearing. That continues to be the challenge.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #147
I'm waiting for the ASR review before buying it....
You could buy it and send it to Amir for review. The MSRP kind of scared me off.
- Thread Starter
- #149
It does not work like that for this product. They offer IN HOME DEMOSTRATION or a store AUDITIONING but NO RETURNS once you finally bought it...
This thread is unlikely to change anyone’s view. I have the same endless discussion with my brother in law about homeopathy. He gives his kids homeopathic cold remedies. I asked him what he thought about the 000s of peer reviewed studies that had failed to find an effect beyond placebo, and the fact (which he agreed was the case) that his kids recovered from colds with homeopathic treatment in the same time frame as with no treatment at all. It was pointless, once a mind is closed to evidence good luck opening it again. He also had not one but two books on his shelf claiming evolution to be a lie. He’s a highly qualified engineer and very respected in his field. It’s a strange world.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2018
- Messages
- 6,652
- Likes
- 9,406
This is the weird bit. He seems to be acknowledging it's complete inefficacy, if I'm not mistaken...?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,754
- Likes
- 37,593
The Nagra hd DAC if it meets claimed specs is going to be mid pack on the Sinad chart.
Well, he wanted to have his cake and eat it on that one!
LOL, recommending a $65K DAC (don't confuse the HD DAC with the HD DAC X!) was completely tongue in cheek. It was the most expensive one I could think of.
Does he perchance happen to work for AudioQuest?
Ya know, expertise in electronic engineering, while admirable, does not necessarily translate into expertise in experimental research or interpretation of natural science literature. In fact, designing an experiment to prove/disprove whether people can perceive an audible difference is essentially a type of human subjects research, which is a health science, not an engineering (applied) science.
JFF, I once started a thread on <cough> head-fi asking if there was anyone on the forum with a background in natural science research experience AND who believed that (solid state) amplifiers and cables had large audible differences. There were 0.
What I see when I read them are typically ZERO controls, lots of convoluted half science/half WTF, combined with other products that they are promoting that also generally don't matter.
They will then often start writing prose that, with a few changed words, could easily be considered pornographic. Usually they give away their own ignorance early and often (cough cough Darko cough cough), but other times they aren't as eye rollingly ridiculous, and can be very convincing.
They are salesmen. Money is at stake, they are able to be very convincing.
Controlled tests bridge that gap. Education does too.
I have never noticed a difference in sound quality between streaming via network, wifi/optical, coax, USB stick, AES, airplay, or anything else I've connected with.
.
If you have any actual data, studies, or science that backs up what you are saying, please share it. Uncontrolled anecdotal subjective experience sharing isn't going to get very far.
Oh, I'm incorrect. They certainly do matter to their profit margins, because bullshit products are very often shockingly cheap to make (look at the cable world... Unbelievable it isn't illegal). I don't believe in Woo. People that try to sell me stuff that requires belief in unknown physics, I'm not interested in.
I can see how the ranked bar charts "comparing" SINAD could be interpreted as conveying which DACs sound better. But it doesn't. You heard it here first. And yes, you COULD purchase a $50 DAC, as long as it measured well.
You sound angry. About as angry as I felt when I opened up an audio magazine in the 80's and read an article about how in a blind listening test, a group of experienced listeners could not reliable differentiate between a stereo system that had expensive amps and cables and one that used cheap stuff. At the time, I hadn't learned about experimental controls, the affect of bias on outcomes, and basic statistics. So I thought it was stupid and completely contradictory to content of the rest of the magazine and to the entire audio industry, for that matter. You may or may not get out of the rabbit hole.
We have them. Level matched output by Vmeter to within 1%, fast switching, source unknown to switcher and testee,18/20. Your room. Your music. No esoteric games with 'sine waves'.
Is that what you did when you made your assessments? If not, see if the differences are still there, before you declare we need better tests. We need people to do VALID tests, not find ones that fit conclusions based on invalid assumptions.
Last edited:
Universal Cereal Bus
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2020
- Messages
- 171
- Likes
- 356
I'm curious to know what you think your music is made up of.