Recommendation for MOST DETAILED, ANALYTICAL, X-RAY - 3D HOLOGRAPHIC DAC available?

[ahofer]

https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/crowdsourcing-a-blind-test-prize-or-bet.9259/

 

[nck045]

Haha, really good point

But to be fair, they mention that they've done similar tests with other setups and got the same result.

Yes, they have been doing blind tests since 2013 and after going through over a dozen amps and 3 speakers, the conclusion was no one could consistently identify the sonic differences. The main point here is as 'hifi enthusiasts' and/or 'audiophiles' we tend to misjudge and overestimate our ability to hear. An amp with sufficiently high SINAD will likely provide similar sound to the point that real world differences will be negligible. This also applies to DACs (maybe even more so).

For those still on the hunt for the best 'X-RAY' amp or the most 'holographic' DAC:

Some of us like to believe we have 'golden ears' and can really pick out those minute differences when we swap amps, dacs or cables. As humans this is completely understandable behavior - it does feel good to believe that we have better hearing than the average joe, but in truth it is nothing more than our ego playing inside us and our minds tricking us. The fact is our sensory capabilities are extremely limited. Our eyes can only see up to a certain distance; our ears can only hear certain frequencies, and it's the same with the taste and touch - all of the human senses have their own limitations. We are imperfect creatures at best. Cats have better eyesight than us, and dogs with better ears.

Disagree? Simple. Be objective for once and try a gain-matched blind test. I'm sure it will eventually lead to somewhere enlightening.

Being aware of all this will help end your search for that perfect component and will help save ALOT of time and money. But where's the fun is that? Acquisition of new gear is always enjoyable and overconsumption makes us happy, right?

Also check out my other post on a similar topic https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/ultimate-1et400a-purifi-amplifier-sonic-shootout-€820-to-€8-344.14048/page-8#post-486221

 

[raif71]

Watch your language. This is a professional forum. Warning issued.

Capt A has said it.

 

[markk02474]

https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/crowdsourcing-a-blind-test-prize-or-bet.9259/

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

 

[Shazb0t]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

The problem is that your claim isn't supported by anything. You don't seem to understand that sighted testing has been PROVEN to be unreliable.

 

[PaulD]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

So, your mind works differently to a normal human's then? Everyone else has cognitive biases and needs to double-blind and accurately level-match the tests to get accurate results. I guess you do not work in medical research...

Try reading this:
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/ka...e-night-events.1496367/page-450#post-60198218

It was recently posted to this thread https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-benchmark-ahb2-amp.7628/page-104#post-554811

 

[paddycrow]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

As someone who has been through a blind test, all I can say is you're overestimating your abilities. When you don't know what, if anything, has been changed in the various runs, it's a completely different experience.

 

[Chrispy]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

How often do you hear "differences", tho?

 

[Blumlein 88]

How often do you hear "differences", tho?

If like most with his ideas everything sounds different and everything matters.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

What I claim is that if I can hear a difference between two items under test, sighted, then I can identify them blind. If I can't tell the difference sighted, then it's not worth all the trouble to compare blind, and certainly won't provide any better results.

So you've yet to take the step just once to confirm if you hear a difference sighted that difference is still there for you blinded. It only has been pointed out like a couple dozen times. It is this last step that can set you free.

Many of us have been there and done that. Your not bringing something new to our experience. We are trying to help you bring something new to yours however.

 

[paddycrow]

You might say that taking part in a blind test is a real eye opener. (Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk...)

 

[markk02474]

How often do you hear "differences", tho?

When doing modifications to gear, I'd say less then 40%. There is no ego to it. It is just experimentation.

More often, I'd make several changes at once out of convenience and wouldn't be sure which changes made what difference. If I were a manufacturer voicing a component, modifying other people's gear, or publishing, I would take the extra effort and risk to change one thing at a time. There is indeed risk as today's products are not designed for lots of assembly and disassembly or parts changes and do fail from it. If I replaced a stack part with a superior one and heard no change, most often I just leave it in rather than risk damage by swapping back. Maybe someday if/when I increase the resolution of my system, it the change might become significant enough to matter.

 

[Chrispy]

When doing modifications to gear, I'd say less then 40%. There is no ego to it. It is just experimentation.

More often, I'd make several changes at once out of convenience and wouldn't be sure which changes made what difference. If I were a manufacturer voicing a component, modifying other people's gear, or publishing, I would take the extra effort and risk to change one thing at a time. There is indeed risk as today's products are not designed for lots of assembly and disassembly or parts changes and do fail from it. If I replaced a stack part with a superior one and heard no change, most often I just leave it in rather than risk damage by swapping back. Maybe someday if/when I increase the resolution of my system, it the change might become significant enough to matter.

What do you modify? How do you determine changes, just sighted and by ear?

 

[markk02474]

What do you modify? How do you determine changes, just sighted and by ear?

I started modifying amps, preamps, CD players, DACs, tuners, and speaker crossovers since around 1985, after hearing the improvement made to my Hafler DH-500 by Musical Concepts.

I do own an oscilloscope, capacitor, and multimeters, and had access to a electronic bridge for testing capacitor DA and ESR which I used to choose capacitor replacement candidates. My ears are the final arbiter of what is better, which should make sense given audio gear is for listening, not measuring.

I also make some recordings of grand piano. Mic placement is by sight and then adjusted by ear. This has been a gradual process and infrequent, so I've not invested much into it yet. The really subjective, lunatic fringe audio people are recording engineers, producers, and "artists". They drop crazy money on microphones, preamps, and effects to get the "right sound". I recently bought a Urei 1176LN Rev. D (circa 1970) for $20 at an estate sale and sold it for very stupid money because 75% of hit rock/pop records were made with it and every rich musician *needs* one for their recordings to get that hit sound.

 

[Wombat]

I started modifying amps, preamps, CD players, DACs, tuners, and speaker crossovers since around 1985, after hearing the improvement made to my Hafler DH-500 by Musical Concepts.

I do own an oscilloscope, capacitor, and multimeters, and had access to a electronic bridge for testing capacitor DA and ESR which I used to choose capacitor replacement candidates. My ears are the final arbiter of what is better, which should make sense given audio gear is for listening, not measuring.

I also make some recordings of grand piano. Mic placement is by sight and then adjusted by ear. This has been a gradual process and infrequent, so I've not invested much into it yet. The really subjective, lunatic fringe audio people are recording engineers, producers, and "artists". They drop crazy money on microphones, preamps, and effects to get the "right sound". I recently bought a Urei 1176LN Rev. D (circa 1970) for $20 at an estate sale and sold it for very stupid money because 75% of hit rock/pop records were made with it and every rich musician *needs* one for their recordings to get that hit sound.

There's that "audio gear is for listening, not measuring" opinion appearing yet again.

There are listening tests and measurements. Both can be applied and both are done in a controlled and referenced manner to enable repeatability and confidence in the outcomes.

You have not validated your hearing capabilities and methods. So just hearsay to us.

You are flogging a dead horse on this forum, mate.

 

[preload]

I started modifying amps, preamps, CD players, DACs, tuners, and speaker crossovers since around 1985, after hearing the improvement made to my Hafler DH-500 by Musical Concepts.

I do own an oscilloscope, capacitor, and multimeters, and had access to a electronic bridge for testing capacitor DA and ESR which I used to choose capacitor replacement candidates. My ears are the final arbiter of what is better, which should make sense given audio gear is for listening, not measuring.

So if you were to acknowledge that dacs, amps, and capacitors pretty much sound the same, it would also imply that all of your mods and claims of improvements over the past 35 yrs were actually meaningless. Basic psychology tells me that even if you were to undergo a blind listening test where you could not differentiate between two devices more reliably than random guessing, you still wouldn't accept the obvious conclusion. The psychological phenomenon I'm describing is... [let's see who yells it out first]

 

[BDWoody]

audio gear is for listening, not measuring.

 

[BDWoody]

Wow, that was tedious reading.

It's almost like you can't help yourself.

Are you sure you're in the right place? What's tedious is your refusal to back up anything you are saying with anything that isn't more blah blah blah.

So many words... Yet not one controlled test.

So much ignorance, combined with a general lack of self awareness has become tedious indeed.

 

[StefaanE]

My ears are the final arbiter of what is better, which should make sense given audio gear is for listening, not measuring.

Your ears are indeed the final arbiter of what sounds better for you, but it is presumptuous to insist your experience is universal and trumps the experience and knowledge of others.

 

[StefaanE]

So much ignorance, combined with a general lack of self awareness has become tedious indeed

The problem with the world is that the stupid are cocksure, while the intelligent are full of doubt. — Bertrand Russell