Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?

[witchdoctor]

I am, but I don't really post 'as a moderator' unless I'm dealing with specific issues, then my words will be in red. Otherwise, I'm just another member.

I'm not the hall monitor... I'm more like the bouncer for when things are about to turn into a bar fight.

Let's say someone walks into a math convention and insists that in his world, 2+2=5, because it just does. No cool new derivation that turns algebra on its head...just claims it as unassailable. How would you 'deal' with that. We are looking to educate people to where they are immune to a lot of nonsense. In order to get there, one has to see that they were, in fact, wrong (through no fault of their own), in some cases.

Also, plenty just read but don't post, so whether or not the 'Poster In Error' ever recognizes it, others without the emotional and financial investment certainly will.

Influence is a great topic and also a scientific one. If the guy says 2+2=5 at a math convention I don't see a bunch of math PhD's trying to convince him. I think they go back to their coffee and their calculators and just ignore the guy, why bother?? Now if the topic is about why is DAC A better then DAC B and I want to influence a poster who wants to learn great.

 

[Julf]

Influence is a great topic and also a scientific one. If the guy says 2+2=5 at a math convention I don't see a bunch of math PhD's trying to convince him.

True. The example is too extreme. What about... an audio forum where someone claims, let's say, that a digital signal with a 44 kHz sample rate can't reproduce timing differences shorter than 22 μs (one sample interval)?

 

[witchdoctor]

True. The example is too extreme. What about... an audio forum where someone claims, let's say, that a digital signal with a 44 kHz sample rate can't reproduce timing differences shorter than 22 μs (one sample interval)?

Hmmm, what about an audio forum where I prefer MQA and you prefer DSD neither one of us can be convinced by the competing formats data? How do you measure customer satisfaction and why is it important for a format to thrive?

 

[BDWoody]

Now if the topic is about why is DAC A better then DAC B and I want to influence a poster who wants to learn great.

The ones who want to learn are easy.

What do you do with the ones who don't, but insist on showing up on every other thread claiming that actual, testable, verifiable accepted science should be minimized, because alpha waves.

Honestly, I don't know of a group of more patient people than many of our incredibly high caliber posters when it comes to actually helping anyone understand almost any of this, up to post-doc levels...

If someone wants to come in and aggressively push ignorance, they can expect to be aggressively pushed back.

Most new people come in to learn, and are no trouble to anyone. Some come in to teach and tell us all how deaf/poor/lame 'we' are. That doesn't often go well.

 

[BDWoody]

Hmmm, what about an audio forum where I prefer MQA and you prefer DSD neither one of us can be convinced by the competing formats data? How do you measure customer satisfaction and why is it important for a format to thrive?

I'd ask whoever believes that to demonstrate that there is an actual preference. Then neither of you would.

Edit:. Under controlled testing conditions, of course.

 

[PenguinMusic]

Balanced headphone outputs are a silly (and useless) audiophile fad, but vendors love it because it gets people to "upgrade".

Oh... I thought it delivered more power and in a sometimes muche "cleaner way" beacuse of total channel separation.
I thought that measurements more or less confirms that.
But if that is not the case, I'll begin to look where the Schiit can be found in Europe/France
Looks good... And as they all more or less sound the same, in case the x7s doesn't suit me, I'll already know where to get a replacement

 

[PenguinMusic]

Hmmm, what about an audio forum where I prefer MQA and you prefer DSD neither one of us can be convinced by the competing formats data? How do you measure customer satisfaction and why is it important for a format to thrive?

What's MQA ?

A competitor to .flac and DSD ?

Never really understood what that is...
But I understand that there is a lot of fuss about it : some swear it is the way to go (even Amir says so I think) ; other beg you to stay away from it.

Regards.

 

[PenguinMusic]

And to buy new cables.

Hi,

Ah... yes. Forgot I'd have to get new cables for the PM-1 if I go into Balanced.
Maybe I'd better not do so then...

 

[Julf]

Oh... I thought it delivered more power and in a sometimes muche "cleaner way" beacuse of total channel separation.

Channel separation tends to be irrelevant with modern gear. You often do get a "benefit" of higher output voltage / more power by using a complementary ("balanced") output stage, but you could just have designed a single-ended/unbalanced stage to give the higher output voltage in the first place.

 

[Julf]

What's MQA ?

A competitor to .flac and DSD ?

Never really understood what that is...

It is a lossy encoding that supposedly saves bandwidth and storage space (so geared towards streaming services), but actually doesn't. It is (or was) being pushed because vendors can sell you new gear, but above all because record companies can sell you the same old stuff one more time, and it has provisions for intellectual property protection (anti-copying measures).

 

[Julf]

Hmmm, what about an audio forum where I prefer MQA and you prefer DSD neither one of us can be convinced by the competing formats data? How do you measure customer satisfaction and why is it important for a format to thrive?

If it was expressed purely as a preference, no issue. But if it comes with claims like "MQA is lossless", "MQA sounds much better", "MQA saves bandwidth", "DSD is more analog, and has 50 times the resolution of CD because the sample rate is 2000 kHz instead of just 44.1 kHz", would you let it go?

 

[PenguinMusic]

It is a lossy encoding that supposedly saves bandwidth and storage space (so geared towards streaming services), but actually doesn't. It is (or was) being pushed because vendors can sell you new gear, but above all because record companies can sell you the same old stuff one more time, and it has provisions for intellectual property protection (anti-copying measures).

Hi,

OK. No need for that.

I must confess one terrible thing :-(
I think I am not even able to tell the difference between 16/44 and 24/96 :-(
I am not even sure to be able to tell the difference between 320kbps .mp3 and 16/44 today.

Besides, I have something like 45TB of storage in my computer and about 20TB of free space.
No need to save space I even encode my /flacs in compression Level 3. Not more. Sorry...

 

[Julf]

I think I am not even able to tell the difference between 16/44 and 24/96 :-(

Nobody can.

I am not even sure to be able to tell the difference between 320kbps .mp3 and 16/44 today.

Most people can't, except with a few pathological tracks.

No need to save space I even encode my /flacs in compression Level 3. Not more. Sorry...

Changing compression level in flac has no effect on the sound - it is the same audio data in any case. It only affects disk space and CPU usage.

 

[BDWoody]

I think I am not even able to tell the difference between 16/44 and 24/96

I believe our humble host, who is likely one of the most highly trained listeners around, was able to differentiate between them under controlled conditions, using a recording of jangling keys. But even then not at 100%.

Don't feel too bad...I am quite certain there are very very few who would have a chance at it.

 

[Julf]

I believe our humble host, who is likely one of the most highly trained listeners around, was able to differentiate between them under controlled conditions, using a recording of jangling keys. But even then not at 100%.

Ah, the controversial jangling keys. Wasn't there some recording glitch in that track?

 

[Feanor]

I believe our humble host, who is likely one of the most highly trained listeners around, was able to differentiate between them under controlled conditions, using a recording of jangling keys. But even then not at 100%.

Don't feel too bad...I am quite certain there are very very few who would have a chance at it.

Although I maintain that I can often hear differences among DACs, amps, etc., I'll admit that I can't tell the difference between 16/44.1 and higher resolutions.

Certainly the quality of the recording and mastering is far more important than the digital resolution.

 

[threni]

"Don't hate me for loving the music of Dimitri Shostakovich"

If you really loved it you'd spell his name right!

 

[BDWoody]

Ah, the controversial jangling keys. Wasn't there some recording glitch in that track?

I don't know... @amirm ?
Any comments on that?

Any interest in a repeat performance? (I think I know the answer...)

 

[PenguinMusic]

Hi,

Ouch... I may get flamed for this.
But I'll take my chance

I had 4 versions of the exact same recording (Beethoven's 5th and 7th, the latter being my favourite) conducted by Carlos KLEIBER in .mp3, CD, DSD and 24/96 downloaded from Qobuz.

In blind test, where the only thing changed was the file format played, I could tell which was which 100%.
That was like 10 or 12 years ago.

But I admit that the only thing changed was the file format. The volume was not touched. So maybe that was because one of the files played "louder" or "quieter" thant the others...

But could recognize it for sure. 10/15 times in a row. And even a like 3/4 days interval. Sound was changed by a friend... Blind.

Today, I am almost certain that I'd fail to do it again...
Heck, I'm even unable to tell the real difference between several headphones.
Until i Heard the Oppo PM-1. Then I knew the quest for THE headphone that suits me was over.
And when I heard it, I did not wanted to like it as I did not have the money to buy it.
So I listened to it thinking : "It will sound like the other 4/5 headphones I have so I will give it back".
After 3 minutes, it was clear that this would stay... Meantime, all other headphones have been sold PM-3, B&W P7 Wireless, Sennheiser HD700... The only one that has not been sold (no one seems to be interested) is the AudioQuest Nighthawk... Which is to me a really plesant headphone !

But that is of course purely personal

 

[PenguinMusic]

If you really loved it you'd spell his name right!

Man, I had to find out where he made a mistake... I looked in Shostakovich...
But it was in DImitri instead of Dmitri