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

[egellings]

Maybe the more "powerful" op amp was misapplied and was acting up, spoiling the sound.

 

[DonR]

Maybe the more "powerful" op amp was misapplied and was acting up, spoiling the sound.

Could have been driven into oscillation. The stabilizing capacitor values would have been chosen for the original op-amp so it is possible. This is often one of the pitfalls of op-amp swapping.

 

[Julf]

Well I actually tested this specific op-amp next to a TI version and I found that the ti version did indeed sound better in complex high frequency audio scenarios.

Would love to hear about your test setup, as well as see your ABX logs.

 

[Jimster480]

Double-blind? Did you take measurements? NE5532 has a gain-bandwidth product of 10MHz so it is doubtful there is any benefit in hi-res. What do you mean by "too powerful"? Did it draw too much current?

No nothing was double blind or measured. Just me doing some research. I spent extensive time doing chip swaps and listening to complex parts of specific well recorded songs to listen for differences. Almost all of the listening was done with a Mrspeakers Aeon flow closed.
I tested with the O2 as well as the Topping A30 (for the op amp swaps).

Yes, I believe it was that it drew too much current or output too much current. I did this in 2018 so I don't remember exactly off the top of my head..

The O2 uses the NE5532 by default iirc. I actually started this testing after reading about op-amp rolling on headfire back in the day. I was doubtful of the differences especially after some very bold claims were made by other users who had purchased $50 to $100 special Boutique op amps.
So after doing some reading about op amp performance I determined that there should be no audible gain from these better op amps and that they likely will make things worse.
So I went on mouser and bought all the common op amps I saw in various designs. Then I acquired a couple Burson op amps (and a Burson amp that they sent me for test).
I determined through listening alone that the Burson op amps actually did make the sound harsher, fatiguing and sharp.
I also determined that the OPA2227 (at least I think it was this one) sounded slightly better in specific high frequency scenarios VS the NE5532 in my Topping A30 and in the Burson amp I had.
The NE5532 was the runner up and the 4562 was slightly worse all around (iirc).
The Burson ones however were obviously worse out of the box in the sense that high frequency sounds were "sharp", making it easy to pick out. I determined that the Burson op amps were making everything artificially louder which was introducing what I believed to be some type of "clipping" with high frequency even at lower volumes.
Then I wrote up a huge post about my findings and got a ton of flack for not "hearing the magic".

 

[DonR]

No nothing was double blind or measured. Just me doing some research. I spent extensive time doing chip swaps and listening to complex parts of specific well recorded songs to listen for differences. Almost all of the listening was done with a Mrspeakers Aeon flow closed.
I tested with the O2 as well as the Topping A30 (for the op amp swaps).

Yes, I believe it was that it drew too much current or output too much current. I did this in 2018 so I don't remember exactly off the top of my head..

The O2 uses the NE5532 by default iirc. I actually started this testing after reading about op-amp rolling on headfire back in the day. I was doubtful of the differences especially after some very bold claims were made by other users who had purchased $50 to $100 special Boutique op amps.
So after doing some reading about op amp performance I determined that there should be no audible gain from these better op amps and that they likely will make things worse.
So I went on mouser and bought all the common op amps I saw in various designs. Then I acquired a couple Burson op amps (and a Burson amp that they sent me for test).
I determined through listening alone that the Burson op amps actually did make the sound harsher, fatiguing and sharp.
I also determined that the OPA2227 (at least I think it was this one) sounded slightly better in specific high frequency scenarios VS the NE5532 in my Topping A30 and in the Burson amp I had.
The NE5532 was the runner up and the 4562 was slightly worse all around (iirc).
The Burson ones however were obviously worse out of the box in the sense that high frequency sounds were "sharp", making it easy to pick out. I determined that the Burson op amps were making everything artificially louder which was introducing what I believed to be some type of "clipping" with high frequency even at lower volumes.
Then I wrote up a huge post about my findings and got a ton of flack for not "hearing the magic".

A valiant effort on your part. Unfortunately, our cognitive biases and poor auditory memory work against us in these situations which is why we need rigorous controls in place to avoid them. As you found out, swapping an op-amp into a circuit it wasn't designed for has downsides which can become instantly apparent. I have both headphone amps and power amps with sockets for op amps and have casually tried various ones in place of the original and, purely on a subjective and uncontrolled way, always return to the original ones, often a 5532.or a JRE 841.

 

[Jimster480]

A valiant effort on your part. Unfortunately, our cognitive biases and poor auditory memory work against us in these situations which is why we need rigorous controls in place to avoid them. As you found out, swapping an op-amp into a circuit it wasn't designed for has downsides which can become instantly apparent. I have both headphone amps and power amps with sockets for op amps and have casually tried various ones in place of the original and, purely on a subjective and uncontrolled way, always return to the original ones, often a 5532.or a JRE 841.

Well I mean with a few switches set up to switch between the two different sets of op amps when doing a to B and looking for specific differences; it is possible to sometimes spot them.
Remember that I am trying to prove that the cheaper stuff is the same as the more expensive stuff. My bias is not to prove that what I wasted money on is somehow better.. So I set my expectations differently.


Well I agree that also the different off amps have different specs and as such they may not match the circuits and this can be part of the reason that I came up with the conclusion that I did. However I still proved the point that the more expensive Boutique op-amps did not magically improve the sound quality and if anything they only degraded it.
However in the case of the A30; I kept the slightly upgraded op amp in it as I found it to be a touch cleaner in my testing and went on to use it like that for a few more years.

 

[Killingbeans]

Remember that I am trying to prove that the cheaper stuff is the same as the more expensive stuff. My bias is not to prove that what I wasted money on is somehow better.. So I set my expectations differently.

If only the brain worked that way... but it doesn't.

 

[digicidal]

You are right, but there are still better products that do produce better cleaner sound. NE5532 is quite good for its price though, but there are worse Op Amps used in some products.

Just isn't that simple. Music contains many different sounds at many different frequencies at the same time. The reproduction of that sound can lead to things sounding different. These small differences can cause listener fatigue (especially with excess distortion often being exacerbated by higher frequency tones, which can come off as "sharp" or "harsh").
When listening to classical music (especially recently recorded tracks with proper mastering) such as some of the songs from Lang Lang, Itzhack Perlman or Yo Yo Ma (or even all 3 in the same song) it is much "easier" to pick out differences if there are any audible ones. The violin as well as a few higher notes of a proper Piano have a real knack for exposing weakness.
There are also some songs in the world of Trance & Progressive where the many beats at once can expose other flaws that are not commonly present. There are many songs with 400+BPM (or even 250BPM) which means more than beats per second (not including other background noises).
Over the years I have put together a playlist which has specific points in songs which can draw out certain flaws with setups, whether DAC or Amp or DAP or some other device (or even a headphone itself).
As I mentioned before; it doesn't mean that the flaw is always present or that it becomes annoying quickly (it depends) but there are sometimes differences that can be heard and sometimes these differences can cause listener fatigue or other annonyance which can disrupt concentration (I always typically listen to music while programming).

I think you are conflating issues with playback. The results you are describing are (in my experience) almost exclusively related to deficiencies in final-stage playback. There are indeed many transducers, networks, enclosures, amp limitations, etc. which can have difficulties with both timing and frequency (as well as distortion) - there are however, comparatively few present in the raw signal (at levels which are audible to humans at least). Note: by "amp limitations" I mean lack of power almost exclusively (although an egregious impedance mismatch could also be a factor) - since they are also significantly more resistant to signal issues than the speakers connected to them.

You seem to place nearly absolute significance on the OpAmps in the chain but very little on the most noisy and inaccurate aspects of the environment you use to experience that sound. If possible (i.e. if you have an ADC and mic), try taking level matched recordings of (1) direct from the analog output from the DAC and (2) at your listening position with an accurate microphone. Difference those two recordings in software and you have a general idea of how good/bad your speakers and room are at presenting the signal as delivered by the DAC. As a fun experiment, you could do the same with two DACs using different OpAmps. I guarantee the difference between those two will be an order of magnitude less than the difference in the first set. If not, then I want to buy whatever speakers you're using - because they blow everything I've ever seen out of the water (regardless of price)!

Alternately, if you have a friend who has a system you already find "much more resolving" than your own... have them do a ABX - swapping DACs only. If you can consistently identify which DAC is being used... then you are on the right path. On the other hand, if you can't - then it's not the DAC that has the problem.

 

[Jimster480]

I think you are conflating issues with playback. The results you are describing are (in my experience) almost exclusively related to deficiencies in final-stage playback. There are indeed many transducers, networks, enclosures, amp limitations, etc. which can have difficulties with both timing and frequency (as well as distortion) - there are however, comparatively few present in the raw signal (at levels which are audible to humans at least). Note: by "amp limitations" I mean lack of power almost exclusively (although an egregious impedance mismatch could also be a factor) - since they are also significantly more resistant to signal issues than the speakers connected to them.

You seem to place nearly absolute significance on the OpAmps in the chain but very little on the most noisy and inaccurate aspects of the environment you use to experience that sound. If possible (i.e. if you have an ADC and mic), try taking level matched recordings of (1) direct from the analog output from the DAC and (2) at your listening position with an accurate microphone. Difference those two recordings in software and you have a general idea of how good/bad your speakers and room are at presenting the signal as delivered by the DAC. As a fun experiment, you could do the same with two DACs using different OpAmps. I guarantee the difference between those two will be an order of magnitude less than the difference in the first set. If not, then I want to buy whatever speakers you're using - because they blow everything I've ever seen out of the water (regardless of price)!

Alternately, if you have a friend who has a system you already find "much more resolving" than your own... have them do a ABX - swapping DACs only. If you can consistently identify which DAC is being used... then you are on the right path. On the other hand, if you can't - then it's not the DAC that has the problem.

I don't use speakers. Almost all my testing was done with a mrSpeakers Aeon Flow Closed, however when I run into "issues" (such as the ones described) I also test with different headphones. Sometimes different Amps or DACs (depending on what I am trying to test) to see what I can reproduce or not.

I could reproduce the differences time and time again. Also when purely listening to different products before sending them to Amir for testing; I have been accurate every time in my viewpoints about how each device sounds. Each time the measurements agreed with my ears. So I see that as me doing something right, because I was able to tell 2 devices apart with quite similar performance as well. This didn't have to do with price or looks or personal bias either.
I am very objective about what I am looking at and don't have personal feelings towards audio equipment.

 

[Julf]

I don't use speakers. Almost all my testing was done with a mrSpeakers Aeon Flow Closed, however when I run into "issues" (such as the ones described) I also test with different headphones. Sometimes different Amps or DACs (depending on what I am trying to test) to see what I can reproduce or not.

I could reproduce the differences time and time again. Also when purely listening to different products before sending them to Amir for testing; I have been accurate every time in my viewpoints about how each device sounds. Each time the measurements agreed with my ears. So I see that as me doing something right, because I was able to tell 2 devices apart with quite similar performance as well. This didn't have to do with price or looks or personal bias either.
I am very objective about what I am looking at and don't have personal feelings towards audio equipment.

"Some people do not like double-blind tests, believing themselves to be immune to hidden biases. However, there is no evidence to prove that even the best of intentions enable a person to avoid subconsciously tilting his/her test responses in a preferred direction. (Perhaps a Vulcan could?)" - Richard Honeycutt

 

[Jimster480]

"Some people do not like double-blind tests, believing themselves to be immune to hidden biases. However, there is no evidence to prove that even the best of intentions enable a person to avoid subconsciously tilting his/her test responses in a preferred direction. (Perhaps a Vulcan could?)" - Richard Honeycutt

Just hard to do double blind tests without another person willing to spend tons of time with you.
Especially when differences are not "night and day" as some claim.
I often replay the same few second segments of songs back to back while flipping between both devices to determine a difference. Sometimes I think I hear a difference but then I go back and there is none.
Other times I think there is a difference but it is extremely tiny. Sometimes the difference goes away with the selection of a different filter on a DAC.

It was such a pain to tell the difference between Op Amps mostly that I actually bought a second Topping A30 to test with so I had one "vanilla" one and one "modded" one.
WIth the other amps I didn't have duplicates of the same amp so it wasn't just ABX.

This is why there isn't much ABX testing as it is extremely expensive and requires the time of multiple individuals.

 

[Julf]

This is why there isn't much ABX testing as it is extremely expensive and requires the time of multiple individuals.

Indeed. Maybe not expensive, but definitely requires a lot of time, effort and assistance.

 

[Jimster480]

Indeed. Maybe not expensive, but definitely requires a lot of time, effort and assistance.

Well it can be expensive depending on what you want to test. For example if you are testing 2 sets of OP Amps in a single piece of source gear then you need 2x of the same gear. Or testing different pads or filters for headphones.... you need 2 sets.
Also there are surprisingly not so many switches on the market which are affordable which are actually fully transparent without additional cross talk or distortion. Which is pretty crappy honestly.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Well it can be expensive depending on what you want to test. For example if you are testing 2 sets of OP Amps in a single piece of source gear then you need 2x of the same gear. Or testing different pads or filters for headphones.... you need 2 sets.
Also there are surprisingly not so many switches on the market which are affordable which are actually fully transparent without additional cross talk or distortion. Which is pretty crappy honestly.

Nobsound 3-IN-1-OUT XLR Audio Switch Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Nobsound MC-103 Pro 3-IN-1-OUT XLR Audio Switcher. The unit I have came with the brand Douk on it so that is what I used in my notations below. I suspect multiple companies put their name on it. I purchased it a few days ago from Amazon. The...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This $59 device will switch up to three devices at line level with no issues to cloud results.

They also make a slightly different variant which is just as good.

Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 3-IN/1-OUT Measurements (XLR Line Switch/Selector)

Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 3-IN/1-OUT XLR Measurements Hi folks, Here is a quick measurements write-up of the Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 XLR line selector. This is the three inputs/one output configuration, pretty much similar to the "Pro" version @amirm reviewed a while ago. It has been...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Julf]

Also there are surprisingly not so many switches on the market which are affordable which are actually fully transparent without additional cross talk or distortion. Which is pretty crappy honestly.

I once again miss Arny Krueger.

 

[Jimster480]

Nobsound 3-IN-1-OUT XLR Audio Switch Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Nobsound MC-103 Pro 3-IN-1-OUT XLR Audio Switcher. The unit I have came with the brand Douk on it so that is what I used in my notations below. I suspect multiple companies put their name on it. I purchased it a few days ago from Amazon. The...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This $59 device will switch up to three devices at line level with no issues to cloud results.

They also make a slightly different variant which is just as good.

Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 3-IN/1-OUT Measurements (XLR Line Switch/Selector)

Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 3-IN/1-OUT XLR Measurements Hi folks, Here is a quick measurements write-up of the Nobsound Little Bear Mc103 XLR line selector. This is the three inputs/one output configuration, pretty much similar to the "Pro" version @amirm reviewed a while ago. It has been...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Yep but that came out in 2020 AFAIK and is also only in balanced
It wasn't out when I was doing the testing above. I had to get (actually borrowed) a switch from someone else which I believe was like $250 or something at the time.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yep but that came out in 2020 AFAIK and is also only in balanced
It wasn't out when I was doing the testing above. I had to get (actually borrowed) a switch from someone else which I believe was like $250 or something at the time.

They make a version in rca too. Don't know much about it.

Also possible to make your own for less than $50 using Ck silver contact switches.

 

[Taschenrechner]

There is no real difference that matters. Here are the things that a good DAC, amp or DAC/amp can do that can be perceived by a human ear: remove background noise, perfect channel balance at lowest volume. An exact readout of the output level via display can be very handy. I never had any issues with audible distortion with a good amp/DAC. Even using EQ.

Switching between devices I can not hear any difference other than elevated noise floor. Let's not forget that noise floor is limited by ears picking up noise from the environment and how well you can isolate yourself from that noise and if you have something like ear damage / tinnitus you can tell that -140dB SINAD goodbye.

Once you do headphone EQ to account for any ear / transducer deficiencies in FR you notice really how bogus most of the audio community is. Removing any peaks and valleys caused by how your ear is matched to your headphone clears up so much distortion that any notion of "that DAC sounds better than that DAC" sounds absolutely insane.

It's 100% placebo. Since I noticed that, there is no more relevant differences between cables, DACs, and amps (unless they are really bad in design).

Transducer and how well you adjusted FR to your individual hearing dictates most of the quality at the end of the chain.

 

[TSX]

Hi

Is this DAC overpriced?

IFI AUDIO ZEN ONE SIGNATURE DAC Burr Brown XMOS Bluetooth 5.0 32bit 384kHz DSD256 MQA - Audiophonics

The iFi Audio Zen One Signature uses the DAC stage of the Zen DAC V2, while adding SPDIF inputs (optical and coaxial) to complement the USB port, as well as the Bluetooth technology of the Zen Blue V2.

www.audiophonics.fr

The name just rolls of your tongue Can’t really find any measurements or serious reviews.

Thanks

 

[oceansize]

Hi

Is this DAC overpriced?

IFI AUDIO ZEN ONE SIGNATURE DAC Burr Brown XMOS Bluetooth 5.0 32bit 384kHz DSD256 MQA - Audiophonics

The iFi Audio Zen One Signature uses the DAC stage of the Zen DAC V2, while adding SPDIF inputs (optical and coaxial) to complement the USB port, as well as the Bluetooth technology of the Zen Blue V2.

www.audiophonics.fr

The name just rolls of your tongue Can’t really find any measurements or serious reviews.

Thanks

Subjective review at avforums, they seem happy with it.