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

[Holdt]

For that to happen it needs to be either a long cable or a thin lampcord when just a few meter long.

Mostly correct. I have a sheet where you can see the difference between cable gauges and length. It does make a difference.

 

[solderdude]

Of course cable resistance matters for DF and this is very measurable.
How much it matters also depends on the output R of the amplifier, the load impedance as well (and how much it varies).
DF would have to be worse than 10 to really make an audible difference though.

 

[Julf]

Before and after listening :

Sonos : could be detected in the bass area
Oppo sonica : detected , but measured very well
Benchmark DAC2 : could not be detected
Yamaha wxc50 used as dac without preamp : could not be detected.

This is just 4 of many examples of tested dacs that LTS has made.

Any possibility of a description of how the test was conducted and what the test setup was?

 

[Holdt]

Of course cable resistance matters for DF and this is very measurable.
How much it matters also depends on the output R of the amplifier, the load impedance as well (and how much it varies).
DF would have to be worse than 10 to really make an audible difference though.

Yes, DF being a product of output impedance and load impedance (cables included). Worsens with low impedance loads. My calculations with an amplifier with DF=10 and a 4-2 ohm load, 13 ft 14 AWG cable returns an attenuation of max. 3.12 dB. 18 AWG returns 3.42 dB error.

DF = 160 returns an error of 0.9 dB (18 AWG)
DF = 80 returns an 1.1 dB error (18 AWG)

 

[solderdude]

The only (speaker) amplifiers that have such a poor DF are some tube amplifiers or 'specials' and in such case that poor output R is part of the 'charm' of the amp.
Those amps usually are not recommended for speakers dipping to 2 ohm in the bass area anyway.
Combine that with a wild varying speaker impedance and long or thin cables and yes it will be audible.

In practice most amps are above DF50 and people using speakers that dip that low use short and thick cables anway. Certainly when they are enthusiasts.

But... this thread is about DAC sound signatures and has no relation to speaker cables so perhaps discuss cable resistance in one of the many cable threads.

 

[Sokel]

Is it possible that the differences (if existed) occurs in different level settings?
We all can see that the SINAD vs Level measurements varies wildly amongst different dacs.
And if we consider the rapid drop of SINAD because of level/music gentre (and their need for different level settings)/placement/etc, and that sometimes level matching can favor one dac against another it's not surprising if differences occur sometimes.
It's a little chaotic anyway.

EDIT:Same with SINAD against freq.

 

[tonycollinet]

Yes, DF being a product of output impedance and load impedance (cables included). Worsens with low impedance loads. My calculations with an amplifier with DF=10 and a 4-2 ohm load, 13 ft 14 AWG cable returns an attenuation of max. 3.12 dB. 18 AWG returns 3.42 dB error.

DF = 160 returns an error of 0.9 dB (18 AWG)
DF = 80 returns an 1.1 dB error (18 AWG)

In your first example output impedance (amp plus cable) is dominated by the amplifier.

In your second example, it is dominated by the cable - but only because you've changed your gauge from a reasonable 14awg to a less useful 18awg. In other words - thin lamp cord.

The only important rating of speaker cables is resistance - as long as you select low enough, then cables don't matter. I don't use smaller than 13, my current cables are 11 (2.5mmsq and 4mmsq)

 

[DanielT]

Yes when I've blind tested myself dacs with non standard filters are mildly detectable. That appears to be simply due to FR. Nothing exotic.

I actually don't like that DACs now offer these filters. I know it is offered because it is easy and looks like a feature to differentiate one product from another. I do have recording interfaces that have minimum phase filters, but they do that for lower latency. They also aren't exceptionally slow roll off filters like some that are available.

Of course cable resistance matters for DF and this is very measurable.
How much it matters also depends on the output R of the amplifier, the load impedance as well (and how much it varies).
DF would have to be worse than 10 to really make an audible difference though.

In your first example output impedance (amp plus cable) is dominated by the amplifier.

In your second example, it is dominated by the cable - but only because you've changed your gauge from a reasonable 14awg to a less useful 18awg. In other words - thin lamp cord.

The only rating of speaker cables is resistance - as long as you select low enough, then cables don't matter. I don't use smaller than 13, my current cables are 11 (2.5mmsq and 4mmsq)

Speaking of blind testing. Like you Blumlein 88, you can test that with different filter settings in your DAC, if that functionality in the DAC is there.

Easier and cheaper blind test. Anyone can get a thin lamp cord cheaply, use it as a speaker cable and blind test.If you have balance control on the amplifier, you can have your usual speaker cable connected to one speaker and thin lamp cord to the other speaker.Then ask if you can detect differences between the different channels, and yes I am aware that the placement of the speakers plays a role (when listening to one or the other via the balance control), but you can switch the cables between the speakers a number of times and then see if you can identify which cable is which. But ok, maybe it was too much trouble, uncertainty about the outcome if you do that, maybe it's best to just change the cable set for both speakers and carry out a blind test.
Obviously hidden cable so the listener cannot see which cable goes to which speaker.

OT:
In my opinion, a more fun blind test would be if one person moves (or not) the position of the speakers and then the other listening test person, blindfolded, gets to say if he hears any differences. Sooner or later, depending on how much the speakers are moved and angled, you will hear differences. Real differences, not just imagined.

Then you might also disconnect your biases, preconceived notions about which speaker placement gives the best sound and arrive at a placement that you hadn't thought of before if you do such a blind test.
...then you can move the furniture around and blind test ...but that is perhaps overkill.

 

[Tangband]

Any possibility of a description of how the test was conducted and what the test setup was?

Google translate is your friend .

FE-lyssning – Wikipedia

sv.wikipedia.org

 

[Holdt]

The only (speaker) amplifiers that have such a poor DF are some tube amplifiers or 'specials' and in such case that poor output R is part of the 'charm' of the amp.
Those amps usually are not recommended for speakers dipping to 2 ohm in the bass area anyway.
Combine that with a wild varying speaker impedance and long or thin cables and yes it will be audible.

In practice most amps are above DF50 and people using speakers that dip that low use short and thick cables anway. Certainly when they are enthusiasts.

But... this thread is about DAC sound signatures and has no relation to speaker cables so perhaps discuss cable resistance in one of the many cable threads.

Well I questioned your claim about the need for an amplifier with a low damping factor of 10 for it to be audible. If you use higher than 14 AWG you get close to 1 dB error when using an amplifier with a DF <100 connected to a 4 ohm load.
1 dB is audible.
Many solid state amplifiers, especially vintage ones, have relative low DF.

But I won't discuss this anymore in this thread. Neither the definition of "lamp cord".

 

[solderdude]

Whether or not that error is audible or consequential depends on the impedance differences of the speaker. When that is fairly flat it is only an overall level difference and inconsequential.
Besides it has nothing to do with DACs.

 

[ahofer]

Google translate is your friend .

FE-lyssning – Wikipedia

sv.wikipedia.org

View attachment 241996

Is that a diagram of how Mastodon works?

 

[SIY]

Is that a diagram of how Mastodon works?

It certainly avoids the main issue of controls.

 

[Julf]

Google translate is your friend.

Thanks, but no need for Google Translate - I have no problem reading Swedish. That picture doesn't help us much. Sure, it is a standard before/after switching setup, but it doesn't tell us anything about how levels were matched, and if the listening was single or double blind, or what statistical controls were used.

 

[fpitas]

But... this thread is about DAC sound signatures and has no relation to speaker cables so perhaps discuss cable resistance in one of the many cable threads.

Yeah. Then maybe we can understand why someone would run tiny wires to a speaker they care about

 

[tonycollinet]

Thanks, but no need for Google Translate - I have no problem reading Swedish. That picture doesn't help us much. Sure, it is a standard before/after switching setup, but it doesn't tell us anything about how levels were matched, and if the listening was single or double blind, or what statistical controls were used.

In other words we'd want the specific (and detailed) test descripition of the specific tests you are referencing. Not a generic description of a double blind test.

 

[Holdt]

In your first example output impedance (amp plus cable) is dominated by the amplifier.

In your second example, it is dominated by the cable - but only because you've changed your gauge from a reasonable 14awg to a less useful 18awg. In other words - thin lamp cord.

The only important rating of speaker cables is resistance - as long as you select low enough, then cables don't matter. I don't use smaller than 13, my current cables are 11 (2.5mmsq and 4mmsq)

Of course, but it matters.
DF = 160 returns an error of 0.5 dB (14 AWG)
DF = 80 returns an 0.7 dB error (14 AWG)
DF = 60 returns an 0.8 dB error (14 AWG)

Whether or not that error is audible or consequential depends on the impedance differences of the speaker. When that is fairly flat it is only an overall level difference and inconsequential.
Besides it has nothing to do with DACs.

It's audible compared to it not being there.

Which is easy to eliminate by having even length cables and going up in cable size and/or choosing and matching speaker and amplifier.

And most speakers have uneven impedance with peaks and troughs. I don't think I have ever seen a flat speaker impedance curve..?

It has nothing to do with DACs though.

 

[Chrispy]

Of course, but it matters.
DF = 160 returns an error of 0.5 dB (14 AWG)
DF = 80 returns an 0.7 dB error (14 AWG)
DF = 60 returns an 0.8 dB error (14 AWG)

It's audible compared to it not being there.

Which is easy to eliminate by having even length cables and going up in cable size and/or choosing and matching speaker and amplifier.

And most speakers have uneven impedance with peaks and troughs. I don't think I have ever seen a flat speaker impedance curve..?

It has nothing to do with DACs though.

You really need to start a cable thread with that kinda stuff

 

[Holdt]

You really need to start a cable thread with that kinda stuff

Just responding. I want to stop.

 

[Chrispy]

Just responding. I want to stop.

Uh huh