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

[100rounddrum]

Sure, if they are badly done (on purpose or not) it can cause audible effects.

Then why is the norm here that all DACs sound the same?

 

[mansr]

Go away. You're not funny.

 

[100rounddrum]

Go away. You're not funny.

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm genuinly curious, why do people here think that all DACs audibly sound the same, when there's measurable evidence that proves otherwise?

 

[Julf]

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm genuinly curious, why do people here think that all DACs audibly sound the same, when there's measurable evidence that proves otherwise?

We don't think *all* DACs sound the same - nice straw man. We do think competently designed DACs that haven't been "voiced" on purpose in a coloring way sound the same.

As to measurable evidence that they don't sound the same, I would love to see it... Remember, we can measure much more than we can hear.

 

[mansr]

As to measurable evidence that they don't sound the same, I would love to see it...

I have, to date, found three DACs with easily audible distortion, at least with the right test signals:

• A $5 USB-C dongle
• A $200 Steinberg interface
• Sony CDP-101, the original CD player

 

[BDWoody]

I'm not trying to be funny. I'm genuinly curious, why do people here think that all DACs audibly sound the same, when there's measurable evidence that proves otherwise?

There may be some but not a lot that I'm aware of...that's part of why we are here. It's more a common accusation from people who are either trolling or who haven't read more carefully.

 

[Snarfie]

Remind me, what are the measurement units for stoundstage and imaging again?

Atleast time alignment an in phase behaviour There it stops for me.

 

[Speedskater]

Speedskater said:
Transducers (headphones, loudspeaker & microphones) live under different rules than do electronic components. It's easy to make electronic components using different technologies, that are audibly identical. But to do the same with transducers is a big challenge.

So things like FIR filtering, noise shaping, jitter etc. are all irrelevant to the quality of DACs, according to this thread?

Talk about a non-sequitur.

 

[dfuller]

By acknowledging that plenty of less-than-great dacs do have an obvious sonic signature thanks to various distortion products.

Think about that uber-high end PS Audio thing that got tested here a couple years back - it's supposed to be this great super quality dac but it measures like crap.

 

[Tim Link]

I have had DACs with intermittent problems, some obvious, some more subtle. The first one was a Theta Cobalt, which would get crackles at times. The manual pointed this out and instructed to unplug it and re-plug it in with hand firmly on chassis, to clear static charge. Another is a Behringer DCX2496. It would also develop a crackling, sizzling sound. The cure was to disconnect and reconnect a ribbon cable inside the box. Fortunately that was a permanent fix. It also occasionally will implement a high Q cut at around 5k, a well known problem with no permanent solution. You have to turn it off and back on again, or re-set the digital stream to get it to correct itself. More recently, I heard a buzzing in my left tweeter. Very obvious when a flute played, or Link whistled for his horse in Breath of The Wild. After much trouble shooting I finally turned on the headphones and behold! The buzzing was still there. I had to re-set the digital stream multiple times, turning the source (an Ultramatch) and the DCX off and on again repeatedly to make it go away. It also caused the image to shift to the right. I don't hear the buzzing lately but I do perceive the image seeming to shift slightly to the right occasionally, making me suspect that something might be amiss, either with my ears or with the DACs in the DCX.

With all this I'm suggesting that there may be more subtle distortion issues that are intermittent with some DAC / digital source combinations. A good test on the bench doesn't mean it always works like that every single time you turn it on. I also have a cheap Denon receiver that mostly sounds very good to me, but on some days it seems to go flat and lifeless, and if I listen with my ear close to the tweeters and nothing playing, I hear some weird fizzling and whirring sounds when I perceive that lifelessness. Unfortunately I can't solve the problem by turning it on and off. I just have to wait for it to go away, which suggests it may be some kind of radio interference. I can also hear the fizzling through headphones when it's acting up, and it doesn't matter what the source is set to.

All just food for thought.

 

[Julf]

With all this I'm suggesting that there may be more subtle distortion issues that are intermittent with some DAC / digital source combinations.

Might, yes. If there are, they are easily measurable and verifiable.

 

[Tim Link]

Might, yes. If there are, they are easily measurable and verifiable.

Yes, easily measurable if you take a measurement when it's happening, as I have succeeded in measuring the 5k high q cut, not that it really needed to be measured as it's so easy to hear. I should play with the Denon and take some measurements when it's acting up vs when it's not. Besides the obvious noise, it should be interesting to see what else might be changing to give me the perception of it sounding dead and flat.
You can see though that a bench test of a piece of equipment might miss this sort of thing, even if it's measured several times on different days. It's like testing RAM for intermittent failures. It makes the RAM expensive because it takes a lot of testing.

 

[JustAnandaDourEyedDude]

Unsure if this is a good thread to post this item in. YouTube popped up a suggestion (among many) for me of a video uploaded one day ago by Steve Guttenberg Audiophiliac. The 19 min. long video is titled "A Frank Discussion About Accuracy, with Stereophile's Herb Reichert", and the caption embedded in the thumbnail image is "What's with all this talk about Accuracy?". I know Reichert recently began a new series of occasional articles in his regular Stereophile column, on the differences that he can identify in the sound quality effects of cables. I do not plan to watch the YT video in question. Instead, I think I'm going to take in this other YT video uploaded by a pretty young thing who will explain why she prefers dating older men. Not sure which of the two videos would put a bigger hole in your pocketbook, if you believed in them both.

 

[SIY]

Unsure if this is a good thread to post this item in. YouTube popped up a suggestion (among many) for me of a video uploaded one day ago by Steve Guttenberg Audiophiliac. The 19 min. long video is titled "A Frank Discussion About Accuracy, with Stereophile's Herb Reichert"...

The blind leading the lame.

 

[1roger]

Yes, you're much like a scientist from the dark ages. Because I cannot measure something in my lab is proof that it cannot exist.

best comment in this thread and it sums up the amateur enthusiast arrogance on here nicely

 

[SIY]

best comment in this thread and it sums up the amateur enthusiast arrogance on here nicely

Always hard to tell if this sort if thing is dishonest or just ignorant.

 

[1roger]

Always hard to tell if this sort if thing is dishonest or just ignorant.

`everyone` on here read measurements for their own purchasing needs and entertainment. its a great tool and very interesting! but to just throw blanket statements out there about individuals who state they can hear.. differences where there measurably should be `none` is going a bit overboard

 

[Julf]

`everyone` on here read measurements for their own purchasing needs and entertainment. its a great tool and very interesting! but to just throw blanket statements out there about individuals who state they are hear.. differences where there measurably should be `none` is going a bit overboard

No, it isn't. Remember the "Science" part in the forum name...

 

[SIY]

`everyone` on here read measurements for their own purchasing needs and entertainment. its a great tool and very interesting! but to just throw blanket statements out there about individuals who state they are hear.. differences where there measurably should be `none` is going a bit overboard

No. Extraordinary claims made with no evidence (e.g., properly controlled listening tests) are absolutely worthless (worse than worthless, really, since they will hook the gullible) and can be dismissed out of hand. Come back with evidence, and that's a different story. This, of course, never seems to happen, just more foot-stamping, handwaving, and the usual tired assortment of logical fallacies.

 

[BDWoody]

individuals who state they are hear.. differences where there measurably should be `none...

...should be encouraged to learn how to do proper controlled subjective testing so they don't continue to buy into fantasy world stuff, but can learn enough about the science so casually dismissed by those who are most exposed by it.