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

[DSJR]

We know the 'why' in that case, so not the same thing.

Appreciate your point though and it's a good one.

My old preamp 'features' a 'Panorama' control which progressively narrows the 'soundstage' before widening it in reverse. Absolutely no use for me via speakers (centre position is mono which helps sometimes), but when I had a headphone amp linked to it, I did feel it helped to narrow the soundfield as perceived -

(A CD [finally] of the original 1976 release of 'In The Region of The Summer Stars' by The Enid had a very 'wide' L-R stereo via headphones and I found the music far more comfortable with a little cross-feed applied via this control - must dig this disc out again for a spin )

 

[VientoB]

Cambridge Audio claim that a majority of staff ( presumably statistically significant ) could tell the difference in a blind test between their new and a previous model of streamer.

Chinny reckon.

 

[ClicketEKlack]

The thing is, this mostly financial deception will continue when the likes of Rob Watts do mini-lectures espousing his marketing spiel regarding audibility of -300dB and so on (and noise floor modulation which I thought was a solved issue these days) and when the mostly 'my age' listeners are all mopping it up and nodding sagely as happened in one of his presentations some years back that I attended...

I did have the opportunity to plug my Focal Utopias directly into a Chord DAVE at a high-end store. I was expecting fireworks, and I heard a sound that was in no way better than the Shanling DAP I brought along with me. So Rob Watts's theories have always had a whiff of snake oil to them.

 

[DSJR]

I did have the opportunity to plug my Focal Utopias directly into a Chord DAVE at a high-end store. I was expecting fireworks, and I heard a sound that was in no way better than the Shanling DAP I brought along with me. So Rob Watts's theories have always had a whiff of snake oil to them.

They need to tell a story and in fairness, Chord's dacs generally perform very well (the Dave is quite old now, but if it's still selling, why mess with it (I can see that pov as most owners of such won't know ASR exists, let alone accept it's perhaps dated tech performance now).

My local dealer 'salon' was showing off the new six grand Chord preamp in one of their 'UK Sitting Room Size' side dem rooms. The thing does look cool I have to say in black livery (with orange I think, illumination I remember). The full system had Dave, M-Scaler, one of their power amps and passive (spit) ATC 50s. The sound was awful frankly and I felt for the speakers, which can do so much better than this (the passive crossovers don't hobble them *that* much I know). All this supposed extra '3-D' the M-Scaler is subjectively reported to add, was totally missing. I stayed a minute or two in that room and scuttled off, never to return. That rig was what, thirty to forty grand all-in? I'd heard the Dynaudio Focus 50 wireless actives (£8600 or so the pair) sounding amazing in that room (no idea currently what protocols or dac system these speakers use), so I can't blame the room in this instance.

Anyway, back to topic... I'm happy if I can play a variety of albums and hear differences in the production and soundstage perspectives as created and know that in my case, the now middle-aged speakers ultimately limit this here, not so much the digital source or amp system.

 

[Dogill]

It's lucky for the western hifi industry that audiophiles prefer more expensive equipment otherwise they would also have to ask for protective tariffs on imports from China

 

[JSmith]

there is a cheap piece of hardware that he can answer his original question with:
Douk Audio DAC-Q11--The first USB DAC with Switchable ESS9038Q2M and AK4493

Unfortunately, probably not as Douk Audio have set different output levels for each... on purpose.


JSmith

 

[Seta Seta Pop]

Oh! 492 pages since Oct, 4, 2019 talking about this!
It is time to give a new point of view. DACs are a lie. They are not really necessary. They are used to keep us under control.

 

[JSmith]

It is time to give a new point of view. DACs are a lie. They are not really necessary. They are used to keep us under control.

The control is even more severe when one has a DAC and a 5G tower nearby... I hear bleach blocks the control signal though.


JSmith

 

[Bernard23]

Oh! 492 pages since Oct, 4, 2019 talking about this!
It is time to give a new point of view. DACs are a lie. They are not really necessary. They are used to keep us under control.

Lol

I'm presuming 492 pages and still limited consensus on the answer?

 

[solderdude]

Recap:

1. There are people that claim/say they can (clearly) hear differences and have explanations for it.
2. Many people hear differences in sighted and usually not level matched comparisons.
3. There most certainly can be audible differences between DACs, which are then also quite measurable b.t.w.
4. Not a single DAC measures the same as the next one so is reason enough to assume they thus sound different.
5. There are many DACs that cannot be told apart in a properly conducted, statistically valid blind test
6. SINAD says nothing about sound quality but can show technical performance at 1kHz at or near max. output voltage.

In the end there will always be audible differences being heard in DACs by a lot of people. It is unclear whether or not they are real (verifiable under controlled tests) or not because the people stating they hear differences can't/won't prove it as they already have proven it to themselves many, many times over so they don't even need to test in a different way.

 

[Bernard23]

Recap:

1. There are people that claim/say they can (clearly) hear differences and have explanations for it.
2. Many people hear differences in sighted and usually not level matched comparisons.
3. There most certainly can be audible differences between DACs, which are then also quite measurable b.t.w.
4. Not a single DAC measures the same as the next one so is reason enough to assume they thus sound different.
5. There are many DACs that cannot be told apart in a properly conducted, statistically valid blind test
6. SINAD says nothing about sound quality but can show technical performance at 1kHz at or near max. output voltage.

In the end there will always be audible differences being heard in DACs. It is unclear whether or not they are real (verifiable under controlled tests) or not because the people stating they hear differences can't/won't prove it.
Also as they already have proven it to themselves many, many times they don't even need to test in a more scientific way.

Thank you for a most excellent summary.
I can further conclude that I've either got very ordinary ears, or/and or some form of "reverse placebo" .

 

[VientoB]

Recap:

1. There are people that claim/say they can (clearly) hear differences and have explanations for it.
2. Many people hear differences in sighted and usually not level matched comparisons.
3. There most certainly can be audible differences between DACs, which are then also quite measurable b.t.w.
4. Not a single DAC measures the same as the next one so is reason enough to assume they thus sound different.
5. There are many DACs that cannot be told apart in a properly conducted, statistically valid blind test
6. SINAD says nothing about sound quality but can show technical performance at 1kHz at or near max. output voltage.

In the end there will always be audible differences being heard in DACs by a lot of people. It is unclear whether or not they are real (verifiable under controlled tests) or not because the people stating they hear differences can't/won't prove it as they already have proven it to themselves many, many times over so they don't even need to test in a different way.

Or so they think.

 

[Barbar]

I specifically registered on the forum because I want to write in this topic because I have a strong argument in favor of people who hear the difference in the sound of different operational amplifiers.
I think this may affect the attitude of some people towards other dimensions of sound.

So, read about the "Mary's Room" experiment — this is my main argument.

This is a thought experiment, the essence of which is as follows:
Imagine a researcher of color, Maria. Maria has studied the neurophysiology of color all her life, but all the time she was in a black-and-white room, where absolutely everything is black and white, even her monitor is black and white and, let's imagine that she herself is also colorless. At the same time, Maria has studied color so well that she knows all the information about color that can be obtained. She knows the wavelengths of all colors, knows which neurons transmit the signal from the retina to the brain and what is happening at this time in the brain itself. She sees all the graphs of color measurements, she has all the data about each color, but she has never seen the colors themselves.
What happens if we let Maria out of her black and white room into the real world, where there are many different colors, will she learn something new, will she get a new experience about color?

My answer is definitely yes.

This experiment shows that even with the fullness of the measured information, graphs and figures, real experience can provide additional information that graphs and figures will not show.

By analogy, I think the same situation happens with sound – even the most accurate measurements of frequency response, etc. do not show the real picture.

In addition, there is a second strong argument already from the field of biology:
Any professional biologist and/or doctor specializing in hearing will confirm to you that people not only hear different frequency ranges, but they hear and perceive the frequencies themselves in different ways.
As you know, we have a snail responsible for the perception of frequencies and in this snail we may have a different number of receptors, for example (conditionally) I may have 100 receptors for the perception of 90Hz, and you have 300 receptors and you will perceive this frequency completely differently than me. This is verifiable and has been proven more than once.
Just as people with a large number of taste and olfactory receptors feel the taste of food thinner and richer.

Thus, I believe that we perceive sound in different ways and some seemingly insignificant sound nuances may be very noticeable to certain people (and for other people, accordingly, other sound nuances will be noticeable).


In conclusion, I want to say that for a long time I did not believe in different OP sounds, but I clearly heard different sound of amplifiers and DAC's, I know that they really have different frequency response.
Recently, I replaced my Yamaha AX-10 with Aiyima A07 and began to read this forum, the opinions of different users, it turned out that the manufacturer Aiyima recommends changing the OP NE5532 to LM4562 in them (they even have video instructions on how to do this on their channel).
I decided to try it.
For me, the difference between NE5532 and LM4562 turned out to be very noticeable.
NE5532 - sounds more open, the midrange is brighter, the vocals sound closer.
LM4562 - gives more low frequencies, the bass guitars sound stunningly natural, much more details are heard, the sound becomes elastic, but the vocals move a little into the background.
For several days I conducted tests by changing the chips in my amplifier and DAC's – I heard this difference every time, including on blind tests.
My wife also hears this difference.
And now the problem for me is that I really like the naturalness of the bass and the overall detail of the LM4562, but its vocals sound a little unnatural – muffled. Therefore, I returned the NE5532 first, the vocals sound acceptable in it, but everything else is noticeably worse than the LM4562. As a result, both chips do not suit me (vocals are very important to me), I ordered several more different popular OP, I will listen to them and draw conclusions myself. Now I have returned the LM4562 and in general I like their sound more, however, every time on my favorite vocal parts or even on regular podcasts I hear this muffled voice – it makes me a little uncomfortable and I really wait for the new chips to come (I'm even thinking about connecting a tone corrector).

 

[Bernard23]

It's been proven multiple times that our sensory system has limits of detection that are higher than physical measurements.
It's been proven multiple times that our sensory systems are highly inconsistent as measurement devices.

There's so much evidence to support this it's pointless referencing anything, but it's easy enough to prove even to yourself at home with some careful planning and execution of the experiment. Had you presented this as the conclusion of a blind ABx trial then there would be some merit, otherwise scientifically it has little relevance.

 

[Mnyb]

Another one to the ignore list....

 

[Mnyb]

It's been proven multiple times that our sensory system has limits of detection that are higher than physical measurements.
It's been proven multiple times that our sensory systems are highly inconsistent as measurement devices.

There's so much evidence to support this it's pointless referencing anything, but it's easy enough to prove even to yourself at home with some careful planning and execution of the experiment. Had you presented this as the conclusion of a blind ABx trial then there would be some merit, otherwise scientifically it has little relevance.

its also proven countless times that by fiddling with circuits and haphazardly change components you can indeed make them sound different but not for the reasons you might think it is .

lack of rigorous controlls makes for untestable claims . its not even wrong as its not information at all , just anecdotes .

 

[VientoB]

The Mary's room experiment (theoretical) is not relevant. If she knows everything about colour then she knows what to expect and her experience outside of her room will validate that.

None of what you have said relates to the fact if two things measure identically they will sound identica.

 

[JSmith]

My wife also hears this difference.

From the kitchen too I bet...


JSmith

 

[Blumlein 88]

I specifically registered on the forum because I want to write in this topic because I have a strong argument in favor of people who hear the difference in the sound of different operational amplifiers.
I think this may affect the attitude of some people towards other dimensions of sound.

So, read about the "Mary's Room" experiment — this is my main argument.

This is a thought experiment, the essence of which is as follows:
Imagine a researcher of color, Maria. Maria has studied the neurophysiology of color all her life, but all the time she was in a black-and-white room, where absolutely everything is black and white, even her monitor is black and white and, let's imagine that she herself is also colorless. At the same time, Maria has studied color so well that she knows all the information about color that can be obtained. She knows the wavelengths of all colors, knows which neurons transmit the signal from the retina to the brain and what is happening at this time in the brain itself. She sees all the graphs of color measurements, she has all the data about each color, but she has never seen the colors themselves.
What happens if we let Maria out of her black and white room into the real world, where there are many different colors, will she learn something new, will she get a new experience about color?

My answer is definitely yes.

This experiment shows that even with the fullness of the measured information, graphs and figures, real experience can provide additional information that graphs and figures will not show.

By analogy, I think the same situation happens with sound – even the most accurate measurements of frequency response, etc. do not show the real picture.

In addition, there is a second strong argument already from the field of biology:
Any professional biologist and/or doctor specializing in hearing will confirm to you that people not only hear different frequency ranges, but they hear and perceive the frequencies themselves in different ways.
As you know, we have a snail responsible for the perception of frequencies and in this snail we may have a different number of receptors, for example (conditionally) I may have 100 receptors for the perception of 90Hz, and you have 300 receptors and you will perceive this frequency completely differently than me. This is verifiable and has been proven more than once.
Just as people with a large number of taste and olfactory receptors feel the taste of food thinner and richer.

Thus, I believe that we perceive sound in different ways and some seemingly insignificant sound nuances may be very noticeable to certain people (and for other people, accordingly, other sound nuances will be noticeable).


In conclusion, I want to say that for a long time I did not believe in different OP sounds, but I clearly heard different sound of amplifiers and DAC's, I know that they really have different frequency response.
Recently, I replaced my Yamaha AX-10 with Aiyima A07 and began to read this forum, the opinions of different users, it turned out that the manufacturer Aiyima recommends changing the OP NE5532 to LM4562 in them (they even have video instructions on how to do this on their channel).
I decided to try it.
For me, the difference between NE5532 and LM4562 turned out to be very noticeable.
NE5532 - sounds more open, the midrange is brighter, the vocals sound closer.
LM4562 - gives more low frequencies, the bass guitars sound stunningly natural, much more details are heard, the sound becomes elastic, but the vocals move a little into the background.
For several days I conducted tests by changing the chips in my amplifier and DAC's – I heard this difference every time, including on blind tests.
My wife also hears this difference.
And now the problem for me is that I really like the naturalness of the bass and the overall detail of the LM4562, but its vocals sound a little unnatural – muffled. Therefore, I returned the NE5532 first, the vocals sound acceptable in it, but everything else is noticeably worse than the LM4562. As a result, both chips do not suit me (vocals are very important to me), I ordered several more different popular OP, I will listen to them and draw conclusions myself. Now I have returned the LM4562 and in general I like their sound more, however, every time on my favorite vocal parts or even on regular podcasts I hear this muffled voice – it makes me a little uncomfortable and I really wait for the new chips to come (I'm even thinking about connecting a tone corrector).

Jesus, this garbage just won't die. What a pitiful experiment. I almost said thought experiment, but one without much thought or experiment or anything other than a story. Not much of a story either. Even includes the ever loving wife. Arggggh!



Can you tell us the controls and blinding used in your listening comparisons of op amps? I'll just guess there weren't any. Other than spousal confirmation.

 

[Brian Hall]

I specifically registered on the forum because I want to write in this topic because I have a strong argument in favor of people who hear the difference in the sound of different operational amplifiers.
I think this may affect the attitude of some people towards other dimensions of sound.

So, read about the "Mary's Room" experiment — this is my main argument.

This is a thought experiment, the essence of which is as follows:
Imagine a researcher of color, Maria. Maria has studied the neurophysiology of color all her life, but all the time she was in a black-and-white room, where absolutely everything is black and white, even her monitor is black and white and, let's imagine that she herself is also colorless. At the same time, Maria has studied color so well that she knows all the information about color that can be obtained. She knows the wavelengths of all colors, knows which neurons transmit the signal from the retina to the brain and what is happening at this time in the brain itself. She sees all the graphs of color measurements, she has all the data about each color, but she has never seen the colors themselves.
What happens if we let Maria out of her black and white room into the real world, where there are many different colors, will she learn something new, will she get a new experience about color?

My answer is definitely yes.

This experiment shows that even with the fullness of the measured information, graphs and figures, real experience can provide additional information that graphs and figures will not show.

By analogy, I think the same situation happens with sound – even the most accurate measurements of frequency response, etc. do not show the real picture.

In addition, there is a second strong argument already from the field of biology:
Any professional biologist and/or doctor specializing in hearing will confirm to you that people not only hear different frequency ranges, but they hear and perceive the frequencies themselves in different ways.
As you know, we have a snail responsible for the perception of frequencies and in this snail we may have a different number of receptors, for example (conditionally) I may have 100 receptors for the perception of 90Hz, and you have 300 receptors and you will perceive this frequency completely differently than me. This is verifiable and has been proven more than once.
Just as people with a large number of taste and olfactory receptors feel the taste of food thinner and richer.

Thus, I believe that we perceive sound in different ways and some seemingly insignificant sound nuances may be very noticeable to certain people (and for other people, accordingly, other sound nuances will be noticeable).


In conclusion, I want to say that for a long time I did not believe in different OP sounds, but I clearly heard different sound of amplifiers and DAC's, I know that they really have different frequency response.
Recently, I replaced my Yamaha AX-10 with Aiyima A07 and began to read this forum, the opinions of different users, it turned out that the manufacturer Aiyima recommends changing the OP NE5532 to LM4562 in them (they even have video instructions on how to do this on their channel).
I decided to try it.
For me, the difference between NE5532 and LM4562 turned out to be very noticeable.
NE5532 - sounds more open, the midrange is brighter, the vocals sound closer.
LM4562 - gives more low frequencies, the bass guitars sound stunningly natural, much more details are heard, the sound becomes elastic, but the vocals move a little into the background.
For several days I conducted tests by changing the chips in my amplifier and DAC's – I heard this difference every time, including on blind tests.
My wife also hears this difference.
And now the problem for me is that I really like the naturalness of the bass and the overall detail of the LM4562, but its vocals sound a little unnatural – muffled. Therefore, I returned the NE5532 first, the vocals sound acceptable in it, but everything else is noticeably worse than the LM4562. As a result, both chips do not suit me (vocals are very important to me), I ordered several more different popular OP, I will listen to them and draw conclusions myself. Now I have returned the LM4562 and in general I like their sound more, however, every time on my favorite vocal parts or even on regular podcasts I hear this muffled voice – it makes me a little uncomfortable and I really wait for the new chips to come (I'm even thinking about connecting a tone corrector).

Most of us have not been locked in a totally silent room and unable to hear music and other sounds.

Most of us have probably already "heard" multiple amps, speakers, headphones, dacs, preamps, etc.. both good and bad.

Devices that measure the same will sound the same at the same levels. Devices that "color" the sound will measure differently.

If changing out opamps makes you happy and you believe you hear something different then go for it. I don't see the point in messing with already well performing dacs or amps.

If those opamps are as different as you think, then the differences will show up on measurements. If the measurements do not show that difference, then you are imagining it because you expected it.