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

[Blumlein 88]

Fascinating how a simple feedback loop , some pcb traces and resistors ( and possibly something else if fancy ) can recognise music and destroy only that ?

Should be obvious, time domain and all that. If you sample the output, go back to the input there is time delay. So then you mix in a delayed signal all out of line. Peaks go into dips and vice versa. Clearly destroying low level detail. Clearly wiping out all subtlety in music which we humans are clearly highly attuned to hearing. Gone is depth, low level detail, and imaging.

Voila..... Music Destroyed!!!!

FUD and all that you know.

 

[ahofer]

Brandolini's law aka the bullshit asymmetry principle. It takes an order of magnitude more energy to refute BS as it does to produce BS.

I know. I stalled out on my blind test compilation. But ASR is big enough to crowdsource, if focused. It would be a service to consumers to understand how ill-supported their accepted notions are. We are sort of doing it by being here, but not quite in as focused a way as is possible.

That’s why I wanted the blind test database to be a wiki, separated by type of component and test setup. Amir was not a fan of the wiki idea.

 

[mikroid]

You are hearing things that are not in the music reaching your ears.

A few conclusions here - your brain is constructing a reason to use such a cable, the previous cable was poorly designed and made and - shock horror - the Rega dac isn't as well designed as Rega and many users think/thought it is or was (the figures do tell a mediocre story sadly).

I am in this "hobby" long enough to don't need others opinions about what I am hearing or not.
Thanks for good intention, keep it for yourself.
Generally I am looking to learn and not to seek validation for what I already know.

On the other side an opinion based on (someone) personal thoughts is an opinion and nothing more.
But (re)moving a post from a thread just because this opinion is in disagreement with reviewer "absolute truth" makes me think maybe this is not the best place to search for useful information.

There are plenty of REGA DAC owners, I remember ten years ago it was a popular choice for low-mid cost, some praised it ,others were just pleased with it but no one said it sounds bad.
It has a poor USB input, is not the most transparent DAC ,sometimes sounds more congested vs modern DACs but overall is very musical and dynamic.
For me this is more important than any modern state-of-art which sounds plasticky and artificial, without any soul or emotion to music.
If this type of sound makes others happy, good for them...different ears....different tastes.

Regarding power cable or power supplies benefits....again...it does not make any sense to debate...
I am sometimes jealous of persons which are happy with their cheap SMPS just because manufacturer tell them "it doesn't matter"....

My initial intention was to sell Rega (I am using it few since acquisition of my RME DAC) but thanks to review and above reactions I will definitely keep it.

PS
Sorry if my English is not the most correct. Is not my native language.

 

[Purité Audio]

If it is different then it will be adding audible distortion over the blameless RME, so it won’t be more lifelike or dynamic it might sound a little fuzzier which you may prefer.
Keith

 

[BDWoody]

Sorry if my English is not the most correct. Is not my native language.

Please don't worry about that at all. Truly.

On the other side an opinion based on (someone) personal thoughts is an opinion and nothing more.
But (re)moving a post from a thread just because this opinion is in disagreement with reviewer "absolute truth" makes me think maybe this is not the best place to search for useful information.

It is unsupported anecdote, as is used in place of actual evidence in pretty much every audio forum or publication in the propaganda machine. It doesn't counter actual evidence as given in the thread. This kind of input only serves to distract from what we are trying to accomplish here, so posts like this tend to get moved to a thread where some remedial work might take place.

Generally I am looking to learn and not to seek validation for what I already know.

This would be a good place to start, if that's what you really want.

 

[AudioSceptic]

If it is different then it will be adding audible distortion over the blameless RME, so it won’t be more lifelike or dynamic it might sound a little fuzzier which you may prefer.
Keith

Yes, it seems that a bit of "fuzz" is being equated (mistaken?) for "soul or emotion to music". This is not "high fidelity".

 

[AudioSceptic]

"sometimes sounds more congested vs modern DACs but overall is very musical and dynamic." Do you find this across all types of music? I can see that it *might* help in some cases but would expect the opposite in others.

 

[mikroid]

Yes, it seems that a bit of "fuzz" is being equated (mistaken?) for "soul or emotion to music". This is not "high fidelity".

The Rega is not fuzzy.

One example of fuzzy sound I remember was on Audio Analogue Puccini SE amplifier.
That amp was hugely slow ,fuzzy, with a colored sound that made you fell asleep since first notes.

Again, are we allowed to have personal options of preferences or should we graduate some formal exams before expressing personal thoughts?

 

[SIY]

Again, are we allowed to have personal options of preferences or should we graduate some formal exams before expressing personal thoughts?

Opinions and preferences are fine, but extraordinary sonic claims need evidence.

 

[JeremyFife]

The Rega is not fuzzy.

One example of fuzzy sound I remember was on Audio Analogue Puccini SE amplifier.
That amp was hugely slow ,fuzzy, with a colored sound that made you fell asleep since first notes.

Again, are we allowed to have personal options of preferences or should we graduate some formal exams before expressing personal thoughts?

Personal preferences are absolutely fine, and unavoidable - we all have them.
Remember that these are personal though, and if we want to understand or to communicate with others it's better to stay with objective information.

 

[mikroid]

Opinions and preferences are fine, but extraordinary sonic claims need evidence.

I looked on my posts and I did not see any statements.
I mentioned that what I said are only opinions which of course are subjective.

Instead I quoted 2 major statements , one regarding what person thinks I am hearing ,second one how my mind is set to explain the sum spent for cable purchase.

 

[SIY]

It has a poor USB input, is not the most transparent DAC ,sometimes sounds more congested vs modern DACs but overall is very musical and dynamic.

I looked on my posts and I did not see any statements.

Just looking at your last post, this turns out to be untrue. How many more should we collect?

 

[IPunchCholla]

Training is more important than testing.

Welcome to How to Listen!

Overview How to Listen is a desktop software application developed by the Harman Internationa l R&D group for the purpose of training an...

harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com

Only costs you time and brings more clarity than a visit to a doctor that only tests bottom hearing limits at a few frequencies that are important for speech.

They were replying to me, and I was referring more to the idea of performance on the Klippel Distortion test (and thinking it would be nice to have that for other things as well) as it is a form of testing (in that you can find where your limits currently are and then compare them to the data known about a piece of equipment) and training (my perception of distortion did improve over repeated attempts, a little bit). I wasn’t thinking about audio grams (though that might be useful for questions of high frequency) but more the things that come up endlessly: perception as it relates to volume, euphonic distortion, etc. Nobody starts with, “I wonder what the limits of my ability to sense these things are?” I’m just wondering what would happen if we were all forced to start there, as an idea, not an actual suggestion.

 

[mikroid]

Just looking at your last post, this turns out to be untrue. How many more should we collect?

If adding "In my very opinion/For Me" is required for each of my sentences or phrases I can do it.

 

[DSJR]

The Rega is not fuzzy.

One example of fuzzy sound I remember was on Audio Analogue Puccini SE amplifier.
That amp was hugely slow ,fuzzy, with a colored sound that made you fell asleep since first notes.

Again, are we allowed to have personal options of preferences or should we graduate some formal exams before expressing personal thoughts?

Puccini SE was 'musical' in that the melodic side of a musical piece had precedence over the dynamics (awful subjective description but I have my memories of several demo samples). Thing is and more importantly, the output stage was incredibly frail and the slightest hint of a possible short would blow the output stage immediately

The Rega dac was a sonic upgrade over the visually matching Apollo R CD player, and that was enough for most owners at the time. I'm grateful to this site and one or two others for moving me up and away from such things while saving a lot of money, even at trade rates!

 

[mikroid]

Anyway, one of sides seems strongly biased.
I don't think this debate serves to the purpose of this thread so I it is better to end here.
Thanks for your kindness and replies.

 

[JeremyFife]

If adding "In my very opinion/For Me" is required for each of my sentences or phrases I can do it.

Just relax a bit. Perhaps consider the impact of what you write, in your first couple of posts you said; Topping D90 sounds 'sterile' and that changing a power cord improves your sound.
No issue with you thinking that. However, statements like that will be challenged.

Back on thread subject: if you personally think that DACs sound different then that's fine, but it doesn't add anything to the debate so it's a bit pointless.
If you have reasons or theories for DACs sounding different then that's interesting

 

[Old_School_Brad]

I wonder how much time, effort, and energy could be saved if we required posters to take and post in their signature their ability to hear frequencies, distortion, noise, and volume?

Looking at the bad amp above, I would be maybe barely able to hear the distortion station in pure sine waves, in a very quiet environment, on a good tinnitus day. No way I’d hear it in music. Others could, though.

While we have soft and hard limits to audibility pretty well documented, nothing made the issues clearer than knowing my own audible threshold for some distortion and noise.

This is so true!
If you don't know your own personal threshold limits you are not really getting the most of information from tests and reviews.
It really is eye opening how much e.g. distortion there can be in music without me noticing.
And don't worry. I test right in the average group as well..

 

[SIY]

If adding "In my very opinion/For Me" is required for each of my sentences or phrases I can do it.

You're still making a sonic claim, a highly dubious one, and not supporting it with any evidence.

Perhaps a science-based forum is not for you?

 

[BDWoody]

If adding "In my very opinion/For Me" is required for each of my sentences or phrases I can do it.

Are you interested at all in whether what you are perceiving as a difference is based on the actual sound waves? If so, try some controlled testing.

If not, continuing to just throw out these kinds of highly unlikely claims is not going to lead anywhere productive for anyone.