How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent?

[Mart68]

I'm not sure if this is dishonesty. It seems more like a complete misunderstanding, one that unfortunately the writer passionately believes is the only possible description.

A lot of those sort of manufacturers and vendors do really believe in what they are selling.

Obviously potential customers pick up on that and it helps to convince them.

What's that old saying?

'Sincerity. When you can fake that, you've got it made.'

A lot of them don't need to fake it.

 

[JeremyFife]

Do DAC's have a sound signature? Yes, they do, but the question is whether it's produced by your brain or whether it's in the actual signal produced by the DAC. This can simply be determined by measuring the DAC output and by a well controlled double blind test.

I'm not sure I agree with this. Isn't it more that DACs can have a sound signature (different outputs based on the same input) but the question is whether that difference is audible or not.
Actual outputs can be measurably different, but the resulting audio is audibly the same since the variances are too small for human hearing to identify.
Questions of perception are interesting but are not specific to DACs.

One for the philosophers: if a change to a sound is too small to be audible, has the sound changed? ... the sound wave has, but is sound the transmission of pressure through air or is it the interpretation of that in our brain?

 

[Beave]

I'm not sure if this is dishonesty. It seems more like a complete misunderstanding, one that unfortunately the writer passionately believes is the only possible description.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
​

― Upton Sinclair

 

[DSJR]

Love that picture. Many audio illusions are essentially based on vision. Some years ago I turned the knob that controlled the cutoff frequency of my subwoofers. I unmistakably heard a significant difference. But then I saw my subwoofer amplifier was switched off... The difference I heard was created by my brain after the visual perception of the knob being turned. A very curious experience...a bit like looking at that picture.

Yeah, all it takes is for a definite difference to be heard A-B and then discovering that *nothing* has changed at all, this a while before my ears gave out on any notion of audiophooldom!

 

[Purité Audio]

A lot of those sort of manufacturers and vendors do really believe in what they are selling.

Obviously potential customers pick up on that and it helps to convince them.

What's that old saying?

'Sincerity. When you can fake that, you've got it made.'

A lot of them don't need to fake it.

Imagine spending a whole career in retail and never once actually verifying preconceived assumptions, I find that very hard to believe.
Charlatans or merely incompetent.
Keith

 

[AudioSceptic]

Imagine spending a whole career in retail and never once actually verifying preconceived assumptions, I find that very hard to believe.
Charlatans or merely incompetent.
Keith

There are apparently quite a few out there, both manufacturers and retailers. ;-)

 

[SIY]

I'm not sure if this is dishonesty.

I am. It takes deliberate action to create dishonest argument. This isn't just mistaken, it's carefully crafted to sell boxes to the ignorant by increasing their ignorance.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I am. It takes deliberate action to create dishonest argument. This isn't just mistaken, it's carefully crafted to sell boxes to the ignorant by increasing their ignorance.

While I agree, I do think people get "educated" into this world and many of them have crafted nothing with no intent to deceive. Someone does the deceiving initially, but many salesmen, regular audiophiles and even some companies believe it. Though wrong and though mislead they aren't trying to con anyone.

Of course on the sales end the really good ones are salesmen. No skin either way. They would turn around and sale the exact opposite if they make a cut and that is their job. Deception or not never enters their vocabulary. The idea is irrelevant.

 

[SIY]

Can a subwoofer be integrated into a system without using measurements or can the phase and crossover level be set by ear or would all the mental "illusions" be too much to deal with? After all, turning the knobs doesn't mean they actually do anything. Maybe they're broken or turned off/don't work. Without measuring it could all be my imagination experiencing another fairy tale?

In theory it can if you have sharp ears and lots of training on recognizing and identifying defects. But it will be a lot slower and more prone to error than measuring and getting it right from the beginning.

And this comes literally days after it happening to me. I have been setting up a DBA subwoofer system to compare with Trinnov's Waveforming. I set the parameters the way they should be theoretically, and @jan.didden and I listened to the results. I was unhappy with the way the whole thing sounded even though it was supposed to be right. I spent a day playing around with levels and phases and slopes, but it just didn't... gel. So I bit the bullet, pulled out my CLIO Pocket, and did some careful measurements and saw some funny things. Tracing back, I uncovered some errors in the way I set up the crossover ("Me make a mistake? Unpossible!"). Fixed them, fired things back up, and... it sounded terrific. Five minutes of measurement let me get the integration right in a way that I couldn't do in a day of futzing around by ear.

 

[Mart68]

I am. It takes deliberate action to create dishonest argument. This isn't just mistaken, it's carefully crafted to sell boxes to the ignorant by increasing their ignorance.

No I don't think so, not in this specific case.

Easy to forget that there's a whole other world through that looking glass where audio replay is something that is semi-mystical, with many known unknowns.

A lot of people live in that world (including some EEs) and they never give much if any thought to a more rational approach as espoused here. They heard the difference, so ASR is wrong. Case is closed for them.

 

[SIY]

Easy to forget that there's a whole other world through that looking glass where audio replay is something that is semi-mystical, with many known unknowns.

This is true of the target audience. I sincerely doubt that it's true of the people who design, build, and sell actual functional boxes and craft the marketing messages.

 

[Mart68]

This is true of the target audience. I sincerely doubt that it's true of the people who design, build, and sell actual functional boxes and craft the marketing messages.

I know some of them and it is absolutely true of them. But agree it won't be so in every case.

 

[Tinker]

In theory it can if you have sharp ears and lots of training on recognizing and identifying defects. But it will be a lot slower and more prone to error than measuring and getting it right from the beginning.

And this comes literally days after it happening to me. I have been setting up a DBA subwoofer system to compare with Trinnov's Waveforming. I set the parameters the way they should be theoretically, and @jan.didden and I listened to the results. I was unhappy with the way the whole thing sounded even though it was supposed to be right. I spent a day playing around with levels and phases and slopes, but it just didn't... gel. So I bit the bullet, pulled out my CLIO Pocket, and did some careful measurements and saw some funny things. Tracing back, I uncovered some errors in the way I set up the crossover ("Me make a mistake? Unpossible!"). Fixed them, fired things back up, and... it sounded terrific. Five minutes of measurement let me get the integration right in a way that I couldn't do in a day of futzing around by ear.

So it happened to you too! How about that!

What you're saying is that even though you followed the parameters your EARS were able to detect that something was wrong leading to further investigation. When I heard the same thing you called it impossible and I was imagining things.

We both FIRST heard a difference that something was not right. You then checked measurements and found an error. I also checked measurements and found an error. It seems we had a very similar "experience" but mine was "Worse" than an invalid "fairytale". Interesting how that works.

Wouldn't you agree that setting up a subwoofer is very subjective? There isn't one perfect setting of 'measurement' that's good for all. For subwoofers (not speakers) listening is my tool of choice.

 

[antcollinet]

So it happened to you too! How about that!

What you're saying is that even though you followed the parameters your EARS were able to detect that something was wrong leading to further investigation. When I heard the same thing you called it impossible and I was imagining things.

We both FIRST heard a difference that something was not right. You then checked measurements and found an error. I also checked measurements and found an error. It seems we had a very similar "experience" but mine was "Worse" than an invalid "fairytale". Interesting how that works.

Wouldn't you agree that setting up a subwoofer is very subjective? There isn't one perfect setting of 'measurement' that's good for all. For subwoofers (not speakers) listening is my tool of choice.

Can you understand the difference between hearing things that are audible. (Noise or distortion or FR variation within the limits of human hearing), and thinking you are hearing something that is inaudible (all of noise, and distortion and FR variation outside the range of human hearing)?

 

[Tinker]

Can you understand the difference between hearing things that are audible. (Noise or distortion or FR variation within the limits of human hearing), and thinking you are hearing something that is inaudible (all of noise, and distortion and FR variation outside the range of human hearing)?

Why are you saying I think I'm hearing something inaudible? Phase reversal in some subwoofers can be VERY audible and not difficult to detect. Can you understand that?

 

[Matchpik]

HIFI literally stands for High Fidelity. It is not about what we hear, it is about is taking the input, and sending it to the output with as close to perfect fidelity as possible (no changes to the shape of the waveform - except where those are designed and specific - eg tone controls or DSP)

What we hear then is unchanged from what was put onto the recording. We don't need to measure that, as I said - it is not our business here.

Ah! The age-old method of making things easy for one's self by allowing the original recording to define correctness. I also used to adhere to this. But one day I began to consider why I did this. Why do I assume whatever the recording engineer decided on is correct or best? His hearing is just as different as the next person's. He just happens to have training or experience in the area. But how do I know what his or her goal was on this recording? His hearing is not flat just as mine is not. I don't know what equipment they were using, but it surely isn't the same as the equipment I'm listening on.

See there's no logic to assigning 'fidelity' to exact reproduction of the recording since you will never hear such unless you happen to have the exact same listening rig as the engineer. But that doesn't necessarily make it musical. I think having a clean reproduction of strings on a guitar, timbre of a wood-bodied instrument, those sorts of things, make for fidelity. Everything else is just presence or which sound to give prominence in the recording. I've heard some engineers give too little prominence to vocals in some recordings, and sometimes too much. We've all heard those recordings that sound imbalanced.

I have rarely felt the need to EQ anything, but I'm not opposed to it because the recording engineer is not a magical deity who knows what's best for me. More likely he is considering how the program material will generally sound on mass-produced consumer electronics. I used to feel like recording engineers were in the audiophile's corner, but that's not likely what they get paid to do, and they can't all be Alan Parsons.

 

[Purité Audio]

Nothing to do with. the engineer or what he was listening to, the only artefact we have is the record itself, which I, personally want to reproduce as accurately as possible.
Keith

 

[Jim Taylor]

Ah! The age-old method of making things easy for one's self by allowing the original recording to define correctness. I also used to adhere to this. But one day I began to consider why I did this. Why do I assume whatever the recording engineer decided on is correct or best? His hearing is just as different as the next person's. He just happens to have training or experience in the area. But how do I know what his or her goal was on this recording? His hearing is not flat just as mine is not. I don't know what equipment they were using, but it surely isn't the same as the equipment I'm listening on.

See there's no logic to assigning 'fidelity' to exact reproduction of the recording since you will never hear such unless you happen to have the exact same listening rig as the engineer. But that doesn't necessarily make it musical. I think having a clean reproduction of strings on a guitar, timbre of a wood-bodied instrument, those sorts of things, make for fidelity. Everything else is just presence or which sound to give prominence in the recording. I've heard some engineers give too little prominence to vocals in some recordings, and sometimes too much. We've all heard those recordings that sound imbalanced.

I have rarely felt the need to EQ anything, but I'm not opposed to it because the recording engineer is not a magical deity who knows what's best for me. More likely he is considering how the program material will generally sound on mass-produced consumer electronics. I used to feel like recording engineers were in the audiophile's corner, but that's not likely what they get paid to do, and they can't all be Alan Parsons.

1) There is no need to assume that whatever the recording (more likely mastering) engineer decided is right ..... FOR YOU. You can have any effect that you want; you can use DSP for adding distortion, for use as a tone control, and if you want some resonant cabinet that adds its own style of distortion, then you can have that, too. But don't expect the people who bring you these recordings to take your personal brand of likes and dislikes into account. You are one of hundreds of millions of people who listen to recordings worldwide, and the personal likes and dislikes of others are very likely different than yours.

2) The final product is not just the outcome of the efforts of recording, or mixing, or mastering ... it's also a product that has to pass the approval of the artist(s), and (ultimately) the producers. Most likely, the recording, mixing and mastering engineers have no opinion regarding the final product. It is, after all, just their job. They are just doing this for a living. The opinions that really count are the producer's and artist's. If you don't like what is on the recording, you need to take it up with them. (Believe you me, there are many times that I have wanted to do just that! )

3) The "fidelity" that recordings display does, therefore, not necessarily have anything to to with plucked strings, timbre, or anything "clean". The recording may be the artist's idea of Armageddon In The Studio, and he/she/they may want it to sound like what you and I consider to be "sh*t".

FYI ... My likes and dislikes seem to roughly align with yours. However, I've seen many businesses come and go because they did not offer the consumer what the consumer wanted to buy. The recording business is the same way. May we weep in unison?

Jim

 

[JeremyFife]

Why are you saying I think I'm hearing something inaudible? Phase reversal in some subwoofers can be VERY audible and not difficult to detect. Can you understand that?

It's probably because you said "I also attribute this change to the addition of the Sparkos SS2590 discrete Op-amp. The level of improvement is stunning" which does seem unlikely.
I get your point about phase reversal which is, as you say, a different thing.

 

[antcollinet]

Why are you saying I think I'm hearing something inaudible? Phase reversal in some subwoofers can be VERY audible and not difficult to detect. Can you understand that?

I’m talking about your claims regarding power cables (as well as some other equivalent nonsense). Which do absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, to the sound. Of course they don’t, there is no engineering mechanism for them to do so.

Can you understand that?