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

[solderdude]

a real woman of science would never have written what was written by @womanofscience666 .... I guess it is the 666 that is talking.

 

[rank]

Dftt

 

[Yuhasz01]

10,000 postings for a rather pedestrian issue; equipment produces sound waves, not music, which we can measure, (objectivity)and our ears and mind interpret/produce the actual music(subjectivity...ie,perception). If anyone posters finds this confusing or not true that is another problem , not addressable here with pragmatic rational technical arguments. Sort of a quantum entanglement of audio: both exist at the same time but are different.

 

[Mart68]

enjoying music is nonsense? Well, maybe if you're using Topping dacs since they're miserable experiences but this hobby is about the music and enjoying it

Do a blind test between your favourite DAC and a Topping. You'll change your opinion within a minute.

But your arrogance indicates that you won't ever try that. Have fun wasting thousands on pursuing a fantasy - not my idea of a hobby, or of enjoyment, but we're all different.

 

[DSJR]

ah, sorry, I wasn't aware, I'll edit it

welp, since all my posts have been forced here for no real reason I'll say what I think on the topic. DAC measurements do not tell the whole story and have been cheated by incompetent designers at topping and similar companies (not all similar companies though, some of them are making great stuff) and they're just chasing numbers while disregarding actual sound quality. These high SINAD dacs usually sound absolutely terrible (boring at best, painful at worst) and the best dacs I've heard have measured well but not exceptionally

It ain't the dac guv'nor I'd suggest your speakers and or room matching aren't too good right where your hearing is (usually) most sensitive, or maybe you use an audiophile amp with plenty of odd-order distortion as I used to use and sell back in the dark days of the 80s. (back then, they were basically domestic PA amps with poor band limiting filters, but they're rather better today)

Get the speakers and room right, plus go to plenty of live acoustic or jazz concerts with the minimum of a PA and you'll find all these 'terrible' sounding dacs actually 'sound' just fine. I'm still inclined to do this before reality kicks in, but 'we' so often blame the part of the system that's actually working properly - and from tests here and elsewhere, the dacs you rate tend to deviate hugely from the task they're supposed to do. Been there, done that and seriously don't want to return as 'there be dragons '

P.S. Great isn't it, when one emerges from the audiophool bulls**t and begins to forget the 'hobby' side, using the gear merely as a tool to enjoy the music via, rather than the other way round. You want a bigger and more expansive sound? get a bigger pair of speakers in the first instance (adding subs to small squitters is another snake-ridden path for most). My remaining 'thing' is having even modest gear where I can hear differences in production and mixing, something the 'nice sounding' enthusiast hobby gear all to often masks...

 

[Miguelón]

I mean they're hardly solved, there's lots of different ways to do dacs and they all sound different. If you're referring to the fact that topping and other companies like them are making dacs that measure really well that doesn't mean anything, Topping dacs are some of the worst I've ever heard. R2R dacs are getting better than ever and are getting seriously good both in sound and measurements

This is the point that this post is about: no audible differences were found between one DAC or another if they measured as “audible transparent”.

Is not a question of “better” or “worse”, this would be ultimately a matter of taste, but more on the side of no one can distinguish between two DACs if they are carefully matched on voltage output.

This is a fact was not only verified (I avoid the word “proven” as in my experience we can always let some space to statistical errors) but is also according to well known limits of human audition.

Mics and Fourier numeric analysis are way beyond human threshold on frequency analysis, phase analysis, ringing, harmonics or all audible qualities we know.

Only other possibility is that Einstein and Podolsky, two ancient physicists, called ‘hidden variables’. That’s it, there are some “mysterious” qualities of sound that have not been discovered yet and made human perception not measurable in our actual paradigm…

Except for… the late is wrong: if hidden variables exist, then blind test should allow listeners to effectively distinguish among two different DACs.

So only conclusion is all are indistinguishable, once adjusted volume.

 

[Miguelón]

We hear that sentiment a lot ( I don’t think we need the xenophobia) it is always from those who unfortunately do not know how things actually work or understand what their measurements mean.
Stick around and learn something.
Keith

Can balanced output be distinguished between an unbalanced one?

Is the only point where I still believe I can find some very subtle differences between my WiiM Ultra (RCA) and my Ifi Zen Dad Signature V2 (XLR).

I’m not sure, since my personal belief is that RCA should sound worse, so maybe purely psychological.

On my perception side, even if I try to match volumes as close as possibly, I find some extra clarity on the XLR side.
Either on the same DAC (Ifi Zen has both outputs), but this is more difficult since I have to change the preamp knob and cables, so not sure about the volume.

(I forgot to mention that, obviously, filters aren’t equal: maybe another differentiating factor?)


Post editing: probably were the filter, changing the WiiM by default to minimum phase slow roll off trebles seem smoother and I can concentrate better on rest of frequencies, the same impression I had with the Ifi Zen DAC. I don’t know which is the filter of this later, but now I’m less capable to notice any difference

 

[Purité Audio]

Perhaps poor implementation most likely psychological.
Keith

 

[Miguelón]

a real woman of science would never have written what was written by @womanofscience666 .... I guess it is the 666 that is talking.

He/she reminds me of Knut(and some number I can’t remember), the Troll who argued obsessively in favor of Ifi DACs, but this time more on the anti-Topping side…

 

[Miguelón]

Perhaps poor implementation most likely psychological.
Keith

I don’t understand you well, are you saying I’m psychologically bad implemented ?

Sorry, I’m not English native, even if your sentence was so short I cannot understand in which way goes…

 

[Blumlein 88]

I don’t understand you well, are you saying I’m psychologically bad implemented ?

Sorry, I’m not English native, even if your sentence was so short I cannot understand in which way goes…

No he is saying perhaps there is a difference due to poor design between an XLR and RCA based unit. So you might hear it, but it has nothing to do with any inherent sound difference between balanced and unbalanced.

But his opinion is the most likely reason you heard a difference is psychological as in bias from knowing one was balanced and one was not. Most likely there was not enough difference in the signal for you to hear a difference beyond the unintended bias.

 

[Tilata]

All DAC's sound the same.

You should read this thread

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

I know there are people out there that think cables affect sound, which is much worse, but there really is no response to something like that, but just to smile and nod. But what about people who talk about DACS as if they were headphone drivers or speakers, and talk about the SOUNDSTAGE...

www.audiosciencereview.com

And then try a blind test next time.

It reminds me the Coke-Pepsi blind testing, which one is better, right? There are people out there drinking RC Cola and Vive cola or even Green cola. And they like it.
The purpose of music is to make you feel something your have either have not experienced i.e. new and exciting, or re-live something which you liked or experienced before. Music is not necessarily a single sensory experience. Some of us see pictures or colours or imagine a scene or picture. All this originates from the activation of the limbic system. Some of us like feeling the tactile resonance of speakers. So placebo effect and whatever else our brain adds to music has a massive impact on what and how we experience it. This makes it a human experience. So maybe customers of certain hi-fi brands are misled by adverts, reviews, semi-scientific interviews, but some of them/us are just happy to listen to good music the way they like it. The minute we stop listening with our ears and brain but focussing on just numbers, graphs, peaks, jotter noise and SINAD, we stop being a human.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It reminds me the Coke-Pepsi blind testing, which one is better, right? There are people out there drinking RC Cola and Vive cola or even Green cola. And they like it.
The purpose of music is to make you feel something your have either have not experienced i.e. new and exciting, or re-live something which you liked or experienced before. Music is not necessarily a single sensory experience. Some of us see pictures or colours or imagine a scene or picture. All this originates from the activation of the limbic system. Some of us like feeling the tactile resonance of speakers. So placebo effect and whatever else our brain adds to music has a massive impact on what and how we experience it. This makes it a human experience. So maybe customers of certain hi-fi brands are misled by adverts, reviews, semi-scientific interviews, but some of them/us are just happy to listen to good music the way they like it. The minute we stop listening with our ears and brain but focussing on just numbers, graphs, peaks, jotter noise and SINAD, we stop being a human.

You are building your straw man here by creating a false dichotomy.
The minute we stop listening with our ears and brain but focussing (sic) on just numbers, graphs, peaks, jotter(sic) noise and SINAD, we stop being a human.

The above sentence makes no sense in many ways. Are mathematicians not human? Are electrical engineers who design circuits not human? Can these people not listen to good music the way they like and be happy? Can you listen to good music reproduction without them? Can humans not listen to music without placebo and other effects? Can they not listen to music without those effects and enjoy it and be happy? Are we not using our brain when we do look at other information? Can you not see colors with music unless you know the source? etc etc etc.

 

[oleg87]

I listen to music with my ears. I evaluate electronic performance with test equipment.

 

[VientoB]

It reminds me the Coke-Pepsi blind testing, which one is better, right? There are people out there drinking RC Cola and Vive cola or even Green cola. And they like it.
The purpose of music is to make you feel something your have either have not experienced i.e. new and exciting, or re-live something which you liked or experienced before. Music is not necessarily a single sensory experience. Some of us see pictures or colours or imagine a scene or picture. All this originates from the activation of the limbic system. Some of us like feeling the tactile resonance of speakers. So placebo effect and whatever else our brain adds to music has a massive impact on what and how we experience it. This makes it a human experience. So maybe customers of certain hi-fi brands are misled by adverts, reviews, semi-scientific interviews, but some of them/us are just happy to listen to good music the way they like it. The minute we stop listening with our ears and brain but focussing on just numbers, graphs, peaks, jotter noise and SINAD, we stop being a human.

People who believe all DACs sound the same just listen with their ears. They're not listening to graphs or numbers. They're listening to the music that the DAC produces. They're not listening to the equipment and thinking, "I wonder how it would sound with a Chord Dave and M-Scaler". It's actually quite liberating.

 

[olieb]

The minute we stop listening with our ears and brain but focussing on just numbers, graphs, peaks, jotter noise and SINAD, we stop being a human.

Well, there might be a time for listening and there might be a time for focusing on numbers, graphs,.... Both is absolutely human, especially numbers are a rather human invention.

So maybe customers of certain hi-fi brands are misled by adverts, reviews, semi-scientific interviews, but some of them/us are just happy to listen to good music the way they like it.

Yes, and it is your personal fun if you enjoy a music tune more when reproduced by gear from "audiophile hi-fi brands" with the promise of the "special extra", actually you would probably be part of the mainstream, most people seem to think that way.
All your fun, the money and the promise will not change the facts about the sound (physical reality) though.

 

[Roland68]

Both is absolutely human, especially numbers are a rather human invention.

Do you actually listen to yourself?

Everything, really everything around us, apart from the original nature, is an invention of us humans.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Is it true that pre and post echo cannot be measured on an analyser?

DACs do not "pre echo" or "post echo". Are you referring to ringing which occurs at 22kHz for 44.1kHz audio, 48kHz for 96kHz audio, etc.?

If you're one to care about such things, I would think you are listening at at least 96kHz to start with...

 

[Mart68]

It reminds me the Coke-Pepsi blind testing, which one is better, right? There are people out there drinking RC Cola and Vive cola or even Green cola. And they like it.

yeah, but there's a limit.

Rola Cola:

 

[Mnyb]

DACs do not "pre echo" or "post echo". Are you referring to ringing which occurs at 22kHz for 44.1kHz audio, 48kHz for 96kHz audio, etc.?

If you're one to care about such things, I would think you are listening at at least 96kHz to start with...

Its often used in misleading marketing. The step pulse used to characterise the filter.

It is as you say . The filters don’t do do that with music aka “legaly” sampled signals .

The test signal is not bandwidth limited its a very steep pulse within one sample it provokes these behaviours to the max . Engineers can evaluate these and tell us a lot about the filters if its well implemented or not etc.