• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

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

The 1s and 0s are the same coz they are digital in a DAC. It is when the analog waves arrive at your ears that might be different. Traveling distances and bouncing off surfaces that might be different at different location.
 
Turn your house into a recording studio and invite bands to record there free.

Guaranteed original authentic performances every day - the closest approach to the original sound.

Make money from vending machines and the pool table - although with that, make sure they don't stuff the complimentary magazines into the pockets to avoid paying.
 
Tell you what .... the fun part of Paul's software is that you can null an original music file to the reproduced file and even listen to the null.
When you want to prove it sounds different (do the same with other DACs you have) using music this is the best method to prove that.
Tried that, couldn't see any ripples anymore, just a weird ramp-up in the high treble for the KA17 that didn't match my listening results, though it's mostly happening past 15-ish k, so beyond what I think is my current hearing range. Other than that I could only see that my assumption about the Hiby's filter choice was wrong: it has better, not worse, stopband attenuation, in addition to the better controlled in-band ripples. This ES9281A Pro truly seems to be state-of-the-art DAC tech.

Tried any of the other 7 available filters in the KA17 which should have different passband ripples ?
Yep, no difference in ripples, just early/late rolloff for the filters you'd expect to have differences in rolloff. That suggests the problem is outside of the DAC chip, which was already my assumption: if the ripple-like problem is real, it's in the amplification stage.

But I found something else today, my crucial error: in the first listening test I hooked up the KA17's BAL-out to the E/90x electrostatic energizer via its RCA-ins. Because those are 2 separate connectors I was working under the illusion that the channels are staying completely separate, but the E/90x does NOT have balanced topology, its RCAs have the same ground! So I was effectively shorting the BAL-out's L and R returns together, which leads to easily audible scrunched-in soundstage width and recessed presentation along the depth axis, even compared to the KA17's own SE-out! Then when I said "I hear the same via the HE-400i" I was probably basing that on confirmation bias carried over from the estat listening, as today I don't hear that big difference through the 400i, the FC3 and KA17 sound damn near identical.

I need to redo this listening comparison with much shorter switching time and listening time, so I think I will just record some representative song through both devices and put it through the ABX tool. Also need to re-measure the multitone thing and make sure my cable setup isn't shorting the BAL channels' returns (though I'm pretty sure I didn't have that problem in measurements as I could only ever get one channel at a time connected to the line-in anyway, but it's worth re-checking).
 
Last edited:
Tried that, couldn't see any ripples anymore, just a weird ramp-up in the high treble for the KA17 that didn't match my listening results, though it's mostly happening past 15-ish k, so beyond what I think is my current hearing range. Other than that I could only see that my assumption about the Hiby's filter choice was wrong: it has better, not worse, stopband attenuation, in addition to the better controlled in-band ripples. This ES9281A Pro truly seems to be state-of-the-art DAC tech.


Yep, no difference in ripples, just early/late rolloff for the filters you'd expect to have differences in rolloff. That suggests the problem is outside of the DAC chip, which was already my assumption: if the ripple-like problem is real, it's in the amplification stage.

But I found something else today, my crucial error: in the first listening test I hooked up the KA17's BAL-out to the E/90x electrostatic energizer via its RCA-ins. Because those are 2 separate connectors I was working under the illusion that the channels are staying completely separate, but the E/90x does NOT have balanced topology, its RCAs have the same ground! So I was effectively shorting the BAL-out's L and R returns together, which leads to easily audible scrunched-in soundstage width and recessed presentation along the depth axis, even compared to the KA17's own SE-out! Then when I said "I hear the same via the HE-400i" I was probably basing that on confirmation bias carried over from the estat listening, as today I don't hear that big difference through the 400i, the FC3 and KA17 sound damn near identical.

I need to redo this listening comparison with much shorter switching time and listening time, so I think I will just record some representative song through both devices and put it through the ABX tool. Also need to re-measure the multitone thing and make sure my cable setup isn't shorting the BAL channels' returns (though I'm pretty sure I didn't have that problem in measurements as I could only ever get one channel at a time connected to the line-in anyway, but it's worth re-checking).
Which HiBy are we talking about here? Just curious.
 
Which HiBy are we talking about here? Just curious.
FC3 mk1. Hasn't lost a listening comparison vs. any DAC I've put it up against so far, including the desktop-sized iFi Micro iDSD (2015) or recently this highly acclaimed FiiO KA17 with the THX-AAA amplifier in it. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom