It’s cool. Your new and you came out of hole a little hot. Consider this your welcoming wagon initiation all rolled into one. Thick skin is definitely needed here. More so for Staff Members
-
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?
- Thread starter Willhelm_Scream
- Start date
Provided as FYI.
Rules for Audio Dealers, Manufacturers, Members with Commercial Interest. This includes any Guest Contributors/Reviewer with Commercial endorsement
We have been operating without specific guidelines for members of the industry and this has caused a number of issues/complaints. So I thought it is time that we set some rules: Audio Science Review Rules for Dealers, Manufacturers, Reviewers and Members of Industry. We encourage...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Well I have to confess to not fully thinking that through. Clearly it is the latter - since I searched for scientific evidence on the topic, and it is literally impossible to convince any search engine to even consider drawing a light sabre as you would a sword. No matter what wording you use you get pages of detail on how to draw a light sabre.... on a piece of paper.
But
"switches on lightsaber* is nowhere near as cool**.
**Clearly there is some relativistic thinking going on here
Last edited:
That's fine but I agree with myself MORE than you do!!!I find I tend to agree with myself!
You are correct.
According to my exhaustive calculations, based on Newton's calculus, Einstein's relativity, and the Unified Theory of Gravitation, the break in period of a cable is expressed in this formula:
B=A*L*O*N*E*Y where B=break-in period, A=angstrom thickness of the conductors, L=length in furlongs (single direction), O=% oxygen content of the conductor, N=number of conductors in the cable, E=energy within the conductor (average watts per listening session), Y=daily frequency of times a Yes album is played in the system (only releases featuring Jon Anderson on vocals).
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 21,039
- Likes
- 38,298
Oh, now you've uncovered your deception. No modern scientist would use furlongs for length. Maybe L should have been for liters of metal?
Nightingale Audio
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2023
- Messages
- 11
- Likes
- 1
Not sure if this is a form of intimidation.... In order to submit your thoughts or discovery you have to risk being offensive in pursuit of the truth, whether or not you find it to be true. Certainly everyone risks being offensive to me why should I not defend myself? Why am I being silenced? Just because I have a product I should not have a voice?
You don't have to risk being offensive. Just don't be offensive.
Politeness and respect are free of charge, and easy to do. It is even possible to disagree and still be polite.
And no-one is silencing you. You just got some free of charge yet valuable feedback, which you can use to improve your experience here from now on.
Killingbeans
Major Contributor
Not an intimidation. Just an observation of the state of things.
ASR gets a lot of drive-by trolls, who just throw around some magical garbage thinking and hope some of it will get a heated reaction from the "measurement idiots".
It puts people on edge.
Also, claims about cables having a "sound", besides the EQ effects you get from oddball LCR parameters, are guaranteed to get some serious pushback, for good reason.
The "silence" part was probably a hint at the benefits of lurking a bit more to get a feel for the place, before you barge in and unknowingly(?) spew things that are against the common consensus, inevitably receiving nothing but eye-rolls in return
It's possible to be a devil's advocate on ASR. There's a few regulars around who's managed to be so without stirring things up. But "You guys are all idiot!" and the likes won't get you far.
Consensus is meaningless. Data rules. Come in with actual data (e.g., ears-only listening tests with appropriate controls) and that's better than consensus.
Killingbeans
Major Contributor
I thought it was implicit that the consensus is based on the data we've collected so far.
Maybe it's just my autistic brain failing to remember that for most people "consensus" merely means "I believe what most of my friends believe".
I'll never be able to see the logic in that...
Maybe it's just my autistic brain failing to remember that for most people "consensus" merely means "I believe what most of my friends believe".
I'll never be able to see the logic in that...
Hey Shayzer,
The K7 was on my radar also, as I also heard that it had a warmer sound signature compared to the DX3 Pro+. I chose the DX3 Pro+ over the K7 because it had a led display. I had to return the DX3 Pro+ due to a faulty display (go figure...lol), but that put the DL200 on my radar, and I purchased one. I have no regrets at all. You can read my review in this thread. I never read any comparisons of the K7 and the DL200, but I find the DL200 much more musical and enjoyable to listen too over the DX3 Pro+. I would recommend ordering one through Amazon so its easier to return if you don't like it. That way at least you have a baseline to work off of to what you like or don't like. Keep us posted my friend.
It is highly unlikely that you would be able to tell the difference between these devices in a properly level matched, blind test with a 'normal' pair of headphones (by normal I mean not ridiculously low or high impedance). There are lots of discussions on ASR regarding measurements, their audibility, proper level matching and blind testing. This audibility post is a good place to start and will help put Amir's (and others) measurements into context... https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-thresholds-of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/
You don't know me my friend, I think that is an unfair assumption for you to make. Its people like you who scare people away from ASR. I've owned both, I never did a review of the Topping cause I was never sure if I was going to keep it/replace it since it had a faulty display. I won't repeat my review I did on the DL 200, you welcome to look it up and poke more holes at it. Shayzer came here for some advise and I tried to help him the best I could since no one replied.
Please don't take offence. My 'assumption' is based on the scientific evidence we have available to us now. The thread I linked to contains explanations of the science relating to audibility and references to the research where appropriate. ASR is a science based forum; you should be prepared to be challenged when expressing subjective opinions, especially when stated as fact and when those opinions are at odds with the accepted science. You should also be prepared to challenge your own assumptions and poke your own holes in your subjective experiences - you will learn a lot more and get a lot more enjoyment out of this forum if you do. I hope you stick around long enough to find this out for yourself.
Well the DL200 has more power, a newer 3rd generation xmos chip, newer ESS Sabre chip with new enhancements, (and wait for it)...it has better SINAD... I think those warrant consideration, but the numbers don't always tell the whole story, and newer isn't always better.
The DX3 Pro+ has a more treble forward sound, it grated on me a lot on my old classic rock and 80's metal tracks. I would get fatigued quickly and not want to listen to music as long as I would like to. I don't have that same experience with the DL200. I listen to it all the time cause my music sounds so much better through it, better than I ever heard it before. I can finally get lost in listening to my music, instead of trying to fix what I don't like. I now find myself listening to music late into the night, and searching out new music to listen to. I never had that experience with the Topping. I think there's validity to practical experience helping to interpret the numbers, if not it seems most would just chase best SINAD ratings and call it a day. (Yes I know SINAD alone isn't the only test to look at, but it seems to hold a lot of weight around here).
I've been along time lurker on here, and have read a lot of Amirs reviews and really appreciate all he does. I get tired of hearing the all amps sound the same, and all DAC sound the same argument. I don't think Amir would agree with you on that.
The DX3 Pro+ has a more treble forward sound, it grated on me a lot on my old classic rock and 80's metal tracks. I would get fatigued quickly and not want to listen to music as long as I would like to. I don't have that same experience with the DL200. I listen to it all the time cause my music sounds so much better through it, better than I ever heard it before. I can finally get lost in listening to my music, instead of trying to fix what I don't like. I now find myself listening to music late into the night, and searching out new music to listen to. I never had that experience with the Topping. I think there's validity to practical experience helping to interpret the numbers, if not it seems most would just chase best SINAD ratings and call it a day. (Yes I know SINAD alone isn't the only test to look at, but it seems to hold a lot of weight around here).
I've been along time lurker on here, and have read a lot of Amirs reviews and really appreciate all he does. I get tired of hearing the all amps sound the same, and all DAC sound the same argument. I don't think Amir would agree with you on that.
The FR measurements for DX3 Pro+ does however not show that there is any extra energy in the treble. One way they could differ on this is on which filter is used.
Believe me I tried all the different filters, just as I did on the DL200. Plus on the DL200 I can adjust the DPLL settings. I didn't hear any differences on the filters on the Topping, but on the DL200 I could. I found I liked F6 best, and at least two others on this thread agreed. I got called out for saying that F6 had punchier bass and better mids. I chose not to argue the fact that changes in high frequencies can have an effect on the hearing perception of mids and bass.
I'm not the first to mention the DX3Pro+ as treble forward, nor the first to say SMSL sounds warmer. Heck Schitt even started to make two versions of some of their amps. The second versions where for people who chase testing measurements instead of sound. Measurements are great, I'm all for the science, but they don't tell the whole story. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to find two different DAC/Headphone amp combos with the same chipset, and measurements that are very similar, but sound different.
I'm not the first to mention the DX3Pro+ as treble forward, nor the first to say SMSL sounds warmer. Heck Schitt even started to make two versions of some of their amps. The second versions where for people who chase testing measurements instead of sound. Measurements are great, I'm all for the science, but they don't tell the whole story. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to find two different DAC/Headphone amp combos with the same chipset, and measurements that are very similar, but sound different.
Last edited:
Soria Moria
Senior Member
What people mean when they say that is that any amplifier or DAC that has been competently designed will sound the same. You can make bad amplifiers and DACs that will sound worse.
People claim all kinds of things in this hobby due to biased sighted listening and expectation bias etc.
Probably to sell them to people who don't fully believe in the current science like you. People sell and claim anything.
What story are they not telling in regards to amplifiers and DACs that have been proven to be real through proper blind listening tests and not just part of someone's imagination?