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

[voodooless]

OK

any item in the chain of gear used to replay a recording that affects the accuracy of timing or level of reproduced sound at levels within the range and capacity of human hearing will affect how we perceive that sound in our listening space.

That seems rather self evident. It’s like saying: a red apple is red when it’s red.

 

[Jimster480]

There are two things you can do - easily on your own, or with little support from a friend (needed for the blind test)

1 - Do a properly controlled blind test - properly level matched - statistically valid, same filter type on each DAC. Prove you can hear a difference. You say you can - should be easy.

2 - Record the output of two dacs. Compare them using @pkane 's Deltawave (it's free to use). Can you hear the difference file? If you can, can you hear it when the track is also playing along side it? You can also use the two recorded files to do an ABX test.


Come back when you've demonstrated you can hear something using one of these methods and we might have something to talk about. Be prepared though to be challenged on your method. You'll need to do it right.

What hardware do you suggest I use to record the output? I wish to acquire it and do exactly this.

 

[krabapple]

OK

any item in the chain of gear used to replay a recording that affects the accuracy of timing or level of reproduced sound at levels within the range and capacity of human hearing will affect how we perceive that sound in our listening space.

Much better but also not necessarily true, thanks to e.g. masking

I am assuming the effect on timing or level referred to in the first part is measured, not simply 'reported' from hearing.

 

[JustJones]

OK

any item in the chain of gear used to replay a recording that affects the accuracy of timing or level of reproduced sound at levels within the range and capacity of human hearing will affect how we perceive that sound in our listening space.

If it's within the range and capacity of human hearing then it can be measured and we know what's causing the difference. I thought the claim is DACs affect the soundstage differently even though they measure beyond the ability of human hearing.

 

[knownothing]

That seems rather self evident. It’s like saying: a red apple is red when it’s red.

Exactly.

 

[knownothing]

Much better but also not necessarily true, thanks to e.g. masking

I am assuming the effect on timing or level referred to in the first part is measured, not simply 'reported' from hearing.

I am suggesting it be “recorded” using the equipment and algorithms used by the MIT laboratory I referenced earlier in the thread. So yes, measured, but the MIT system used would be a facsimile of human hearing that the authors claim is capable of identifying localized sounds, mimicking human capabilities.

 

[knownothing]

If it's within the range and capacity of human hearing then it can be measured and we know what's causing the difference. I thought the claim is DACs affect the soundstage differently even though they measure beyond the ability of human hearing.

No, the original post prompting my posts on this thread (which has been merged into a much longer running thread) asked this question:

Why isn't sounds stage from a dac measurable?​

 

[antcollinet]

What hardware do you suggest I use to record the output? I wish to acquire it and do exactly this.

An ADC whose performance is also transparent, such as the E1DA Cosmos ADC.

 

[dlaloum]

Distortion in DACs is usually well below audible levels. And it's usually swamped by the distortion produced by the transducers (speakers or headphones).

Indeed! - I don't believe DAC's have an impact on soundstage.... DAC/Amps on the other hand.... (but its the AMP not the DAC, and even there it is the interaction between amp and speaker that is likely to cause an issue where that happens)

 

[Blumlein 88]

I am suggesting it be “recorded” using the equipment and algorithms used by the MIT laboratory I referenced earlier in the thread. So yes, measured, but the MIT system used would be a facsimile of human hearing that the authors claim is capable of identifying localized sounds, mimicking human capabilities.

Did you read that whole paper? It sounds like some good work. Did you notice it worked indoors quite well, but failed in outdoor settings. So it has some way to go for using it the way you have in mind. I suppose one could say you are going to have it replace the human user for the blind testing part. That would be okay if the algorithms are good enough.

Yet, the part you are being hard headed about is not listening to what could possibly effect the results of a human or that algorithm. Anything that does that is 100's or 1000's of times smaller in variability between any two DACs that are decent designs. They know this too at MIT. The ADC/DAC they used to train the neural net was of moderate quality. If it wasn't up to the task then changing DACs would change the neural net. The reason it isn't a problem is because any good ADC or DAC is not going to have any effect on directional hearing by humans. So we can confidently tell you that the facsimile for human hearing will also not detect any difference.

What kind of information would convince you of this?

 

[dlaloum]

Talking about the "sound stage" of any gear upstream from your speakers literally makes zero sense.

Except your amp, in cases where the Amp is mismatched to the speakers... (eg: low impedance speakers with an amp that does not handle low impedance well / hits current clipping)

 

[knownothing]

Did you read that whole paper? It sounds like some good work. Did you notice it worked indoors quite well, but failed in outdoor settings. So it has some way to go for using it the way you have in mind. I suppose one could say you are going to have it replace the human user for the blind testing part. That would be okay if the algorithms are good enough.

Yet, the part you are being hard headed about is not listening to what could possibly effect the results of a human or that algorithm. Anything that does that is 100's or 1000's of times smaller in variability between any two DACs that are decent designs. They know this too at MIT. The ADC/DAC they used to train the neural net was of moderate quality. If it wasn't up to the task then changing DACs would change the neural net. The reason it isn't a problem is because any good ADC or DAC is not going to have any effect on directional hearing by humans. So we can confidently tell you that the facsimile for human hearing will also not detect any difference.

What kind of information would convince you of this?

Running the test I suggest with any gear, models and analyses sensitive enough to prove your point. Thanks.

kn

 

[BDWoody]

Running the test I suggest with any gear, models and analyses sensitive enough to prove your point. Thanks.

We're just going around in circles here.

I don't see a lot of effort being put into trying to understand, so I'm going to give you a few days off from this thread, so you can maybe digest a little more of what is being said.

 

[Jimster480]

An ADC whose performance is also transparent, such as the E1DA Cosmos ADC.

Thanks, should I buy one or two?

 

[antcollinet]

Thanks, should I buy one or two?

Currently trying to think of a reason you'd need two.

 

[Deleted member 71725]

I just read through the first 13 pages or so, enjoyed the philosophy greatly, and after running around in a few circles of my own, skipped to here, only to discover the same circles being run.

I’m left with the age-old questions of why is there anything; why is the question absurd; and why am ignoring my real-life obligations in favor of philosophical rabbit holes as I enjoy music with a silent 4k TV blasting weather?

Find me at AXPONA and I’ll give you a carefully thought-through, circularly biased answer on my way to a ridiculously priced room of equipment I’ll enjoy and curse while listening to more music.

Cheers!

Edit: Meant to add that there are lots of truly bright bulbs here, and I suspect that’s what keeps other bright bulbs coming back. I don’t confer the metaphor to myself…

 

[Coverpage]

DACs do alter the sound. This is not hard to find out; just try out a few DACs with similar linearity measurements (without load) and listen through your headphones. I haven't studied this deeply enough to understand all the factors that cause it.

But having listened to many DACs, more expensive is most definitely not better. More often than not, it's just different, and what matters more is pairing the DAC, amp, and headphones according to your subjective preference. If you're open to EQ, it's especially not necessary to buy excessively expensive DACs; a blind test would likely confirm that you can't tell how expensive the DAC is by its sound.

 

[antcollinet]

I just read through the first 13 pages or so, enjoyed the philosophy greatly

Welcome to the forum.

only to discover the same circles being run.

An ASR core competence

 

[BDWoody]

I just read through the first 13 pages or so, enjoyed the philosophy greatly, and after running around in a few circles of my own, skipped to here, only to discover the same circles being run.

The thread was started when we probably had around 7k members, and it has served us well as we've grown.

We've got new members coming in every day, and many are starting from the same place with the same handful of questions with the same arguments in response, so this thread really represents hundreds of consolidations as otherwise disruptive questions can be moved here and addressed in one place.

 

[DLS79]

I have two Topping DACs on my desk now. E50 and E70V.


We can adjust the gain to be similar and play a song. Doing a simple A/B, I can tell the obvious tonal difference between the two. Now if you try the R2R DACs, it'll be even easier, although I don't know if they are similarly low SINAD as well.

The fact that you don't know this tells me you haven't actually tried it yourself. Science requires you to explore and try. Observe nature.

I think you are on the wrong forum!