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

[solderdude]

Many DACs descriptions enhance in capital letters 32/768 kHz resolution. Is there any domain when such a resolution may be justified?

It is useful for the sellers of those formats and consumers think they have something that sounds 'better' and will hear it as such.
Win-win

 

[antcollinet]

Many DACs descriptions enhance in capital letters 32/768 kHz resolution. Is there any domain when such a resolution may be justified?

Maybe in production - if you are not spending stupid money on it, it allows you to process the sound as much as you like without worrying about a build up of errors. And pretty much frees you from worrying about levels within that 32 bit range.

Though I think the justification of the high frequency range there is more difficult. Mainly it will just result in huge files.

 

[Brian Hall]

That -30dB noise floor is over the entire spectrum and if most of it is in the lower part of the spectrum it isn't the audible noise floor for mids/upper mids.
Consider that the dynamic range of human can handle is about 70-80dB.
This is not the same as being able to hear -5dB at 3kHz and 130dB (pain limit).
Play peaks at 100dB SPL and at 30dB peaks it is all silence one hears.
Play peaks at 120dB and about 40dB is the softest sound one can hear... that will be lower again when some time has passed without such loud peaks.

But yes, 16bits, dithered is more than enough and can reach over 96dB dynamic range. Think of dither as DSD in the smallest bit.

For recordings it pays to have 144dB (theoretically as the practical noise floor is in the way) as one can have a LOT of headroom recording loud sounds without the need of watching the peak meters not reaching 0dB and having to redo the recording after apologizing to the artists

Yes, when I am recording my own music I have written, I record up to 24 separate tracks at 24/48 and then mix it down to stereo 16/44.1.

 

[Miguelón]

That -30dB noise floor is over the entire spectrum and if most of it is in the lower part of the spectrum it isn't the audible noise floor for mids/upper mids.
Consider that the dynamic range of human can handle is about 70-80dB.
This is not the same as being able to hear -5dB at 3kHz and 130dB (pain limit).
Play peaks at 100dB SPL and at 30dB peaks it is all silence one hears.
Play peaks at 120dB and about 40dB is the softest sound one can hear... that will be lower again when some time has passed without such loud peaks.

But yes, 16bits, dithered is more than enough and can reach over 96dB dynamic range. Think of dither as DSD in the smallest bit.

For recordings it pays to have 144dB (theoretically as the practical noise floor is in the way) as one can have a LOT of headroom recording loud sounds without the need of watching the peak meters not reaching 0dB and having to redo the recording after apologizing to the artists

I imagined that I could listened a difference but surely was again another psychological influence.
Or maybe the new releasing was be remixed, there are different on volume also

 

[antcollinet]

This is because volume should be encoded on the digital signal and upsampling lets the place to extra methadata bits?

No, it's because the upsampling means the quantisation noise from the volume reduction and subsequent re-quantisation stays below the quantisation noise within the 16 bit source.

 

[Miguelón]

No, it's because the upsampling means the quantisation noise from the volume reduction and subsequent re-quantisation stays below the quantisation noise within the 16 bit source.

Thanks, I’m not understanding everything because quantisation noise is a topic I have not studied. But is a good thing to learn this weekend which is announced to be rainy and tempests.

 

[Brian Hall]

Maybe in production - if you are not spending stupid money on it, it allows you to process the sound as much as you like without worrying about a build up of errors. And pretty much frees you from worrying about levels within that 32 bit range.

Though I think the justification of the high frequency range there is more difficult. Mainly it will just result in huge files.

It will also require a monster of a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) to handle very many tracks at those crazy high sampling rates for no extra benefit. There is benefit to 24 bits and maybe up to 96khz, but going over that will bring most PCs to a crawl. 24/48khz is plenty when working on recorded tracks.

There is no benefit to higher than 16/44.1 for playback after the other work/mixing is done.

Edited to define DAW.

 

[Brian Hall]

Thanks, I’m not understanding everything because quantisation noise is a topic I have not studied. But is a good thing to learn this weekend which is announced to be rainy and tempests.

It is not something you need to be concerned about with music you listen to that was produced by someone competent and played back on equipment that measures well.

 

[Miguelón]

It will also require a monster of a DAW to handle very many tracks at those crazy high sampling rates for no extra benefit. There is benefit to 24 bits and maybe up to 96khz, but going over that will bring most PCs to a crawl. 24/48khz is plenty when working on recorded tracks.

There is no benefit to higher than 16/44.1 for playback after the other work/mixing is done.

Thanks again, that makes a total waste of money my 20€/month subscription (master and hi-res access) while the 10€/months has 16/44.1

Now they have unified the subscription to 11€/month no matter the resolution

 

[Miguelón]

It is not something you need to be concerned about with music you listen to that was produced by someone competent and played back on equipment that measures well.

I’m very curious, I study all things that I can. Is a pleasure for me, now I’m out of university and free form exams and masters etc, learning without pressure is relaxing

 

[Brian Hall]

My Qobuz subscription allows for "HiRes", but these are the settings I use:

 

[Miguelón]

Thanks a lot again for all members that had the patience to persist on changing my perception on dacs and human listening.

I now realize that demands a lot of effort to convince someone to stay clear and firm against marketing influences.

I admire perseverance of the forum, high technical reviews and assessment. First time I watched I just added Amir or other members reviews to some “free reviews” (sarcasm, I think they have a lot of influence and in fact they presented 3 pages of subjective impression with no one messurement). Rapidly I realized that where a completely new world in acoustics

 

[Brian Hall]

I tried using similar settings in Tidal, but kept getting a lot of MQA at "16/44" so I just canceled Tidal again.

 

[Miguelón]

My Qobuz subscription allows for "HiRes", but these are the settings I use:


View attachment 365563

I was subscribed to Qobuz in the past, especially years when I lived in France and from time to time switch back and forth with Tidal. I keep Spotify also because I love playlists and its suggestions to discover new music

 

[Miguelón]

I tried using similar settings in Tidal, but kept getting a lot of MQA at "16/44" so I just canceled Tidal again.

Yeah, MQA is bizarre, and even worse than some mp3 files. Also my DAC do crazy things sometimes when changing from CD to MQA and reverse…
Apparently they are gradually changing MQA to CD or hi-res, at least I red comments telling that

 

[antcollinet]

Thanks a lot again for all members that had the patience to persist on changing my perception on dacs and human listening.

I now realize that demands a lot of effort to convince someone to stay clear and firm against marketing influences.

I admire perseverance of the forum, high technical reviews and assessment. First time I watched I just added Amir or other members reviews to some “free reviews” (sarcasm, I think they have a lot of influence and in fact they presented 3 pages of subjective impression with no one messurement). Rapidly I realized that where a completely new world in acoustics

It is difficult to get past what you have been "taught" by the subjective industry over years. It's difficult to let go of those beliefs. But a lot of us have gone through it ourselves.

From ASR side it is a pleasure when someone is able to listen and learn from what they find here so that they are able to do so. It is one of the reasons ASR is here, and it makes the effort worthwhile.

 

[Brian Hall]

Thanks a lot again for all members that had the patience to persist on changing my perception on dacs and human listening.

I now realize that demands a lot of effort to convince someone to stay clear and firm against marketing influences.

I admire perseverance of the forum, high technical reviews and assessment. First time I watched I just added Amir or other members reviews to some “free reviews” (sarcasm, I think they have a lot of influence and in fact they presented 3 pages of subjective impression with no one messurement). Rapidly I realized that where a completely new world in acoustics

Understanding how things really work is freeing. You will realize that good DACs (and streamers) really do sound the same regardless of price, even when some idiot is telling you why the $25,000 DAC has a bunch of BS subjective advantages compared to a better performing $150 DAC.

 

[Miguelón]

It is difficult to get past what you have been "taught" by the subjective industry over years. It's difficult to let go of those beliefs. But a lot of us have gone through it ourselves.

From ASR side it is a pleasure when someone is able to listen and learn from what they find here so that they are able to do so. It is one of the reasons ASR is here, and it makes the effort worthwhile.

I will try to explain things I learned to some friends, they spend crazy money on dacs and cables that costs 300€/meter or more on home setups.

I never thought to buy an expensive cable, but I was barely convinced to buy a 1500€ DAC with have no more useful functionality for me than a 200€ one

 

[Miguelón]

Understanding how things really work is freeing. You will realize that good DACs (and streamers) really do sound the same regardless of price, even when some idiot is telling you why the $25,000 DAC has a bunch of BS subjective advantages compared to a better performing $150 DAC.

Are you joking? It exists a 25.000 $ DAC?

 

[Brian Hall]

Are you joking? It exists a 25.000 $ DAC?

One example:

Audiogon Discussion Forum

I was purchasing some hi-res files from NativeDSD today and found mention of PS Audio’s Obsidian Ted Smith Signature Dac ($25K) in their compatibility e...

forum.audiogon.com