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

[Willhelm_Scream]

Yes, like I said, I'm sorry that some people really can't hear well. The funny part is that these two dacs would probably measure quite differently, but somehow they sound the same to everyone.

Yes, they would measure differently, because machines are capable of making measurements below the threshold that humans can hear.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

So if I'm correct, what you are saying is the dac in your macbook is pretty much as good as it gets for audible sound?

For audible sound? No, it isn't as good as it gets because there are other things that actually change the audible sound like the pair of headphones you choose. But can people "hear the difference in sound" between the dac in a MacBook Pro and the dac in something like a benchmark dac 3? No and it most likely goes much lower than something like a MacBook Pro or Apple USBC dongle. The only problem with these types of devices is that they might not have enough power if you have demanding headphones (if you have a powerful amp you should be good though. The DAC on my MacBook Pro is plenty powerful enough to drive all my headphones when I pair with my THX789.

People can't hear the difference between different cables either just in case you were wondering.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Yes, like I said, I'm sorry that some people really can't hear well. The funny part is that these two dacs would probably measure quite differently, but somehow they sound the same to everyone.

There are people with better hearing than you who understand that there isn't an audible difference between dacs. Do you also think that the digital to analog circuitry in your DVD player makes movies look better than other DVD players playing movies on the same TV? Just curious. Also are you aware of what the placebo effect is, and of all of the different reasons that human senses are fallible? If so, then why are you so certain that you are hearing actual differences? How can you possibly say that the differences you hear aren't due to the placebo effect? If I thought that I heard subtle differences between equipment, I at least would admit that the difference might not be an actual difference, and would admit that I am unsure one way or another. But to be arrogant to the point that you think there is no way that the differences you think you can hear can be explained by anything other than the fact that you have much better hearing than everyone else, is something that I really just don't understand.

 

[MrGoodbits]

I literally have no audiophile friends for this reason, just can't deal with the audiophoolery. What I will tell people, though, is what I personally experienced first hand: when I did DBT tests---back when my ears were young---I could not hear any difference whatsoever between TOL amps/preamps and a cheap but good measuring receiver (using good speakers and acoustics).

It has to be experienced. Before the DBTs, when you know what's playing, you hear differences (slam, timing, etc); during the DBTs everything sounds exactly the same (but not any less good, there's nothing missing); and after the DBTs, if you're smart about it, any interest in "audible" differences in good-measuring electronics just sort of fades away,

I think the personal DBT experience is the only way to make any headway against audiophoolery.

 

[LTig]

Understood, thanks.

So with all that said, does it make sense to get a separate, dedicated DAC to pair with a separate dedicated headphone amp? Or to just get a headphone amp with its own internal DAC and call it a day?

It depends on your needs. Do you want one box or two (two boxes require more space and additional cables and are often more expensive than a one box solution - two power supplies, two housings). OTOH you have more choices with separate boxes. Other features you may like to have: separate volume controlled outputs (like a preamp), EQ, crossfeed, tone controls, analog inputs, more digital inputs, ...

A lot of DACs, headphone amps and combinations thereof covering a very wide price range have been tested here so you can choose according to your needs. I did. Just playing Weend'ô You Need To Know Yourself.

 

[pkane]

Yes, like I said, I'm sorry that some people really can't hear well. The funny part is that these two dacs would probably measure quite differently, but somehow they sound the same to everyone.

The problem is not that people can't hear well. It's that people believe that they can hear minute differences, even when none are there.

When you or I or anyone listens to music, we have very little control over what we focus on. Listening to the same exact track twice, you'll hear different things and have a different impression, sometimes the bass slam will be greater, sometimes the highs will be too bright, sometimes the soundstage will appear wider. Our precise audio memory is very short, a matter of seconds, and our ability to hear and compare sounds is not well adapted to evaluating audio equipment. This is easy to test if you let someone else randomly change components without telling you. The first time you are sure that you hear major differences between two components and find out that the same one was used for both tests, you'll realize that this is true.

Audibility training can help with detecting certain differences and is well worth it. Blind testing will help you overcome the confidence that you are a perfect audio detecting machine. Hint: you are not.

 

[LTig]

[..] It has to be experienced. Before the DBTs, when you know what's playing, you hear differences (slam, timing, etc); during the DBTs everything sounds exactly the same (but not any less good, there's nothing missing); and after the DBTs, if you're smart about it, any interest in "audible" differences in good-measuring electronics just sort of fades away,

We humans must trust our senses since they are the only means we have to experience the external world. That makes it very difficult to accept that these very senses fool us more often than we think. This posting contains my revelation (bold markings by me).

I think the personal DBT experience is the only way to make any headway against audiophoolery.

Let me repeat an older posting:

One should show these people a few optical illusions. Using very simple basic tools (like using ones own finger to hide a part of an image) shows them that they cannot trust their eyes telling the truth. This may help no longer trusting ones ears as well.

 

[BDWoody]

One day scientists will discover the difference between the sound produced by those scrap pile cables and proper audiophile cables, and you'll be looked at like the guys that questioned Faraday.

Could be...just funny that nobody can reliably identify the difference once the levels are matched... In the mean time, by all means keep holding onto hope.
Sometimes that's all there is left...
I'll spend the money on a tropical island trip, because...i can actually enjoy that in the real world.
So nice when resources can go towards actually making life better in non-imagined ways.

 

[ashleydoormat]

No.



At least 200 years of metallurgy and physics.

Dude this is not a proper way to respond to a legitimate question. Any source you can provide to enlighten me? I'm not a EE and I'm open to learning more science!

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Could be...just funny that nobody can reliably identify the difference once the levels are matched... In the mean time, by all means keep holding onto hope.
Sometimes that's all there is left...
I'll spend the money on a tropical island trip, because...i can actually enjoy that in the real world.
So nice when resources can go towards actually making life better in non-imagined ways.

I'm guessing you didn't read the rest of this thread.

 

[ashleydoormat]

@amirm actually did a test between DIGITAL cables that showed a measurable difference in the output of the DAC. It is far below what somebody could hear. But it's there in the signal.

Can you point me to the test? Thanks!

Either way is it appropriate to use the result of one test between certain selected cables and apply the conclusion to every cable in the market?

 

[SIY]

Dude this is not a proper way to respond to a legitimate question. Any source you can provide to enlighten me? I'm not a EE and I'm open to learning more science!

I’d recommend starting with a basic freshman-level text on electromagnetism. Then move on to solid state physics. Personally, I’m a fan of the Feynman Lectures, but they may be some tough sledding. Worth it, though.

 

[BDWoody]

I literally have no audiophile friends for this reason, just can't deal with the audiophoolery. What I will tell people, though, is what I personally experienced first hand: when I did DBT tests---back when my ears were young---I could not hear any difference whatsoever between TOL amps/preamps and a cheap but good measuring receiver (using good speakers and acoustics).

It has to be experienced. Before the DBTs, when you know what's playing, you hear differences (slam, timing, etc); during the DBTs everything sounds exactly the same (but not any less good, there's nothing missing); and after the DBTs, if you're smart about it, any interest in "audible" differences in good-measuring electronics just sort of fades away,

I think the personal DBT experience is the only way to make any headway against audiophoolery.

It really is like a before and after event for me...
Changed everything.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

I’d recommend starting with a basic freshman-level text on electromagnetism. Then move on to solid state physics.

lol at someone who thinks who thinks there are sound differences between cables self-learning electromagnetism.

 

[SIY]

lol at someone who thinks who thinks there are sound differences between cables self-learning electromagnetism.

Gotta start somewhere. That’s where I started, and it was useful toward getting me a decent level of understanding.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

I literally have no audiophile friends for this reason, just can't deal with the audiophoolery. What I will tell people, though, is what I personally experienced first hand: when I did DBT tests---back when my ears were young---I could not hear any difference whatsoever between TOL amps/preamps and a cheap but good measuring receiver (using good speakers and acoustics).

It has to be experienced. Before the DBTs, when you know what's playing, you hear differences (slam, timing, etc); during the DBTs everything sounds exactly the same (but not any less good, there's nothing missing); and after the DBTs, if you're smart about it, any interest in "audible" differences in good-measuring electronics just sort of fades away,

I think the personal DBT experience is the only way to make any headway against audiophoolery.

Anyone who believes in audiophoolery will do anything they can to avoid such an experience. Some people just love to live under a veil of ignorance. Might work for people who already have a decent math/science education, but for most audiphools, forcing them to have a "DBT experience" isn't going to make a difference.

 

[BDWoody]

I'm guessing you didn't read the rest of this thread.

Actually, just took that post I was responding to out of proper context.
My mistake.
As you were...
(Ducks out non-gracefully)

 

[LTig]

Yes, like I said, I'm sorry that some people really can't hear well.

There are people here who are very well trained in auditioning of minor musical details, e.g. regarding compression artefacts of lossy audio encoders. But even these people accept the fact that only a blind test is able to reveal if differences are audible or not.

Hearing involves not only the ears but to a very big part the brain, and although the brain is able of many fantastic things (like hearing through rooms - see @Floyd Toole's book) it is very limited in other things - which is well known after some 80 years of psychoacoustic studies. It's a pity that many audiophiles still ignore this wealth of information.

See this funny story.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Gotta start somewhere. That’s where I started, and it was useful toward getting me a decent level of understanding.

IMO, if you don't understand the equations, you don't understand electrodynamics. And there are few people who aren't physics, math or EE majors that have the mathematical background to understand any of that stuff. And most of the people who have the ability to learn that stuff, wouldn't have been able to do it without being forced to take the exams.

Perhaps though I'm underestimating the influence of just understanding the basics of "this shits all electricity" on someones perspective. Much of the problem is due to people looking at "DACS" as "devices that make music (and therefore must have a sound)" instead of looking at them like circuit boards that perform a necessary function of conversion, that are put in boxes and commodified into a sellable product. People forget that DACS are just the same thing that was always in your CD player or laptop that transformed digital information into an amplifiable electric signal.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Actually, just took that post I was responding to out of proper context.
My mistake.
As you were...
(Ducks out non-gracefully)

LOL. TY brother