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

[Sal1950]

For example the rules of joining at head-fi are pretty clear that it is a subjectivist community first and foremost so joining means that you acknowledge that point and are obliged to either respect it or leave the community.

That's exactly why I left there and a few others some years back. I just ran out of patience for listening and debating the BS.

and that the current administration is run by a group of evil genius, power hungry pedophiles.

I think that part it true.

 

[audio2design]

It's incredible, but if you want to be friends with audiophiles or even post on an audiophile board, you either have to pretend you agree or somehow remain silent when people talk about this stuff.

This is the actual problem. Your need to participate with these people, at least on audiophile boards. I now just see them as a source of amusement. If you want to be angry at someone be angry at the suppliers, those that profits off the websites, etc. My favourite "subjective" site is Audiogon, purely for amusement, because it does not just attract, but encourages the greatest level of "whackadoodle". Their business model is predicated on it.

Of Audiogon and AudioScienceReview, ASR is far higher ranked and is exclusively forums, whereas Audiogon is mainly sales. Now if we could just deal with head-fi's popularity, which says more about headphone popularity than anything else. There are a lot of people researching headphones

Oh, I do get the last laugh too often. I know that deep down so much of that subjective BS is nothing but insecurity. I know there is a good likelihood there is something in their music collection that my "engineering" contributed to the production of. Their ranting on the net has never contributed to anything. Something they love is that way because of me .... using nothing but science. They hate that.

 

[MaxBuck]

I'm not ready to say that there cannot be audible differences in the sound signature of competent DACs. But I can't hear them.

 

[solderdude]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but even with a DAC section being SOTA, it is actually not very difficult for a DAC to have a coloured sound. Would the design of the analogue stage not provide the designers an opportunity to colour the sound at that stage?

Yes, of course. One can use tube output stages, use transformers, use poor post filters (behind DS chips), or roll-off treble response in an audible way. People buy that and pay lots of money for it too. Just to own something they think sounds 'less digital' as the brochure and subjective reviews promise you.

One can buy into that or just not buy a (subtle) effect box and/or buy a DAC that does not come even close to adhering to the sampling theorem (on purpose) thinking it is better because a 1kHz square wave looks so nice.
I am quite certain some young kids with good hearing will be able to pass blind tests. Better or different ? preferred ?

Me, I simply buy good performing cheaper DACs and don't have to worry if something else would not sound 'better'.

 

[Killingbeans]

Absolutely, I have over 12000 posts at head-fi and it is extremely challenging in that environment. The subjectivists have made it a moral and ethical issue to even point out where science may be of benefit to the discussions at hand. I understand to an extent; in the end, it is their money and hobby, and if people chose to enjoy it from a purely subjective position, they most certainly do have that right, and along with that, the right to discuss their point of view.

I joined head-fi a few weeks ago. Have 7 post at the moment. I believe that spending most your time in one specific group makes it easy for you to get lost in one idealism or another. I hope balancing things out a bit will help help me to avoid becomming a militant knob, but only time will tell.

I did already get a PM from a user trying to make it clear to this poor new kid that listening impressions is the thing that will remove all mystery. I wrote some "objectivistic" rambling back and probably failed hard at not being cocky. I bet the man thinks I'm a nutcase.

It's pretty clear that the headphone community has the passion and emotions turned up to 11, and it will be a great challenge for me to not end up being labeled as a troll

 

[Jimbob54]

I joined head-fi a few weeks ago. Have 7 post at the moment. I believe that spending most your time in one specific group makes it easy for you to get lost in one idealism or another. I hope balancing things out a bit will help help me to avoid becomming a militant knob, but only time will tell.

I did already get a PM from a user trying to make it clear to this poor new kid that listening impressions is the thing that will remove all mystery. I wrote some "objectivistic" rambling back and probably failed hard at not being cocky. I bet the man thinks I'm a nutcase.

It's pretty clear that the headphone community has the passion and emotions turned up to 11, and it will be a great challenge for me to not end up being labeled as a troll

I do wonder what would happen if you made only subjective observations but diametrically opposed to the majority view. So AKM chips become harsh and clinical, plenty of glare. ESS based DACs are velvety smooth.

HD600 are the most stark 'phones ever. Nary a veil in sight.

 

[mansr]

I do wonder what would happen if you made only subjective observations but diametrically opposed to the majority view. So AKM chips become harsh and clinical, plenty of glare. ESS based DACs are velvety smooth.

HD600 are the most stark 'phones ever. Nary a veil in sight.

Try and find out.

 

[NiagaraPete]

I drank the purple kooliad about DAC's but now I have become "enlightened" and only drink the facts. Unless its horrible compared to great it's unlikely inaudible.

 

[khark]

This is taken from Neumann's site, arguably experts in what they do. The thesis that just FR/Distortion measurements doesn't show us the whole picture is something a lot of people would be inclined to agree based on experience. Where does that leave us though?

 

[BDWoody]

This is taken from Neumann's site, arguably experts in what they do. The thesis that just FR/Distortion measurements doesn't show us the whole picture is something a lot of people would be inclined to agree based on experience. Where does that leave us though?

View attachment 156449

Still without any evidence that it is true.

 

[A Surfer]

I joined head-fi a few weeks ago. Have 7 post at the moment. I believe that spending most your time in one specific group makes it easy for you to get lost in one idealism or another. I hope balancing things out a bit will help help me to avoid becomming a militant knob, but only time will tell.

I did already get a PM from a user trying to make it clear to this poor new kid that listening impressions is the thing that will remove all mystery. I wrote some "objectivistic" rambling back and probably failed hard at not being cocky. I bet the man thinks I'm a nutcase.

It's pretty clear that the headphone community has the passion and emotions turned up to 11, and it will be a great challenge for me to not end up being labeled as a troll

Yes, even I once a darling of the community, sought out by equipment manufacturers to do reviews of gear am now often accused of being a troll because I struggle to hold to the rules of the community. I actually had the label of Contributor at head-fi which was a mark of respect and was granted to me by Jude and the admin team. I don't buck the rules at head-fi because I am an ass (or at least I hope not) but I find myself unable to hold my tongue. I tried Super best Audio Friends for a while, but sorry, that is a very unfriendly community and not something I could be involved in. Kind of makes my skin crawl actually if I'm to be honest. The whole idea of giving dislikes and ganging up on people is yucky.

I have found a new home here, but sadly my technical knowledge is nowhere up to the level of many members here so my value to the community is not particularly high, but I love being here anyway.

 

[JRS]

And the vast majority of music is run through tens or even hundreds of DACs and ADCs during the production process. Yet nobody really seems to get all up in arms about the standard DACs used in mixers and preamps.

Yes, but apparently it's only the last that counts. At least that's what they must contend, which sorta maybe makes sense from the weird perspective of viewing all the prior harm as having been beaten into the bit stream that is now for the last time being converted into a continuous v(t). It's all voodoo to me.

 

[JRS]

You could run a competition like drag racing for pinks (for those not familiar that refers to the winner owning the loser's car after the race).

If you can pick the better measuring DAC in a blind test, you take mine... if not, I take yours.

Edit: Naturally you'd want to eliminate the really bad outliers... but maybe set a minimum SNR of 115dB or so.

Maybe at CES, set up a room where for 100 bucks one can hit a progressive jackpot if they can discern two different dacs at a p value of 0.01, picked from a field of 4 highly reviewed DACs. Ever time someone loses, the counter goes up by 15 bucks. Easier than printing money, I tell you.

 

[Chrispy]

Still without any evidence that it is true.

I like the way they buffer that comment with the "this is particularly true of the more colored, non-linear end of the sound spectrum.....

 

[Chrispy]

Yes, but apparently it's only the last that counts.

Only the last that counts works how? Does that make sense to you?

 

[JRS]

Only the last that counts works how? Does that make sense to you?

Let me be try to be more clear--whatever various errors that have been made thru the recording and mastering process have become part of the permanent record so to speak. So none of those matter when comparing the sound of two DACs. The only errors that matter are the ones in your living room.

And that's assuming that large enough errors were made to change the bits. If none of the errors was large enough to flip a bit, then one is still hearing the only conversion that matters, and that's the last. In other words, one can argue that the cumulative effect of prior analog errors may matter, but only when bits are affected. Otherwise the differences only exist in the analog domain at the time of the last conversion. So in that sense it defeats the objection about what about all the other DAC's in the chain?
Does that help?

It seems to me that we need a Carver null test to decide the issue--this was done way back in the 70's or 80's when two amps were connected differentially so that the only sound produced is when there is a difference. Seems like if the DAC's were perfectly synchronized, the same sort of test could be done. And that face offs between competent devices would result in very deep nulls. That would be game, set and match IMO.

 

[Blumlein 88]

snip...............
It seems to me that we need a Carver null test to decide the issue--this was done way back in the 70's or 80's when two amps were connected differentially so that the only sound produced is when there is a difference. Seems like if the DAC's were perfectly synchronized, the same sort of test could be done. And that face offs between competent devices would result in very deep nulls. That would be game, set and match IMO.

You can look into Deltawave. Software for doing exactly as you describe. Pkane a member here wrote it.

Long thread covering it from the beginning until the non-beta release.

Beta-test: DeltaWave Null Comparison software

Folks, Only for the brave: I'd like to solicit your feedback and suggestions on DeltaWave null-testing software. It's an early preview, so please be gentle! Details and software download are available here: https://deltaw.org An example report produced by DeltaWave comparing two USB cables...

www.audiosciencereview.com

You can download it for free here:

DeltaWave Audio Null Comparator | DeltaWave documentation

deltaw.org

There is a long running thread with people doing loopback nulls that is over 10 years old at gearspace (formerly gearslutz).

Evaluating AD/DA loops by means of Audio Diffmaker - Gearspace.com

Originally Posted by didier.brest here's the result with soft limiting Thanks, Didier!

gearspace.com

Nulls aren't quite so deep as you might hope for though we know why. Primarily it is because of phase differences in the upper two octaves caused by different digital filters in use. These tests at gearspace are all 44.1 khz. Deltawave can actually unwrap that and mostly fix it. Once you do that you do in fact get some very deep nulls. When used for other purposes such as running a loopback and changing cables then rerun to compare what differs about cables you typically get nulling down to the thermal noise level indicating the cables all give the same results.

 

[snaimpally]

Measurements don't always tell the whole story. First of all, measurement equipment evolves. Current equipment can measure more and to more decimal places than before. Second, equipment can measure good but sound bad and vice-versa, which is why reviews on this forum include both objective measurements and subjective listening comments. Third, human sensory organs, like eyes and ears, are far more sophisticated than most measurement equipment.

 

[Chrispy]

Let me be try to be more clear--whatever various errors that have been made thru the recording and mastering process have become part of the permanent record so to speak. So none of those matters when comparing the sound of two DACs. The only errors that matters are the one in your living room.

And that's assuming that large enough errors were made to change the bits. If none of the errors was large enough to flip a bit, then one is still hearing the only conversion that matters, and that's the last. In other words, one can argue that the cumulative effect of prior analog errors may matter, but only when bits are affected. Otherwise the differences only exist in the analog domain at the time of the last conversion. So in that sense it defeats the objection about what about all the other DAC's in the chain?
Does that help?

It seems to me that we need a Carver null test to decide the issue--this was done way back in the 70's or 80's when two amps were connected differentially so that the only sound produced is when there is a difference. Seems like if the DAC's were perfectly synchronized, the same sort of test could be done. And that face offs between competent devices would result in very deep nulls. That would be game, set and match IMO.

Have you tried a test of a series of dac/adc/dac conversions to see where you can actually tell a difference with a particular recording? Seems to be a start as to where to start worrying about it let alone assuming there are particular differences based on subjective claims.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Have you tried a test of a series of dac/adc/dac conversions to see where you can actually tell a difference with a particular recording? Seems to be a start as to where to start worrying about it let alone assuming there are particular differences based on subjective claims.

I've posted two threads using 8th generation ADC/DAC copies vs the original digital file. Used different gear in both instances. You can still download the files and give a listen for yourself.

8th generation ADC/DAC loop vs the original.....can you hear it?

Download this zip file. It will unzip into a folder with three 30 second snippets of a Fiona Apple song. Two are the original digital file. One is an 8th generation loop thru DAC/ADC. Pick the odd file out on the poll...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Listen and choose the 8th generation digital copy.

Each of these zip files will open into three wav files. One is labeled Reference, one is A and one is B. These are 30 second snippets of full songs. The originals were from CD so all 44.1 khz and 16 bit. Either A or B has been thru 8 generations of DA to AD copying. The other is identical...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Also to show how relatively important and imperfect transducers (microphones and speakers) are I did a 4th generation copy using mikes and speakers. You can still download those here:

4th generation speaker to microphone loopback for your listening pleasure.

Inspired by @RayDunzl I played some song snippets over speakers, and recorded with a microphone. Then took the recording and looped it back thru again. The microphones were 1.25 meters from the speakers. In this case if you download this zip file, it will open into 3 original song snippets...

www.audiosciencereview.com