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

[Island_Kenny]

all I know is that a bad USB cable can be blamed for a lot of bad things.

 

[Sal1950]

all I know is that a bad USB cable can be blamed for a lot of bad things.

Yea, the DAC goes silent.

 

[raif71]

The force is strong with those that believe a DAC has a sound signature, seriously !!

 

[Sal1950]

The force is strong with those that believe a DAC has a sound signature, seriously !!

The Dark Side

 

[Phrangko]

All DACs sound different when listening tests are done sighted and not level matched.
There is nothing strange about that as the human brain is involved as 'test equipment'.
99% or more of DAC owners test sighted and not accurately level matched and consider sighted tests valid or have a warped idea of what 'blind testing is.
It's these reports and the ones BS audio magazines (paper or web) post, that enhances the notion of DACs, cables, players, decent amps sounding different making it believable and 'factual'.
Perhaps a handful of folks really puts effort in doing a valid (blind) test with statistical relevance. Those that do become 'enlightened' but will be scorned by those that don't. They will be told blind tests are flawed because (insert many reasons) or you are deaf.

It becomes more difficult (if not impossible) to discern between well designed DACs (proper filtering, freq. response and distortion level) when DAC's are level matched and one doesn't know which DAC is playing.

There may be cases it may well be that some DACs sound audibly different (to certain young and trained folks) if they measure substantially different.
With that I mean considered become audible thresholds are crossed in one or more areas.

How I deal with 'sighted' listeners ?
I encourage them (shortly) to do a proper blind test and when interested will give some pointers to test a bit more rigid (but not court style proof delivering).
Sometimes I tell them I can't tell the difference or give an explanation (depends on the person across you).
NEVER tell them they can't or don't hear a difference because the heard so is true, You can't fool their ears after all.
The vast majority thinks I am nuts, an ignorant EE, hardcore objective idiot, deaf or have no idea how music should sound and continues to ignore the message.
They CLEARLY and UNMISTAKABLY heard it and thus it is real.... how could it not be.
Then I go on ignore on the web and when meeting face to face will 'nod' kindly and listen to their babbles (like they do to mine) and friendly part ways.

The only way to get another camp to 'think' a bit more is show them in a test. Have done that in the past (with cables) and the fun part is that they admit 'grudgingly' that they can't hear a difference but the vast majority thinks it was only in a 'rigged' test and don't change their minds one little bit.

These folks exist.. let them live their lives and you yours.
You can't easily convert someone's religion, best to just let them go on thinking their hearing is 'superior' and there are things 'we' cannot measure (yet) or don't know how to measure.

Now that you mentioned it, audiophilia is a religion. Criticize and you'll get it.

 

[digicidal]

The Dark Side

I've heard that they have cookies at their meetings... it is a seriously compelling reason to join IMO.

 

[yigitboy]

As there is no perfectly manufactured device, all minor or major defects may make us feel or hear different. Is not that so easy?

 

[Julf]

As there is no perfectly manufactured device, all minor or major defects may make us feel or hear different. Is not that so easy?

Not all measurable differences are audible. Feel is of course another matter. Of course even the color of the enclosure affects how you feel (and feel you hear).

 

[yigitboy]

Not all measurable differences are audible. Feel is of course another matter. Of course even the color of the enclosure affects how you feel (and feel you hear).

Not all but some, not for everyone but for someone

 

[Julf]

Not all but some, not for everyone but for someone

There is a pretty good way to find out - double-blind ABX listening tests.

 

[pozz]

There is a pretty good way to find out - double-blind ABX listening tests.

@yigitboy An even better way is to read the existing research in psychoacoustics and audio engineering. A good book answers a lot of questions and clears up many mistaken notions very quickly.

 

[Julf]

@yigitboy An even better way is to read the existing research in psychoacoustics and audio engineering. A good book answers a lot of questions and clears up many mistaken notions very quickly.

As long as the research is properly peer reviewed and verified. Lots of "research" out there...

 

[Mnyb]

Yes trust the research in these cases because even if you as a layperson manage to do what you think is a proper ABX test and gets a positive (in this case yes you can hear a difference between properly designed DAC's with very low distorsion and flatt FF response ).

The probabilities are not on your side . It is far far more likely that you made a mistake in your ABX than finding an actual difference .

I modern audio electronics these diffrences are realy tiny below any treshold most of us could even hope to hear.

It's actually possible to simply be wrong even in these post truth times where ones personal opinions and experience is valued higher than facts.
In fact we are mostly wrong.

In so called debates it is for drama reasons popular to have one person for something and the other person against something even if one of them are an expert with decades of experience and the other person is some random "antivaccer" who just pulled his "knowledge" out of his a***.

There are almost infinite ways to be wrong and a very few to be rigth and even those are temporary untill someone finds a better answer.

The current answer to "can you hear a difference between any small signal electronics with low distorsion low noise and flatt FF response" is no

 

[Julf]

It's actually possible to simply be wrong even in these post truth times where ones personal opinions and experience is valued higher than facts.
In fact we are mostly wrong.

Indeed. On that note...

Forbes: Your Glorified Ignorance Wasn't Cool Then, And Your Scientific Illiteracy Isn't Cool Now

 

[pcdinh]

My DAC changes the sound differently each time I change my power cord. Oh wait ... what am I saying?

 

[audiophile]

The probabilities are not on your side . It is far far more likely that you made a mistake in your ABX than finding an actual difference .

Sounds like objectivists’ confirmation bias.
If you believe that you can’t possibly hear a difference between DACs in a proper blind listening test then your brain might trick you into thinking that there is no difference ))

 

[LTig]

Indeed. On that note...
Forbes: Your Glorified Ignorance Wasn't Cool Then, And Your Scientific Illiteracy Isn't Cool Now

Wow, great article. Should have a link to this in the ASR manifesto.

 

[Mnyb]

Sounds like objectivists’ confirmation bias.
If you believe that you can’t possibly hear a difference between DACs in a proper blind listening test then your brain might trick you into thinking that there is no difference ))

Yes tricky it works both ways , that’s says a lot about how hard it is to design a proper experiment .

In an ideal ABX test , the test subject ( victim ) should not even now what he is listening to . You should not only be unaware of brandname and prices but also what kind of thing you are testing . It should also be random to the test leader ( like in medical test , niether the doctor or the patient knows whos getting placebo ).
More than one test subject is good too etc ....

I would not trust myself in a DAC test , I would lean hard on data and measurement and features and build quality.
DAC’s seems to be the best performing part in the whole audio system if done well . Just stay away brands with mystical desig principles will help a lot .

In reality I don’t know what DAC I’m listening to now as they are built in to my active speakers. there are two of them in each speaker the xover is DSP

 

[SIY]

In an ideal ABX test , the test subject ( victim ) should not even now what he is listening to . You should not only be unaware of brandname and prices but also what kind of thing you are testing . It should also be random to the test leader ( like in medical test , niether the doctor or the patient knows whos getting placebo ).

The part I highlighted in red is not generally true. If the controls are double blind, there is usually no reason that the test subject should be unaware of what's being compared. The important thing, as you've said, is that the test subject AND the tester be unaware of which of the choices is playing at during any of the "X" parts of an ABX format. For other DBT formats, again, there's no reason not to know what two things are being compared, only WHICH of the two is being played at any given choice point.

 

[Julf]

The part I highlighted in red is not generally true. If the controls are double blind, there is usually no reason that the test subject should be unaware of what's being compared. The important thing, as you've said, is that the test subject AND the tester be unaware of which of the choices is playing at during any of the "X" parts of an ABX format. For other DBT formats, again, there's no reason not to know what two things are being compared, only WHICH of the two is being played at any given choice point.

Except, I guess, if one wants to try to avoid the negative expectation bias @audiophile is concerned about. If you know what gear you are comparing, you might be biased to think "there is no difference".