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

[Plcamp]

Well if you could see the datasheets of the DACs then you could know if it matters or not, if there is a "difference" or not, if you can't access the datasheets then it's pretty difficult, or at least you need some datas given by the manufacturer.

My point was I can’t discern whether the parametric differences of DACs make any perceivable difference to what’s heard.

should I care if the DAC can cleanly resolve a sinusoid at -90 dB?

 

[Racheski]

After owning 5 different DACs and even listening to actual music at 97 dB SPL or louder, I just find this graph below to hold true from my experience. With my DACs ranging from ~85 dB to ~106 dB SINAD, I find it extremely hard to perceive a definite and objective sonic difference between the DACs from the top of the red zone all the way to green zone, nevermind the blue zone DACs

What about the DACs that are in the orange on the review, but are green on the Tableau Dashboard?

 

[KeithPhantom]

Well if you could see the datasheets of the DACs then you could know if it matters or not, if there is a "difference" or not, if you can't access the datasheets then it's pretty difficult, or at least you need some datas given by the manufacturer.

But remember, the chip used is not as important as the implementation, and this is hard to assess if you don't have actual measurements of the equipment.

 

[jojolapin102]

But remember, the chip used is not as important as the implementation, and this is hard to assess if you don't have actual measurements of the equipment.

Yes it is true ! Implementation matters way more in the final result than the chip itself, I take an example I experienced : I have a low end motherboard with a DAC that has 98 dB SNR, and it's excellent, no noise at all, everything's good, I can't make a difference from another DAC. Then, I have an "high end" motherboard (at least way more expensive) which has a 110 dB SNR DAC, and it's ****** as hell, it is terribly noisy, the crosstalk is insanely high, but on the paper both DACs are really different and the second seems to be better

 

[KeithPhantom]

What about the DACs that are in the orange on the review, but are green on the Tableau Dashboard?

If they are green in the dashboard, they are good (the dashboard is more updated than the review). To hear something different out of DAC, it has to be pretty much fundamentally broken.

 

[Racheski]

In full transparency, this was a "gotcha" comment. The dashboard and review use different calculations to determine what is Blue vs Green vs Orange vs Yellow vs Red, which confused me on the measurement thread you started recently. You can compare the Massdrop Grace SDAC colors to confirm this.

 

[KeithPhantom]

The dashboard and review use different calculations to determine what is Blue vs Green vs Orange vs Yellow vs Red, which confused me on the measurement thread you started recently.

Weird, why is that? I think consistency is the best policy (unless I'm missing something).

 

[Racheski]

Weird, why is that? I think consistency is the best policy (unless I'm missing something).

THANK YOU. I'm not the only one who thinks that is weird and confusing. I asked the powers at be and did not receive an answer

 

[paddycrow]

On the subject of cables, I can share one time I experienced a cable making a discernible difference. When I first set up my home theater, I bought a cheap set of RCA cables for the powered subwoofer. Whenever I turned the lights on in the room, the sub would detect a signal and turn itself on. I wound up replacing that cable with a name brand which eliminated the problem. So it made a difference, but not one I could hear.

 

[Angsty]

In full transparency, this was a "gotcha" comment. The dashboard and review use different calculations to determine what is Blue vs Green vs Orange vs Yellow vs Red, which confused me on the measurement thread you started recently. You can compare the Massdrop Grace SDAC colors to confirm this.

I think the color coding has changed over time as more DACs have been reviewed. Look at the 2018 review for the Schiit Modi 3 as an example. Now, the blue seems to represent the top quartile, with green to be the next quartile. As more DACs are tested, some could be pushed from one quartile to another.

 

[Racheski]

I think the color coding has changed over time as more DACs have been reviewed. Look at the 2018 review for the Schiit Modi 3 as an example. Now, the blue seems to represent the top quartile, with green to be the next quartile. As more DACs are tested, some could be pushed from one quartile to another.

The DAC histogram in the reviews do not use quartiles, however, the Tableau dashboard does use quartiles. I was initially confused as well, but confirmed it by looking at the Massdrop Grace SDAC.
The Modi 3 review was before Amir used the color coded ranges. The colored bars in that review represent different inputs tested on the Modi.

 

[raistlin65]

Here's the question I want answered by the sound signature crowd. If DAC's all have their own sound, then how does anyone know what the intrinsic sound of a specific DAC is?

One can only compare a DAC relative to another DAC, as otherwise, what is the frame of reference? And yet, many reviewers who believe all DACs have a sound signature don't hesitate to say what it is for a specific DAC.

 

[Theriverlethe]

Here's the question I want answered by the sound signature crowd. If DAC's all have their own sound, then how does anyone know what the intrinsic sound of a specific DAC is?

One can only compare a DAC relative to another DAC, as otherwise, what is the frame of reference? And yet, many reviewers who believe all DACs have a sound signature don't hesitate to say what it is for a specific DAC.

And is there some vaguely linear improvement in sound quality with each successive generation and/or price increase? If so, shouldn’t we have stadium-sized soundstage by now?

 

[BDWoody]

And is there some vaguely linear improvement in sound quality with each successive generation and/or price increase? If so, shouldn’t we have stadium-sized soundstage by now?

You mean you don't? Must not have a 'resolving enough' system. Start with your USB cables...

 

[Theriverlethe]

You mean you don't? Must not have a 'resolving enough' system. Start with your USB cables...

I’m still amazed at audiophiles talking about soundstage extending beyond their speakers, as if it’s unusual or difficult to achieve.

 

[Robbo99999]

I’m still amazed at audiophiles talking about soundstage extending beyond their speakers, as if it’s unusual or difficult to achieve.

Yeah, definitely, a lot depends on the recording or the 'quality' of the recording, but to me when I close my eyes and listen to my 2.0 system it literally sounds like a wall of sound enveloping me across the whole front wall and maybe even the sides a little. I think if you got your 2.0 at a perfect equilateral triangle to your listening position and if the recording has taken that into account properly I think it can be extremely immersive & surrounding.....perhaps there's things like reflections off walls and things that help with that, and maybe some speakers are better at that than others, but I really only have my JBL 308p Mkii's as a reference as previously I only had boom boxes or stereo systems with no knowledge of how to place/position speakers & listening positions (regardless of not having the knowledge (this site) to buy decent gear before). One's thing for sure I definitely notice when a track has not got it's imaging sorted out, there's a massive difference to me between a 'good' recording that is surrounding and immersive and a 'bad' one that just sounds flat and has no immersive qualities....it's a very stark & definite difference and I'm sure it comes down to the recording & mixing engineers. Soooo much depends on the recording & soooo much depends on your speaker positioning & speaker choice. (well we can put roomEQ on top of that too if we like).

 

[Vini darko]

Yeah, definitely, a lot depends on the recording or the 'quality' of the recording, but to me when I close my eyes and listen to my 2.0 system it literally sounds like a wall of sound enveloping me across the whole front wall and maybe even the sides a little. I think if you got your 2.0 at a perfect equilateral triangle to your listening position and if the recording has taken that into account properly I think it can be extremely immersive & surrounding.....perhaps there's things like reflections off walls and things that help with that, and maybe some speakers are better at that than others, but I really only have my JBL 308p Mkii's as a reference as previously I only had boom boxes or stereo systems with no knowledge of how to place/position speakers & listening positions (regardless of not having the knowledge (this site) to buy decent gear before). One's thing for sure I definitely notice when a track has not got it's imaging sorted out, there's a massive difference to me between a 'good' recording that is surrounding and immersive and a 'bad' one that just sounds flat and has no immersive qualities....it's a very stark & definite difference and I'm sure it comes down to the recording & mixing engineers. Soooo much depends on the recording & soooo much depends on your speaker positioning & speaker choice. (well we can put roomEQ on top of that too if we like).

At the risk of being shot down in flames. I'd say amplifiers have significant effect on stereo space preformace too. Admitidly less than recording and speakers do. It's been my experience that my different amps often require different speaker placement to get the most out of them. And tend to highlight or obscure different aspects of the sound in stereo space. I'm sure this could be measured finitely but crosstalk is sufficient to get an idea of quality of engineering in this quality.

 

[Robbo99999]

At the risk of being shot down in flames. I'd say amplifiers have significant effect on stereo space preformace too. Admitidly less than recording and speakers do. It's been my experience that my different amps often require different speaker placement to get the most out of them. And tend to highlight or obscure different aspects of the sound in stereo space. I'm sure this could be measured finitely but crosstalk is sufficient to get an idea of quality of engineering in this quality.

As I was reading your post I was thinking to myself that crosstalk could be the only explanation, as I can imagine that affecting stereo separation, etc. I don't know enough or have enough personal experience with different amplifiers and amplification qualities though to know if this can really be the case.

EDIT: I did a headphone headband mod on my NAD Viso HP50 headphones, which are headphones that have been proven to have headband resonances that produce sound in the opposing earcup. I did a simple mod to try to absorb that transfer, and subjectively to me it did open up the soundstage some more resulting in better imaging and also increased detail....it brought it closer in that respect to my AKG K702's which are quite renowned for those qualities. Anyway, to me that seems like a very similar concept to crosstalk, so I can see what you mean from my own experience....for what it's worth.

 

[SIY]

At the risk of being shot down in flames. I'd say amplifiers have significant effect on stereo space preformace too.

Evidence for that is severely lacking.

 

[Vini darko]

Evidence for that is severely lacking.

My motly collection of low end, poor health, modified, different age and topology amps, aren't to be confused with high end sota products which probably do sound mostly the same.