• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

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

Here2Learn

Active Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
112
Likes
113

SIY

Grand Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
10,383
Likes
24,749
Location
Alfred, NY
The self-evident claim has been used previously as valid.

"I think, therefore I am" [Descartes]. What's more 'self'-evident than that?

It's then not a far reach for audiophiles, to say "I hear a difference, therefore there is one".
Only if they aren’t interested in reality.
 
D

Deleted member 12179

Guest
I know there are people out there that think cables affect sound, which is much worse, but there really is no response to something like that, but just to smile and nod. But what about people who talk about DACS as if they were headphone drivers or speakers, and talk about the SOUNDSTAGE, IMAGING, and MIDRANGE of a DAC? I actually don't know what to say to people to not be rude. If you try explaining that a DAC isn't something that actually changes the sound, they accuse you of having "a hard-on for measurements", as if it were the measurements themselves that tell you that DACs don't have a sound. What they don't get though, is that even if we had no equipment to measure distortion or other aspects of sound, still would not have a sound to them. So you try explaining by telling them that when you listen to different DACs using the same headphone and amp, that you cannot tell the difference. "You can't tell the difference between DACS????" "There must be something wrong with your system. You don't have revealing enough upstream and downstream equipment. Either that you haven't "learned" to tell the difference between them." Then you explain that in double-blind studies people are not able to tell the difference between Dacs any better than someone picking random answers. And their response is that the differences are "subtle", and them and other audiophiles who have spent time practicing and learning how to listen properly can hear a difference. "That doesn't sound like a very good way of testing that. Just taking a random group of people who know nothing about audio equipment and asking them to try to find the difference between DACs? Those people haven't yet learned to know the difference!" Then you ask them how they know that they actually hear the difference and it isn't just placebo. ETC.

The problem is that this isn't even an uncommon view. I would say that people who understand there isn't a difference between decently engineered dac (except perhaps small amounts of distortion in the lower end ones that may or may not be audible). Most audiophiles think there is at least a subtle difference between DACS and don't realize that saying the DACS sound different is like saying the portion of a DVD player that takes the 0s and 1s that are read off the disk and converts them into video can make the same DVD "look different" on the same exact TV. 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. Like "ohh have you heard the utopias in the chord hugo?? it really makes the mids stand out, but its a warmer dac". The main problem is actually that there is a confusion. They think that we mean that what makes a DAC "objectively good" is a TRANSPARENT DAC, and that we first define a good dac as a transparent DAC and then say that the measurements prove that the DAC is transparent, and therefore it is the better DAC. They think there are other dacs that are not transparent, but rather, color the sound in a good way, and therefore "measure worse" but sound better. This is nothing but a huge confusion. If that were how dacs worked, then I would actually agree with them. What matters most is how something sounds. However that is literally not what DACS do. DACs by nature do not have a sound signature. Saying a DAC has a sound signature is like saying a cable has a sound signature (well I guess if it is a really ****** dac it can have a sound signature of "fuzzy" or whatever dac distortion is, but you get the picture). Problem is, I don't think there will ever be an easy way to educate audiophiles about this, and so the only remedy will be like who the hell knows?

Well, you use the word DAC for something very wide. I have a khadas DAC, sounds "really good". MY ipod has a DAC, sounds way worse, my macbook has a dac, sounds really really worse, with the same track, same player software same everything. My monitor has a DAC, it clearly sounds better than the macbook dac, worse than the khadas. I would not go so far as saying the sound signature is different, but boy, you can be sure detail is different "musicality" even though that word is silly and means nothing, it's extremely different, sound stage, is different for sure.

Now, maybe you should specify you are talking about dac's from a certain level. Then again, all those dacs have an analog part, maybe that is the part that sounds slightly different?
 
D

Deleted member 12179

Guest
Can you explain then why people can't distinguish between them in double blind tests? Are you positive that you would be able to? Like say you had a gun to your head, or had to bet a large sum of money that in a volume matched double blind test you had to guess correct above a certain OR, do you really think you could do it?

what kind of file are you using for those blind tests? All my friends who have no clue about audio stuff, I sometimes tell them to please seat on my sofa and tell me which one of these two sound better; they always always always notice a difference, and the one that is supposed to be better is the one they say "this is better, I notice it becase of this and that "... I do this cause I do not really trust myself completely, my test it's ever a blind test.
 

Gopman

New Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
4
Likes
3
After reading the info about signature, the thing that impact the sound the most are the EQ and the noise. With a proper EQ (36 bands and can cut the high/low at certain limit), you can make any good amps sound the same because most amps are neutral. Good amps will have quality part to handle the load, power, and good filter. The main reason why I buy the DAC was to reduce noise and have the connection feature I want. If the DAC is hooked to the computer, a good software and driver is a must. Of course, the final output are the speakers and it cannot be ignored. I consider my speakers very good. It's able to produce the sound I wanted with the right components. The fact is that it's made in 1981 and sound terrific to date. To me the EQ is not bad because it's able to correct room problem and let you listen to the music how you wanted. Cables is the least important to me. I still don't know why people spent 10K on cables. Must be because they can and they think they can hear something amazing. You can just buy quality bare bone cable on Amazon and put the right end connection to save a ton. What kill the music the fastest is noise.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
what kind of file are you using for those blind tests? All my friends who have no clue about audio stuff, I sometimes tell them to please seat on my sofa and tell me which one of these two sound better; they always always always notice a difference, and the one that is supposed to be better is the one they say "this is better, I notice it becase of this and that "... I do this cause I do not really trust myself completely, my test it's ever a blind test.
This is a well-known bias - hearing a difference where there is none. The handful of positives on blind tests have generally suffered from this, and it's why you should use the "A-B-X" format, not 'A-B'.

https://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/wishful_thinking.htm
 
D

Deleted member 12179

Guest
This is a well-known bias - hearing a difference where there is none. The handful of positives on blind tests have generally suffered from this, and it's why you should use the "A-B-X" format, not 'A-B'.

https://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/wishful_thinking.htm

I see, so if I test an iphone 1 dac against a 5000€ chord, I will hear a difference but there is none, so I should add to the mix say an iphone 3GS dac, and then do an ABX test. Then the result of the test will be good.

LOL

Mac fly, mac fly, is there anybody there???
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,202
Likes
16,982
Location
Riverview FL
I see, so if I test an iphone 1 dac against a 5000€ chord, I will hear a difference but there is none, so I should add to the mix say an iphone 3GS dac, and then do an ABX test.

No.

X is not a third piece of gear.

X is A, or it is B.

The test is then "Is A the same as X" and/or "Is B the same as X"

(as I understand it)
 
D

Deleted member 12179

Guest
No.

X is not a third piece of gear.

X is A, or it is B.

The test is then "Is A the same as X" and/or "Is B the same as X"

(as I understand it)

Ahhhh ok, that makes a lot of sense, that would be a proper test indeed.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,004
Likes
3,998
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
No.

X is not a third piece of gear.

X is A, or it is B.

The test is then "Is A the same as X" and/or "Is B the same as X"

(as I understand it)
ce
Exactly. That makes it a valid test for if you really can hear a difference. The question becomes "can you tell if X is A or B?" instead of "Do you think you can hear a difference?". Then it is just a question about statistical validity.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,004
Likes
3,998
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I have a khadas DAC, sounds "really good". MY ipod has a DAC, sounds way worse, my macbook has a dac, sounds really really worse, with the same track, same player software same everything. My monitor has a DAC, it clearly sounds better than the macbook dac, worse than the khadas. I would not go so far as saying the sound signature is different, but boy, you can be sure detail is different "musicality" even though that word is silly and means nothing, it's extremely different, sound stage, is different for sure.

I would not use "for sure" for subjective, sighted and unverified personal perceptions.
 

magicscreen

Senior Member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
300
Likes
176
I see, so if I test an iphone 1 dac against a 5000€ chord, I will hear a difference but there is none, so I should add to the mix say an iphone 3GS dac, and then do an ABX test. Then the result of the test will be good.

LOL

Mac fly, mac fly, is there anybody there???
Unfortunately you have made a mistake buying the Khadas Tone Board and the Jds labs Atom. It was a waste of money.
The iphone dac+amp sounds exactly the same. You should try a properly volume matched double blind test.
On the bright side, at least you have not bought for example a THX AAA 789 and Topping D90. You cannot hear difference using them as well in properly volume matched double blind test.
 
Last edited:

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
Ahhhh ok, that makes a lot of sense, that would be a proper test indeed.
Well covered in the link I posted. So why the snark?
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Unfortunately you have made a mistake buying the Khadas Tone Board and the Jds labs Atom. It was a waste of money.
The iphone dac+amp sounds exactly the same. You should try a properly volume matched double blind test.
On the bright side, at least you have not bought for example a THX AAA 789 and Topping D90. You cannot hear difference using them as well in properly volume matched double blind test.
My understanding is that headphones/speakers matter a ton, then amplifier is 2nd most important, then DAC third. I certainly notice a difference with different headphones, that's a given I guess. I've got SoundblasterX G6 DAC -> JDS Labs Atom Amp -> AKG K702 headphones and I'm also certain I can notice the difference between using the inbuilt Soundblaster headphone amp vs using the JDS Labs headphone amp, so for me I think headphone amps are very important. DACs I think are important to not get a lemon, but I don't really have practical experience comparing DACs....but headphone amps and headphones are for sure important as far as my experience goes.

EDIT: I think DACs can have some influence, for instance on my SoundblasterX G6 DAC I can change the filter, and "Fast Roll Off - Linear Phase" sounded noticeably better than the others...I could hear more character in intimate female vocals...that sounds very subjective and it is, but that's the best way I can describe it....I kept replaying a certain part of the song "It Could be Sweet" from Portishead whilst switching the filter, and that's where I noticed the difference. But this is in no way as different as my experience with different amplifiers/headphones, but I think DAC can have some small influences.
 
Last edited:

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
2,279
Likes
3,421
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
I see, so if I test an iphone 1 dac against a 5000€ chord, I will hear a difference but there is none, so I should add to the mix say an iphone 3GS dac, and then do an ABX test. Then the result of the test will be good.

LOL

Mac fly, mac fly, is there anybody there???

Level matching is likely more important than if the test is double blind. It's hard to do an ABX test properly in one's home, as a difference in volume of <1db can bias the test.

A review at archimago recently compared the D30 and the SMSL M100 and found them to sound the same. But when the reviewer changed the volume of the DACs slightly, his hearing always found the louder DAC to sound better: "At the conclusion of the formal test, I thought it was time to try something I had noticed in a blind test many years ago and which is mentioned but not talked about in many modern reviews. I bumped the stepped attenuator up one notch, making one of the DACs slightly louder (about 0.5 dB according to the meter). Instantly, one of the devices sounded “better” in a vague but consistent way – specifically, it didn’t sound louder, just different. I returned the attenuator to its original position and the difference vanished. Then I turned the attenuator down by the same amount – now the other device sounded better. The result was repeatable, with multiple iterations and multiple music types."

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2020/02/measurements-listening-topping-d30-dac.html
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,004
Likes
3,998
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Level matching is likely more important than if the test is double blind. It's hard to do an ABX test properly in one's home, as a difference in volume of <1db can bias the test.

"Which is more important to have in a car, oil or fuel?". Yes, a small difference in volume can (and will) bias a test. But so will lack of double-blind.
 

raistlin65

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 13, 2019
Messages
2,279
Likes
3,421
Location
Grand Rapids, MI
"Which is more important to have in a car, oil or fuel?". Yes, a small difference in volume can (and will) bias a test. But so will lack of double-blind.

I strongly disagree. I have yet to see evidence that people always experience expectation bias. Moreover, the difference between the blind vs. double blind is to eliminate the possibility that some kind of cue might bias the results.

But a listener will ALWAYS hear a difference if DACs or amps are not level matched. ALWAYS.

So certainly. If someone does a blind or sighted comparison test and finds that two DACs or two amps sound different, they cannot have confidence in the results. But if the amps or DACs are not level matched, once again, they will ALWAYS hear a difference.
 

TomB19

Active Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
137
Likes
102
Exception bias is real but grossly over-played.

It's not difficult to level match two sources. It's also relatively easy to quantify sonic differences between devices using REW; at least, to some extent.

I think, as often as not, exception bias is used as a weaponized defence by the ignorant against contradictory information.

A buddy and I have A/B swapped tons of equipment, over the years. One of us will go behind the TV and swap one device for another. It's more difficult with speakers but we have done it with quite a few components and amplifiers. While not perfect, it's tough to tell what device is being brought online so I think it's pretty good.

He used to swear by power conditioning. Using our ghetto science approach, we discovered his conditioner does make a difference but not a positive one. I won't share the brand of power conditioner under test to prevent a fan of that brand from wasting bandwidth explaining to me the test was done wrong, since it did not support his conclusion.
 

ahofer

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
4,952
Likes
8,698
Location
New York City
Exception bias is real but grossly over-played.

I think, as often as not, exception bias is used as a weaponized defence by the ignorant against contradictory information.

I don't know what "exception bias" is* (nor how to weaponize it), but I assure you that Expectation Bias, (also known as Experimenter's Bias) is for real, and it is quite similar (even identical) to rejecting contradictory information. If you look at the link I posted above, you'll see it revealed in a fairly large n experiment:

In the CD-tweak test from Stereophile for example, the subjects anwered 132 times "I heard a difference" in the 186 trials where there was a difference. That is 71% of the time. But they also said "I heard a difference" 132 times in the 194 trials where there was no difference. That is 68% of the time. It is not very difficult to see that 68% is not statistically different than 71%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer-expectancy_effect
Experimenter's or expectation bias -The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.[47]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#cite_note-47


*perhaps exception bias, or "I'm Exceptional Bias" should be the name for the tendency of old audiophiles with impaired hearing, such as I, to decide that we have such refined hearing abilities that we can detect differences that the vast majority of the population cannot.
 

Julf

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
3,004
Likes
3,998
Location
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
I strongly disagree

That is of course your right.

But a listener will ALWAYS hear a difference if DACs or amps are not level matched. ALWAYS.

It is my experience that when someone says "ALWAYS", they are always wrong. ALWAYS.
 
Top Bottom