Thank you for sharing your experience with DACs. That has not been mine. Even at the restrictive bitrates provided by Youtube, the difference between these two DACs was surprisingly apparent in the
reviewer's test--especially the dynamic range. That said, my response to another member's question included all the caveats for which they can evaluate the reliability of my observations.
Have a good evening.
First - the reveiwers test - presumably done via speakers/miocrophone. Speaker distortion, and room effect will vastly swamp the tiny differences between dacs even if they were audible (they are not). Secondly tiny differences in mic placement, or even the position of the reviewer in the room can easly cause audible sonic differences as the recordings are made. As can lack of accurate (with a voltmeter) level matching.
And that is totally ignoring the mangling youtube audio protocols are doing to the sound.
On the other hand:
From engineering, physics, and psychoacoustics, as well as numerous measurements, we know that DACS (when they perform well, which most do) have no noticeable impact on the sound.
However, our hearing is susceptible to perceptive bias. What we hear is influenced by what we know, believe, feel, our life experiences, and what we see. No one is immune to this if they’re human - it’s how we’re built. In fact, we wouldn’t be able to function without our subconscious brain filtering our senses.
So, when someone claims to hear differences between DACs despite the engineering, science, and measurements all saying it’s highly unlikely, should we believe them or attribute it to their very fallible auditory system?
And if you believe your ears, why do you also need your eyes to help you decide what something sounds like? If you trust your ears, do so and compare only with them, no peeking. Controlled, level matched blind.
Anything else is a waste of your time posting. It doesn't inform any one of anything valid regarding the performance of the devices you are comparing.
