www.audiosciencereview.com
So there is no influence on the psychoacoustic interpretation of the music?Been there, done that:
![]()
How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent?
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...www.audiosciencereview.com
No, how could there be?So there is no influence on the psychoacoustic interpretation of the music?
Is codified timbre simply quantified in the code and jitter has no influence?No, how could there be?
The timbral quality of a sound is based on its measurements when it was recorded. If your DAC is transparent, you are hearing the exact representation of recorded timbral quality.Can output timbral quality be extrapolated from the DAC performance measurement metrics?
Is jitter not a consequential influence on the encoded signal, in the psychoacoustic interpretation?The timbral quality of a sound is based on its measurements when it was recorded. If your DAC is transparent, you are hearing the exact representation of recorded timbral quality.
Jitter is a non-issue in any modern, non-broken DAC. And yes the "code" (I'm presuming you're referring to the digital stream here) completely quantifies the original signal and the DAC is able to reconstruct the original signal no issue. Instead of looking to audiophile nonsense or your "gut" or "intuition" to guide you, learn something about how this stuff works. To start with, I can always recommend this video:Is codified timbre simply quantified in the code and jitter has no influence?
No, not unless the product is highly flawed.Is jitter not a consequential influence on the encoded signal, in the psychoacoustic interpretation?
Déjà vu?Jitter is a non-issue in any modern, non-broken DAC. And yes the "code" (I'm presuming you're referring to the digital stream here) completely quantifies the original signal and the DAC is able to reconstruct the original signal no issue. Instead of looking to audiophile nonsense or your "gut" or "intuition" to guide you, learn something about how this stuff works. To start with, I can always recommend this video:
Not in well designed DACs, which is why I said transparent DAC. You would save yourself a lot of headaches by not ignoring measurements and using them to inform your subjective side. The objective view is not to replace subjective view but to inform and guide it.Is jitter not a consequential influence on the encoded signal, in the psychoacoustic interpretation?
I doubt he watched the video the first time, and probably won't this time either, but one can always hope. In any case, I'll take any opportunity to spread the Word of Monty.
As I remember, somewhere towards the end he admits to some distortion artifacts being displayed in the oscilloscope analysis...I doubt he watched the video the first time, and probably won't this time either, but one can always hope. In any case, I'll take any opportunity to spread the Word of Monty.![]()
He admits nothing. He just explains what is going on, and why this is as it should be.As I remember, somewhere towards the end he admits to some distortion artifacts being displayed in the oscilloscope analysis...
Is noise-floor inconsequential to timbral output integrity?He admits nothing. He just explains what is going on, and why this is as it should be.
What he was talking about are all things leading from the demo setup, nothing else. Thus irrelevant to the point he’s making.Is noise-floor inconsequential to timbral output integrity?