Topping Centaurus R2R DAC Review

[antcollinet]

Does anyone have links to quality statistically relevant double blind listing tests that show that differences in well measuring DACs are either audible or inaudible ?

Have a look through this thread. Perhaps not as easy to get through as you would like - but it is the best I've found.

Catalogue of blind tests

I thought this thread on Head-Fi was a valiant effort to put together blind tests that have been performed over the years. Given that there have been many more (I'm thinking Archimago's tests, among others), it would be fun to open source a complete list...

www.audiosciencereview.com

But bear in mind a blind test can't prove that there is no difference to be heard - it can only fail to prove that there is (you can't "prove" the null hypothesis - only test it)

 

[bigpilot]

Over the past 25 years, we've conducted genuine blind tests with well over 100 audiophiles, including tests with various DACs across nearly all price ranges and technologies. With technically flawless equipment, no one could detect the supposedly significant audible differences, not even with their own devices. We also included a Denafrips Ares once, but again, there was nothing remarkable; it performed as expected.

I still own several DACs myself, some of them current models, some costing several thousand euros (I sold the more expensive ones long ago). Nevertheless, an SMSL D1 has been sitting on my desk for quite some time. My home system uses a DAC that's now over 30 years old, from one of the most capable developers. Due to its functionality, I'll soon be adding a D200 to the setup.

If it were even just a tiny bit better, I wouldn't have a problem putting a €10,000 or €20,000 DAC in my living room or on my desk.

You can try thinking about it...

I very much doubt that. I can clearly hear differences between my SABRE DAC and older delta-sigma DACs.

 

[mocenigo]

I very much doubt that. I can clearly hear differences between my SABRE DAC and older delta-sigma DACs.

Sighted or blind?

 

[antcollinet]

I very much doubt that. I can clearly hear differences between my SABRE DAC and older delta-sigma DACs.

I don't doubt that you are hearing a difference. It is just that the difference you are perceiving is not coming from the sound hitting your ears, but is created by your perceptive biases (it happens to all of us and we can't turn it off) in the wetware between them. (Or you are responding to output level differences between the devices)

If you do a properly controlled blind test so that there are no tells, levels are precisely matched, and you don't know which device you are listening to - you will find those "clear" differences disappear.

 

[Roland68]

I very much doubt that. I can clearly hear differences between my SABRE DAC and older delta-sigma DACs.

It's possible that one or both of the DACs are defective.
If there are clearly audible differences in a completely blinded test, then at least one DAC is fundamentally faulty and must be considered defective in its function as a DAC.

Lower resolution is a different matter; that simply indicates significantly worse measured values.

 

[AndyZ]

This appears to be a scientifically valid test proving differences in DACs are audible with good hearing

 

[Purité Audio]

Dacs can sound different, that isn’t news.
Keith

 

[oleg87]

This appears to be a scientifically valid test proving differences in DACs are audible with good hearing

They can have potentially meaningful (as in statistically discernable, though not subjectively meaningful, as music generally has very little going on at those frequencies to begin with) differences in the upper treble depending on the filter implementation (or lack thereof). For most adults this is inaudible except with NOS and very slow filters.

 

[JustJones]

This appears to be a scientifically valid test proving differences in DACs are audible with good hearing

I think the test was on hearing a difference in the filters not different dacs using the same filter.

GoldenSounds passes apparently ABX test for DACs (NOT Really)

Spoiler: Apparently he does it by hearing above 20kHz. MOD EDIT: GS only tests two different filters created with a software program. At no time he tests different DACs let alone passing such a difference. Edit: The sharp filter, the sinc-L, is very similar to the MScaler x2 filter, so...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[AndyZ]

If the differences in DAC filters are audible then differences in DACs may also be audible.

 

[bigpilot]

It's possible that one or both of the DACs are defective.
If there are clearly audible differences in a completely blinded test, then at least one DAC is fundamentally faulty and must be considered defective in its function as a DAC.

Lower resolution is a different matter; that simply indicates significantly worse measured values.

They both sound good but the one sounds consistently better than the other to my ears.

 

[Roland68]

If the differences in DAC filters are audible then differences in DACs may also be audible.

What audible differences exactly are supposed to exist between two different DACs?

 

[Purité Audio]

If one adds audible distortion it will sound different.
Keith

 

[Mnyb]

If the differences in DAC filters are audible then differences in DACs may also be audible.

Only the filters you should not use , if you use one of the correct filters we are back to that well designed DAC’s sound the same .
And that is not hard to do . Most of these filters does not sound different some has the potential.

Of course some badly behaved R2R NOS contraption has the potential to maybe sound “different” especially with no filter at all like some people use them ( don’t do that it’s named reconstruction filter for a reason , it’s a vital part of the DAC process ).

Ffw I don’t think goldensound is a trustworthy source I would use a showel of salt .

Making a blind test where you hear differences in DAC’s ? I’ts more likely to be a method error than a true result.

Besides the selectable filter are mostly there for marketing purposes, there is a correct one to use IMO a good DAC designer sticks it there for you .

Edit : as this the topping centaur tread this is a particularly well designed R2R DAC , used rigth it to will sound no different.

 

[RandomEar]

If the differences in DAC filters are audible then differences in DACs may also be audible.

That's... not how this works? Your argument is comparable to "Earth is in space. I can breathe on earth, therefore I should be able to breathe in space." - which is clearly not the case.

The filters measure different. And it was a very unusual case of Goldensound seemingly being able to hear up to 21 kHz at his age (mid 20s). However, there were multiple valid questions concerning the test and some critique of the methodology. He failed to clarify many of the pain points, which left the community with an unsatisfactory "maybe, maybe not" result.

Modern DACs using identical filters typically measure better than human hearing. So they effectively measure the same. If you compare them using the same filters (level-matched and blind), you will not be able to hear a difference because there isn't one.

 

[VientoB]

This appears to be a scientifically valid test proving differences in DACs are audible with good hearing

That was discussed at the time. Sadly he never tied it again with different equipment. Just went quiet. And I believe he was hearing small differences with filters at around 21kHz

 

[bigpilot]

What audible differences exactly are supposed to exist between two different DACs?

Dynamic range (clearly audible with SABRE), more natural definition of instruments and voices, better soundstage

 

[solderdude]

Dynamic range (clearly audible with SABRE), more natural definition of instruments and voices, better soundstage

And which of those were verifiable in lab condition testing using the ears only ?
The above mentioned video never got a follow up with real world DACs despite Cameron having an ABX tester.
If that were 'easy' to prove then why hasn't there been such 'definitive proof' of these alleged differences with 2 different brand/type but considered 'transparent' DACs ?

What aspects of reproduced recordings would allow for a difference in dynamic range, more natural definition of instruments and voices and what technical aspect would change the perception of soundstage ... other than perception itself (the brain part of it) ?

 

[Roland68]

Dynamic range (clearly audible with SABRE), more natural definition of instruments and voices, better soundstage

That makes sense in principle.
Could you define "better soundstage" in more detail?

 

[Mudflapper]

Well done !

As you say, now you have a scientifically validated answer to those believing in R2R fairy tales : it's for sure not better, but, well, drawbacks (while still measurable) are limited here.

At least if care is taken in level matching between this DAC and the amp: if you have to always run it at -30dB, intermodulation distortions may become somehow noticeable.
So it's probably better to use this DAC at fixed output level and an integrated amp to control overall volume.
Correct ?

I would still love to do a blind test between this R2R and your favorite Delta Sigma.