You couldn’t hear the difference - Proof! Beautiful video of David Mellor (Audio Masterclass) about sound differences between DAC

[shuppatsu]

I like an ABX test a lot more than his previous test of "count the switches." Even if a sizable proportion of people could tell differences between two DACs, it's very unlikely that they would be able to tell at every possible moment. When I ABX test lossy audio codecs, when I bump the bitrate down far enough that I can actually tell the difference, I can only tell the difference in very specific parts of the track. Just "keeping an ear out" for changes would be a hopeless task.

That said I don't need to do this ABX test to know that I would perform very poorly on it. I couldn't even differentiate the 2% distortion on that SET amp test from a few years back!

 

[shuppatsu]

Tracy Chapman is practically a bass.

She’s a bass!

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Caution:

Argument from authority - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I believe this is a slight misunderstanding/application of the fallacy.

If your reputation is all you have, then make an unsubstantiated claim, it fits.

But that's not what's happening here. Mellor has a track record of listening to and testing audio equipment. The fact that he has such a great CV supports him in doing this, it is not being put forward as a reason for trusting him with blind faith.

Amir has put forward his own experience in posts at this very forum, and there's nothing wrong with doing so.

 

[totti1965]

I believe this is a slight misunderstanding/application of the fallacy.

If your reputation is all you have, then make an unsubstantiated claim, it fits.

But that's not what's happening here. Mellor has a track record of listening to and testing audio equipment. The fact that he has such a great CV supports him in doing this, it is not being put forward as a reason for trusting him with blind faith.

Amir has put forward his own experience in posts at this very forum, and there's nothing wrong with doing so.

Thank you for defending me a little here, but of course @Apesbrain is right (at least basically). He has a point.

 

[Sokel]

I have written a little comment in this new David Mellor video:

„Ha ha ha, David, you are completely right: with the DACs it is a bit like the man who lost his keys in the dark. He is searching his keys under a street-lantern. „Are you shure, it was around here, where you lost your keys?“ Answer: „Not at all, but here it’s bright, so I search here“ It’s all this audiophile insanity…Nobody wants to make propper room treatment, or propper speaker positioning. Instead they are searching for non-existing differences between a 120dB SINAD and a 120.5dB SINAD DAC. Is it a factor 100 less important or a factor 1000 less important than, let’s say, a good speaker, which is also less important, than the qualities of room and positioning…But let’s search for our keys where the light is: it’s so easy to count Zeros in Amir‘s measurements.“

I simply love this guy!

I wouldn't even try to hear a difference:

 

[Yorkshire Mouth]

Thank you for defending me a little here, but of course @Apesbrain is right (at least basically). He has a point.

Yup, he's right to say "Caution", just wanting to delineate the boundaries. No one should believe someone purely because of their reputation.

 

[DanielT]

Better to buy a WiiM Mini streamer puck and plug it into your existing DAC because WiiM Mini now has, if I understand correctly, PEQ and automatic room correction functionality. Those good features for only around $100. Features that can actually create audible differences. It will most likely also lead to better sound.

WiiM Pro Plus with a good internal DAC, how much does it cost these days, $240? A streamer, the features mentioned above, plus (intentionally) probably a lot of other things that I can't think of right now. What more do you need than that?

 

[DanielT]

Hifi was better in the past, expensive Hifi equals good Hifi, I hear what other audiophiles don't hear. Are there the same type of enthusiasts who are doing computers and or TV sets as a hobby? For those who tinker with computers and TV I get the impression that they like development. That they like that they get more /better performance for the same or less money. They don't seem to have this goofy backward-looking love of old (crap?) stuff that some Hifi enthusiasts can have.
I'm a bit goofy myself because I like vintage amplifiers receivers, because I think they look nice. On the other hand, vintage DACs no way in hell that I would buy one of those vs a new good modern DAC.

I guess many who have bought brutally expensive DACs imagine that they hear a difference. Otherwise, they have bought something very expensive unnecessarily (if they bought it with the belief of hearing a better sound that is).

In short. The DAC question is basically a closed chapter. Almost all modern DACs are transparent and only add a little inaudible garbage to the audio chain. Nothing to worry about.
Amir's test of the DAC. Then I check: First, is the DAC transparent? The answer is yes in at least 99%(?) of the cases. After that ( and now comes the interesting thing to read about); functions, user-friendliness and durability. Actually, I think it is more interesting these days to read about users' experiences to see if there are any problems, if the quality is good, any firmware updates (see WiiM in the post above for example).

 

[teapea]

Results are in with his new video.

 

[DanielT]

Results are in with his new video.

And in that video David says -what makes that result pretty pointless -that:

Starting at 3:26: It is possible to cheat. ...with the download there is a possibility to come up with a correct answer with 100% confidence.

So how do we know if the participants cheated or not? We do not know.

 

[TTT15]

Is there controlled blind testing available establishing the extent of correlation between measurements and listeners preferences/ audibility?

 

[JRR]

I don’t think that was the point or even heard him mention that.

 

[pma]

Once again I have performed a level matched A/B listening comparison of 2 DACs, better say CD player vs. DAC, Marantz SA7001 vs. DacMagic+. This is the test schematics:

Marantz SA7001 plays CD disc and simultaneously sends data via S/PDIF to DacMagicPlus. The DAC has output level control and the levels are matched to get the 0.2dB matching at the output of my ULTIM2 preamplifier that has 3 SE inputs and 2 balanced inputs. Then the signal goes to my PM-AB2 power amplifier and CNO-T25 speakers.

The setup looks like this:

Without music and the system turned on, the speakers are deadly quiet even with the ear placed as close to the diaphragm as possible.

The preamplifier allows for instant switching between the channels. Even if it is done in short intervals, or listening to longer passages of music repeatedly, I have found no sound difference. Again, because similar tests I have repeated with more DACs and CD players in the past.

Just do your tests properly. Level matched, without additional hum due to bad test configuration. And do it blind. If you think you heard the difference, ask someone to make channel selection instead of you. And never take seriously YouTube posted sensational tests with sound clips recorded through microphones.

 

[mocenigo]

Thanks for sharing!

After more than 500 attempts in the listening test I prepared a few years ago (link to test and link to latest test results) the conclusion was unsurprisingly similar.

Even the fact that the cheap DAC in my test introduced significant high-frequency response deviation didn't seem to help much with audibility... going into it I was half-expecting the test to be too easy because of this, but that was not the case at all, it turned out.

So we're talking about a SINAD difference of roughly 30dB between the two DACs, with the cheaper DAC also having non-flat frequency response, and still the vast majority of test attempts indicated no difference was perceived.

Of course many people will point out limitations of my test (some IMHO valid, and some not so much), which was also extensively discussed in the thread containing it.

If I understand correctly people have to download two files which are digitized versions of the output of the two DACS, and then listen through their own devices? Sorry, but, while I am quite confident that differences between competently designed DACs are inaudible, such as test proved very little. It depends on potential masking distortion and noise of the ADC, and on the equipment of the people that take the test. I am sue that such limitations of your test have been extensively discussed already, but any test should be done with no further equipment between the DACs and the ears of the listeners, except for the same amplified and headphones or speakers.

 

[Mart68]

If I understand correctly people have to download two files which are digitized versions of the output of the two DACS, and then listen through their own devices? Sorry, but, while I am quite confident that differences between competently designed DACs are inaudible, such as test proved very little. It depends on potential masking distortion and noise of the ADC, and on the equipment of the people that take the test. I am sue that such limitations of your test have been extensively discussed already, but any test should be done with no further equipment between the DACs and the ears of the listeners, except for the same amplified and headphones or speakers.

If the difference is so small that it's masked by noise from an ADC is it really worth worrying about?

Claimed differences between DACs are rarely described as subtle or hard to detect. Often they are said to be 'night and day,' or non-Cole Porter related descriptions such as deeper bass, more buttery top end, and my all time favourite 'Like the musicians had more rehearsal time.'

These tests while not perfect are more than enough to show that stuff to be nonsense.

 

[mocenigo]

If the difference is so small that it's masked by noise from an ADC is it really worth worrying about?

It depends: *if* they are there and are important to some, then we should worry about.

Claimed differences between DACs are rarely described as subtle or hard to detect. Often they are said to be 'night and day,' or non-Cole Porter related descriptions such as deeper bass, more buttery top end, and my all time favourite 'Like the musicians had more rehearsal time.'

I am aware that there is an incredible exaggeration, which points to those claims to be bogus.

These tests while not perfect are more than enough to show that stuff to be nonsense.

Agreed, they do prove with an extremely high likelihood that such claims of huge, night-and-day differences are nonsense.
They do not prove that there were no tiny, yet audible, differences to start with.

 

[Mart68]

Agreed, they do prove with an extremely high likelihood that such claims of huge, night-and-day differences are nonsense.
They do not prove that there were no tiny, yet audible, differences to start with.

They don't but how does that matter in practical terms. I'm happy to accept there are tiny, very hard to hear differences between some DACS.

What I wonder is how close to perfection the rest of the playback system and acoustic has to come before it's worth turning any attention onto those miniscule differences?

 

[mocenigo]

They don't but how does that matter in practical terms. I'm happy to accept there are tiny, very hard to hear differences between some DACS.

This is a different matter. I agree that the residual differences should just be academic unless one is an obsessed audiophile.
I personally do not care about these residual differences, but I cannot speak in absolute terms.

What I wonder is how close to perfection the rest of the playback system and acoustic has to come before it's worth turning any attention onto those miniscule differences?

Of course, the power amplifiers themselves usually add more noise and distortion, and loudspeakers (or headphones) and the environment are even worse. As above: I do not think it's worth turning any attention onto those miniscule differences — but for some people, it's worth. If it's important for them, who am I to judge? (may I be sorry for them though?) However, errors introduced by additional equipment have already provided surprises in science, both negative results and positive (remember the particles that apparently moved faster than light in vacuum?), so I am always very careful.

 

[dominikz]

If I understand correctly people have to download two files which are digitized versions of the output of the two DACS, and then listen through their own devices? Sorry, but, while I am quite confident that differences between competently designed DACs are inaudible, such as test proved very little. It depends on potential masking distortion and noise of the ADC, and on the equipment of the people that take the test. I am sue that such limitations of your test have been extensively discussed already, but any test should be done with no further equipment between the DACs and the ears of the listeners, except for the same amplified and headphones or speakers.

Online tests have their limitations, I acknowledged that in my thread as well. This fact however doesn't make them pointless nor useless.

Note that the two DACs in my test have a ~30dB SINAD difference, and one of the DACs introduces a significant frequency response deviation compared to the other - all of which is captured in these recordings and the differences between the two files are trivial to demonstrate (you could almost say 'night and day' ), but it still appears these differences were not easily audible in over 500 online ABX attempts so far.

At least one test participant used an audio analyzer SW to get a 100% result, which shows that the differences are large enough to be easily detected - but still they are not easily audible.

While this is by no means proof that "all DACs sound the same", it should at least make people skeptical whether "different DACs have night-and-day sound signatures".
In my opinion both of these statements are so absolute that they are obviously red herrings, so my hope is that these kinds of controlled (even if limited) listening tests will at least give people some pause before jumping to conclusions based on informal listening experiences (usually without any controls whatsoever).

 

[Jarrett]

The smaller the differences (DACs, cables), the more heated the discussion