roly1650 said:

But, but.........
Your question was about dacs and amps, now you're jumping to transducers, which are by and larger, judged subjectively. It's not hard to understand why Brooko found audible differences, the degree of difficulty in designing a good loudspeaker or headphone makes designing a dac or amp seem trivial imo.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know my question was about DACS and I was given three replies which I thanked for.

And I made a comment too which seems to have been misunderstood so I'm trying just to explain more clearly by giving Brooko's review as an easy example to percieved differences individually heard in equipment that varies in cost (yes it was a headphone example but that's not the point).

I'm just saying that some not all audiophiles will chase their individual percieved best from whatever piece of audio chain equipment including DACS, regardless whether others see no value in expensive ones or not.

roly1650 said:

... as ridiculous as believing the accuracy of a post on here is directly related to its word count.

Click to expand...

damn, I would have been soooooo accurate in most of my posts^_^.
 

silentfrequency said:

 

baadaq said:

maybe in the past there was an small difference that could be percieve, atm that's just nonsense.

Click to expand...

I'm unsure of what you are being specific on as "nonsense" but if you read a review like Brooko's hd600 v hd800 and even hd800 v T1, he personally perceives audible differences between each model and though that may seem a obvious example, I think maybe examples my point I originally tried to convey?

Click to expand...

it's still just a subjective opinion. does brooko preferring one amp tells you anything about the accuracy of the amp? headphones are irrelevant, even 2 headphones of the same model can have several DB of variation from one another(even left and right earcup of one headphone). they're all crap and we pick one when the smell doesn't disturb us too much.
you're just showing that you mix 2 significations for "better". one that is about the accuracy of the transmitting tool, the other one being related to how someone you trust subjectively judged some tool. 
both can have value, but they certainly aren't related all that often.
because if we all really looked for the best accuracy, then nobody would buy vinyls or average tube amps with 1%disto or more. we would almost all use orthos because they have the lowest distortion values and stable FR, and never get anything else.
but that's not how it goes. I know that I don't have an ortho because they're heavy ^_^. that's 100% of the reasons why I don't get some. how is that for high fidelity?
most people don't hear distortions, they don't care for the noise floor, in the end they buy a frequency response(they hopefully like) with an abstract idea of high fidelity/upgrade/new/better. but most of the time it's only different.
after transparency you upgrade to something sounding the very same. nobody gets moved or happy for spending 2000$ on something sounding the same as the old stuff he had. that's why accuracy sells only as a concept, not all that well as a reality(at least at the consumer level).

silentfrequency said:

Yes, I know my question was about DACS and I was given three replies which I thanked for.

And I made a comment too which seems to have been misunderstood so I'm trying just to explain more clearly by giving Brooko's review as an easy example to percieved differences individually heard in equipment that varies in cost (yes it was a headphone example but that's not the point).

I'm just saying that some not all audiophiles will chase their individual percieved best from whatever piece of audio chain equipment including DACS, regardless whether others see no value in expensive ones or not.

Click to expand...

Got it, change of topic noted.
Being an old fart the misunderstanding is all mine......maybe.

roly1650 said:

But the fallacy in that is that price is directly related to sound quality, which isn't true. It's as ridiculous as the audiophile I heard say that one of the major criteria he uses for judging an amplifiers quality is its weight, (true story) or as ridiculous as believing the accuracy of a post on here is directly related to its word count.

Click to expand...

Well, weight, at least in a power amplifier, DOES define the outer limits any non-digital operating amplifier can ultimately achieve. You can not have decent linear power supply without so and so much iron in transformers and so and so big ( great capacity ) capacitors - neither of which is light. And no amp can be better than its power supply - period. And to house all that, cabinet MUST be sturdy - which again drives the weight and price up. Add the necessary heat sinks ... - and no, do not think that they are oversized - they usually are big just enough to stay reasonably cool playing normal music into reasonably normal loudspeaker load, I have yet to see an audio power amp rated for continuous use with its full rated power.
 
Just look at any decent 200 W+/ch  amplifier and check how much does it weight. And get back to me if you do not find paperweight  "counterparts" inferior in real world use. Audibly so.
 
I certainly agree that price is NOT directly related to sound quality - AT FIRST. Time and time again it has unfortunately been proven that what started as an enthusiast's dream offering something way above in quality for considerably less than "normal going price" for similar quality product ended up being taken over by people who "rescued" the sinking ship - and MUCH more than "adjusted" the selling price from that point on, a situation that is in the end worse if the initial cost would have been realistic and capable of sustaining the product in the market. The only manufacturers who - in the past - have allowed themselves the luxury of actually building their flagships for more than selling them were big Japanese mfrs - Technics, Sony, Toshiba, etc - when they were building their image as non plus ultra manufacturer - who could recoup their losses with flagships trough sales of less quality/expensive gear that sold in million quantites.

castleofargh said:

damn, I would have been soooooo accurate in most of my posts^_^.

Click to expand...

It just maybe that you're the exception that proves my rule. I have the experiment designed.......you could be the perfect candidate. Any good at picking word counts, level matched, double blind?

silentfrequency said:

I'm unsure of what you are being specific on as "nonsense" but if you read a review like Brooko's hd600 v hd800 and even hd800 v T1, he personally perceives audible differences between each model and though that may seem a obvious example, I think maybe examples my point I originally tried to convey?

Click to expand...

why ... what?, i thought that you were asking for audible difference between dacs...

baadaq said:

why ... what?, i thought that you were asking for audible difference between dacs...

Click to expand...

.

silentfrequency said:

omg!

I was, I did, I explained myself more than once, maybe nobody got what I was saying, please let's just move on?

Click to expand...

 

rajikaru said:

Click to expand...

I guess that's me told

castleofargh There are the hfm he560/400i and the Oppo's.
Besides, have you seen the Stax sr-207 measurements?

Has anyone else tried the out of your head virtual surround simulator demo using headphones?

It's really impressive IMO anyway and replicates various speaker set ups.

I've read that too of the line headphones alone can reproduce sound quality to the same level of top of the line speakers that cost 100k and over, essentially making expensive headphones appear cheap in comparison, but with this kind of software maybe the lines between headphone and speakers are blurring even more?

http://www.head-fi.org/t/689299/out-of-your-head-new-virtual-surround-simulator

silentfrequency said:

Has anyone else tried the out of your head virtual surround simulator demo using headphones?

It's really impressive IMO anyway and replicates various speaker set ups.

I've read that too of the line headphones alone can reproduce sound quality to the same level of top of the line speakers that cost 100k and over, essentially making expensive headphones appear cheap in comparison, but with this kind of software maybe the lines between headphone and speakers are blurring even more?

http://www.head-fi.org/t/689299/out-of-your-head-new-virtual-surround-simulator

Click to expand...

 
Headphones will never quite shake you in the same way I mean really, what I miss when I listen to a big symphony on headphones isn't f'in frequency response, it's that sense of a whole bunch of sound power shaking your bones.

silentfrequency said:

Has anyone else tried the out of your head virtual surround simulator demo using headphones?

It's really impressive IMO anyway and replicates various speaker set ups.

I've read that too of the line headphones alone can reproduce sound quality to the same level of top of the line speakers that cost 100k and over, essentially making expensive headphones appear cheap in comparison, but with this kind of software maybe the lines between headphone and speakers are blurring even more?

http://www.head-fi.org/t/689299/out-of-your-head-new-virtual-surround-simulator

Click to expand...

*sigh* - it is the only "thingus" that might>may entice me to dip my toe in DSP > PCM ...
 
Still, it would feel utter blasphemy for me to listen to analog recordin on vinyl and then having to go trough DSP.
 
The other DSP that might entice me to do the same would have been some REALLY good virtual crossover for loudspeakers - it can be made well enough for the speaker to be actually capable of reproducing an acoustical square wave around/in the vicinity of the crossover frequency - compared to the usual gulasch .

rrod said:

Headphones will never quite shake you in the same way I mean really, what I miss when I listen to a big symphony on headphones isn't f'in frequency response, it's that sense of a whole bunch of sound power shaking your bones.

Click to expand...

Yes, I guess headphones with simulator software will never be able to compete with the physical sensation you get from speakers as you exampled

But nontheless, I'm still quite impressed with the simulator software as it pushes the headphone experience further.

silentfrequency said:

Has anyone else tried the out of your head virtual surround simulator demo using headphones?

It's really impressive IMO anyway and replicates various speaker set ups.

I've read that too of the line headphones alone can reproduce sound quality to the same level of top of the line speakers that cost 100k and over, essentially making expensive headphones appear cheap in comparison, but with this kind of software maybe the lines between headphone and speakers are blurring even more?

http://www.head-fi.org/t/689299/out-of-your-head-new-virtual-surround-simulator

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've tried it. Too much reverb for me. Didn't do anything EQ and crossfeed or HRTF software can't.
 
You don't get the impact like RRod mentioned, the sound doesn't change when you move your head, and you're still filtering the speaker EQ through your own headphone's colorations. It's not really blurring any lines, but it is a cool idea.
 
It was a good demonstration that price != sound quality in speakers. Can't remember which was my favorite but it wasn't one of the uber-expensive ones.