Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › So who can ABX this recording, from the source?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

So who can ABX this recording, from the source? - Page 2

post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalamar View Post
Still, the change is pretty insignificant. And it probably was the 5532's fault, IMO.


It was about as significant as comparing 320 to FLAC.  Not everyone has the system/ears/attention to detail to hear it, but it's definitely there.  And the better endpoint you get, the more you notice it.  (Endpoint being speakers/headphones.)

 

Are you going to stop with your 'ALL DACS AND AMPS SOUND ALIKE' ranting, and join the much more rational 'Invest the most in cans, then in an amp, then in a DAC, then in a source, then in cables moderately'?

post #17 of 23
Thread Starter 

No? Are you forgetting that it was colored *twice*? And the line in isn't as good as the line out by far.

 

The dac and amp crap going on here is nothing short of insanity. Head-fi needs some sane voices.

post #18 of 23

With interest I tried this as well, and also found that it was easier to tell the two apart by concentrating on the bass notes. I first started with a pair of Ultrasone Pro 650's, and the bass was just a mess. With these headphones, I tried concentrating on the background rain near the beginning. One file's rain was a bit grainier than the other.

 

I then switched to the K702s and the previous mess of bass now reveals itself to be thunder. Also near the beginning, some of the thunder's underlying tone sounds almost like sci-fi warbbles, and the two files had a fairly distinct difference that I concentrated on.

 

A curious observation: after spending so much time concentrating on the two files, repeatedly playing back parts of the same song, my hearing started to lose sensitivity. The warbbles became less distinct until I could not hear the faintest warbble anymore. The feeling was like trying to read text in almost-dark - straining to detect what I know is there but just can't.  This was after about 20 minutes of playing around with this. The effect was so dramatic that I thought something had gone wrong with my equipment.  After resting for 10 minutes - took out the trash, washed dishes - the details returned to my ears.

 

Jack

post #19 of 23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalamar View Post

No? Are you forgetting that it was colored *twice*? And the line in isn't as good as the line out by far.

 

The dac and amp crap going on here is nothing short of insanity. Head-fi needs some sane voices.


Indeed.

post #20 of 23

I MUST know the name of this song and any others similar to it.

 

As for my scores, I found it extremely tiring to complete the test. I got 9/9 correct at the start, then 12/13, 15/17, and ended with 17/20 at the end with great difficulty.

 

I ran the two files through the audio difference maker, and found that one was louder than the other. Definitely hard to notice, I had my track volume on 100% and my computer volume also on 100%. The biggest difference was at the start, the first 0.1 seconds where one of them is significantly louder than the other.

 

I have to say, thank you for making this thread, thank your for setting up this test. You've saved me a lot of money and grief in the years to come. I do not mind losing that little detail, I never want to concentrate so hard on music, and I want to spend money on headphones rather than something so small. For me it's not 'I can't tell the difference', it's more like, 'I don't care about it if it costs me $2000 for it', keeping in mind that it would require a perfect dac to give that quality.

 

The file: http://www.mediafire.com/?2dm4l6pc0ihh9cs

 

edot: i realise that my source itself may not be showing some of the detail, but for that much money I'd rather get a few pairs of headphones.


Edited by Trysaeder - 8/17/10 at 4:31am
post #21 of 23
Thread Starter 

It's a vinyl rip of Dark Passion Play - Last of the Wilds. Not my own rip.

 

Well, at least someone understands this isn't a serious test isn't to "prove" anything but rather provide some insight on whether or not upgraditis is really worth it to you.

post #22 of 23

After some thought, I'd think that there is a point in upgrading.

 

For argument's sake, let's call the STX 'bad'. This bad source gives you bad music, and when you play the coloured one next to the original, the original sounds better in comparison, BUT, because it's bad, it doesn't reveal how bad it is.

 

So in less confusing terms, the bad source doesn't show you the detail lost from the colouring, and doesn't show you the detail in the original file.

The good source should be able to show the details of the music, as well as the detail lost from going through itself.

 

If my theory is true, then all dacs and the difference in their 'reflections' should sound the same margin apart. Although this theory would be null if a person with a 'good' source could not tell the difference easily, far more easily than my strained attempts.

It would be great if someone with a few dacs from different price ranges could do this experiment.

 

post #23 of 23
Thread Starter 

The difference is hard coded to the file, IMO there's not going to be any more ease in telling it apart using a better dac, so long as you're not using something like onboard or some distorted uDAC or tube amp.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › So who can ABX this recording, from the source?