Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Android phones and USB DACs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Android phones and USB DACs - Page 394

post #5896 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJScope View Post

Its possible that there is some kind of DSP or post processing going on.
Or it could be psychological - like an awful lot of perceived differences in sound reproduction.
post #5897 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Percival View Post


Or it could be psychological - like an awful lot of perceived differences in sound reproduction.


Or both - a lot of SACD and DSD "compatible" players for example don't actually decode the DSD directly. They just convert them into PCM in their processor then run them through a PCM DAC. Then you still get people raving about how much better the SACDs are even compared with basically the same album in PCM of any bit depth when they're playing them through one of those $200 Pioneer or Philips universal disc players, or some of the newer DAPs (I mean, why not just convert them to PCM before putting them into a player that will do it on the fly and just drain more of the battery?).

post #5898 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by hykhleif View Post
 

i don't know when i play the same song 192/24 bit from the iPod using onkyo player it sounds different than when i use uapp on android when connected to idsd, with iPod i don't know why i find more warmth in the sound


That is because software DOES make a difference and you hear it.  Believe your ears, not what you are told!

post #5899 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by bixby View Post
 


That is because software DOES make a difference and you hear it.  Believe your ears, not what you are told!

 

By that logic, we should not believe you telling us that software makes a difference.

 

Personally, I am more inclined to believe something if it has objective, reproducible evidence to back it up. I'm just odd scientific that way. :happy_face1:


Edited by Percival - Today at 10:34 am
post #5900 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Percival View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bixby View Post
 


That is because software DOES make a difference and you hear it.  Believe your ears, not what you are told!

 

By that logic, we should not believe you telling us that software makes a difference.

 

Personally, I am more inclined to believe something if it has objective, reproducible evidence to back it up. I'm just odd scientific that way. :happy_face1:


Sir Knight, until the 1600s there was no scientific explanation for the colour white.  Newton offered the first plausibe explanation, which was questioned by people like Goethe until the early 19th Century. Does it mean that until that day people should doubt the evidence of their senses, i.e. the existence of the colour white simply because scientists could not explain it?

post #5901 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by kostaszag View Post
 


Sir Knight, until the 1600s there was no scientific explanation for the colour white.  Newton offered the first plausibe explanation, which was questioned by people like Goethe until the early 19th Century. Does it mean that until that day people should doubt the evidence of their senses, i.e. the existence of the colour white simply because scientists could not explain it?

This is the different time, almost 2015, and we're not talking string theory or Higgs boson here. This is easy science and psychoacoustics is well understood.

post #5902 of 5906

Well.... there it is folks... digital music is an unexplainable phenomenon.

post #5903 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanD View Post
 

This is the different time, almost 2015, and we're not talking string theory or Higgs boson here. This is easy science and psychoacoustics is well understood.


Psycho-acoustics is not well understood. Most of the best and most thorough research in psycho-acoustics occurred in the 1930s, for the U.S. Navy Sonar and anti-submarine warfare programs.

 

Exactly how the human brain perceives sounds (plural) at various frequencies and volume levels, is a work in progress.

 

So too are the testing methods by which any theories are tested. ABX, for instance, is largely useless.

 

I ask the army of ABX zealots to please refrain from attacking me, I won't engage you any further so try to save it, especially since this whole thing is now off-topic for the thread.

post #5904 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyFresh View Post
 


Psycho-acoustics is not well understood. Most of the best and most thorough research in psycho-acoustics occurred in the 1930s, for the U.S. Navy Sonar and anti-submarine warfare programs.

 

Exactly how the human brain perceives sounds (plural) at various frequencies and volume levels, is a work in progress.

 

So too are the testing methods by which any theories are tested. ABX, for instance, is largely useless.

 

I ask the army of ABX zealots to please refrain from attacking me, I won't engage you any further so try to save it, especially since this whole thing is now off-topic for the thread.


wow it seems my question started a big debate, psychoacoustics or not i feel that the sound changes by changes the transport so until only of the two debate teams wins or comes up with a winning explanation i will hold on to my thoughts, but keep the debate peaceful 

post #5905 of 5906

Death to the naysayers!!!

post #5906 of 5906
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyFresh View Post
 


Psycho-acoustics is not well understood. Most of the best and most thorough research in psycho-acoustics occurred in the 1930s, for the U.S. Navy Sonar and anti-submarine warfare programs.

 

Exactly how the human brain perceives sounds (plural) at various frequencies and volume levels, is a work in progress.

 

So too are the testing methods by which any theories are tested. ABX, for instance, is largely useless.

 

I ask the army of ABX zealots to please refrain from attacking me, I won't engage you any further so try to save it, especially since this whole thing is now off-topic for the thread.

Lighten up, I don't remember ever attacking you or forcing you to believe anything, There's plenty of research available from many sources, again, nobody is forcing any of it on you.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Android phones and USB DACs