[Willakan]

In what way are nick_charles' attempts a failure? Because they didn't show differences that any sane person would expect to be audible?
The RMAA point I have already responded to by pointing out the tests I was referring to did not use RMAA, but you saw fit to ignore that.
The documentation on the receiver chip almost certainly is not BS - the device no doubt does have very low jitter measurements.  However, all the objective evidence I have seen (excluding people on forums declaring they heard it - people declare they hear differences between "CD Mats") suggests that jitter is generally not a problem.
 
"Real world experience" is great, assuming it wasn't sighted and was properly volume matched. 
Anecdotal evidence isn't really evidence of anything. I can find reports suggesting prettymuch anything about anything in the world of hi-fi - did you know the DACmagic is both bright and warm?
 
No-one is denying measurable differences between opamps. Relating those differences to what was heard under sighted, highly bias-prone listening conditions is not good science and will never be good science. Also, didn't you have a go at me earlier for presenting the opinions of others of repute to try to persuade you? Pot,kettle, ect...
 
As I have previously said, the fact you believe that the fact I haven't heard the opamps involved causes you  to disregard my opinions, whilst the fact that you believe what you heard to be of any import whatsoever, it not being done under suitable conditions, causes me to regard what you say with an industrial-sized pinch of salt. It is difficult to see how we can come to an understanding from this position.
 
TL;DR: "Real world experience" as you describe it is highly bias-prone and generally unreliable. Measuring equipment of a good standard is generally not. It is highly unlikely we will ever agree on anything.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Now, measuring THD/SNR/IMD won't learn us much...why so? Let's take another analogy: get a cheap LCD screen and a top of the range plasma, calibrate them using a colorimeter to D65/2.4/SMPTE-C. Yes, once properly calibrated they will measure the exact same colorimetry-wise! Now, would you say that they look the same? I hope not.

Because the true contrast levels measure substantially different, as do the processing electronics, and type of panel.  All also measurable phenomena too.
 
 
Quote:

Roll some opamps, hear for yourself. If LT1028, AD797, OPA827, ADA4627 sound the same to you....well, at least you tried.

 
Classic leeperry argument, if you can't hear the difference your ears are broke.  Do a level matched DBT so we can make fun of your ears will you?

 

[kwkarth]

Somebody a little ways up-thread mentioned that the measurements being used are like trying to eat soup with a fork. That's got to be one of the best analogues I've ever heard.  If you measure the wrong things, don't be surprised when you don't find the differences you're looking for.
 
What we need are people from both sides of the camp who are willing to be intellectually honest and willing to work together until they find answers to all the questions.  Don't care who's right and who's wrong.  Just care about finding the truth.  Are there enough people on both sides of this fence, who are secure enough in themselves and want the truth more then they want to be right or prove the other guy wrong?
 
Who will step up?

 

[tmars78]

Quote:

Somebody a little ways up-thread mentioned that the measurements being used are like trying to eat soup with a fork. That's got to be one of the best analogues I've ever heard.  If you measure the wrong things, don't be surprised when you don't find the differences you're looking for.
 
What we need are people from both sides of the camp who are willing to be intellectually honest and willing to work together until they find answers to all the questions.  Don't care who's right and who's wrong.  Just care about finding the truth.  Are there enough people on both sides of this fence, who are secure enough in themselves and want the truth more then they want to be right or prove the other guy wrong?
 
Who will step up?

I agree completely with the bolded part. But if you read enough of these threads, you soon realize, the ones who say they hear nothing, will step up, while the others will say, "I know what I hear, and that is all that matters." I understand no one wants to be wrong, but I think hi-fi could progress so much further, if people would work together. 
 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

I agree completely with the bolded part. But if you read enough of these threads, you soon realize, the ones who say they hear nothing, will step up, while the others will say, "I know what I hear, and that is all that matters." I understand no one wants to be wrong, but I think hi-fi could progress so much further, if people would work together. 
 

I agree!
 
 

 

[Mad Max]

 
Quote:

... Classic leeperry argument, if you can't hear the difference your ears are broke.  Do a level matched DBT so we can make fun of your ears will you?

You can play with the levels all you want, it won't change LT1028's weird-@ss soundstage, nor will it make AD797 less/more dry than the others, nor will it bring the others' imaging up to par with 4627 and 797.  Do a level-matched DBT to see for yourself.  =]

 

[cjl]

Quote:

Let's take another analogy: get a cheap LCD screen and a top of the range plasma, calibrate them using a colorimeter to D65/2.4/SMPTE-C. Yes, once properly calibrated they will measure the exact same colorimetry-wise!

That's the thing though. They won't. Even perfectly calibrated (and keep in mind that you can only reduce the color space of a screen during calibration, not increase it, so if one of them cannot reproduce the desired gamut, no amount of calibration will help with that), there will be very easily measured differences between the screens. Specifically between LCD and plasma, the response time, contrast ratio, black point (which is admittedly related to the contrast ratio), and viewing angles will be substantially different between the two. It's also fairly likely that the top of the line set will calibrate better than the LCD - you can't always calibrate perfectly, and high end displays tend to be able to achieve a closer-to-perfect calibration than cheap ones do. All of this is easily measured with fairly basic equipment. It really isn't a good analogy for the claims a lot of people have for "unmeasurable" differences in audio equipment.

 

[leeperry]

You can play with the levels all you want, it won't change LT1028's weird-@ss soundstage, nor will it make AD797 less/more dry than the others, nor will it bring the others' imaging up to par with 4627 and 797.  Do a level-matched DBT to see for yourself.  =]

Prove it

 
Oh wait, how do you measure soundstage again? I forgot.

 
I agree completely with the bolded part. But if you read enough of these threads, you soon realize, the ones who say they hear nothing, will step up, while the others will say, "I know what I hear, and that is all that matters." I understand no one wants to be wrong, but I think hi-fi could progress so much further, if people would work together. 
 

TBH, this is not another sterile debate about whether jitter is audible(from ppl who have never bothered trying a reclocker), or whether opamps sound different(from ppl who haven't rolled any serious audio opamps in their lives). The OP is about *WHY* do different opamps sound different. I've given clues to this, but noone's used a top of the range measurements package on those chips so far AFAIK. Posting in a thread about *WHY* do different opamps sound different that they all sound the same anyway and that this is placebo yada-yada very much applies as trolling in my book, together w/ the proof of talking about audio gear they have never tried for themselves, or worse: some major auditory issues that would require assistance from an audiologist ASAP.

That's the thing though. They won't. Even perfectly calibrated (and keep in mind that you can only reduce the color space of a screen during calibration, not increase it, so if one of them cannot reproduce the desired gamut, no amount of calibration will help with that), there will be very easily measured differences between the screens.

I mentioned "SMPTE-C", meaning that you will also shrink the gamut to the smallest gamut in the industry(that is used for DVD and BD in the US). And if your two wide gamut displays are calibrated following D65/2.4/SMPTE-C, they will measure the exact same. You can use a combination of 16bit 3DLUT and your graphic card's 10bit CLUT in order to map gamuts if the screens OSD is too basic, in 32bit float + dithering too...and yes, they will both be identically perfectly calibrated.
 

In what way are nick_charles' attempts a failure? Because they didn't show differences that any sane person would expect to be audible?

 
I love to quote team "everything sounds the same", now all the opamps and all the cables sound the same...great news, we're all mentally divergent /o/
 

Originally Posted by Willakan /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Anecdotal evidence isn't really evidence of anything. I can find reports suggesting prettymuch anything about anything in the world of hi-fi - did you know the DACmagic is both bright and warm?

That's the thing, I don't really care what newbies have to say about such a crappy sounding DAC as the DacMagic. OK, why crappy:
-high ripple SMPS wallwart
-terrible CM108 USB chip
-terrible sounding dual opamps(NE5532/OP275)
-mandatory ASRC
 
And oh my oh my, what a surprise: http://ravenda.wordpress.com/2009/08/14/audiogddac19/

Cambridge DACMagic ($429 ~ does not sound any better than a $99 NuForce uDAC, a disappointment)

 
And here again: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/Cambridge-Audio-DacMagic-Review

my 2 cents is still that the NE5532 op-amp is an inferior component which always sound inferior and harsh.
 
If you can not hear it, that is not my problem - I would immediately replace it with a Burr-Brown, National or Analog Devices chip made for audio and I have done so on a number of devices and even my wife immediately notices the difference though she has no clue as to what have been done!
 
The 5532 is a component which sounds inferior to almost anything made with audio quality in mind. The output section of the Squeezebox Classic is even worse. That is made with an opamp made for telephones and comms systems.
 
Also, my reaction is due to the fact that I get very disappointed when a DAC with the word MAGIC in its name in 2009 uses an opamp which I replaced the first time in 1990...
 
That being said, the DacMagic does not sound too bad, but why spend that kind of money on a dac, when the same (analogue) circuit can be found in a receiver which is so much more versatile - and eventhough the DAC-section is less sophisticated still sounds way better than the DacMagic when properly modified...
 
So you're right in recmmending people to use their ears, I've done so, and my conclusion was clear: The unit was sent back, full refund received.

 
Even his wife can hear the difference between opamps! But not members of head-fi? There's something very wrong here

 
If you use crappy components, no amount of magic in the world will make it sound amazing...not even newbies raving about it. Surely, all the UK hifi-magazines will write pages on how amazingly sounding the DacMagic really is. Sponsors do pay the bills at the end of the day.

No-one is denying measurable differences between opamps. Relating those differences to what was heard under sighted, highly bias-prone listening conditions is not good science and will never be good science. Also, didn't you have a go at me earlier for presenting the opinions of others of repute to try to persuade you? Pot,kettle, ect...

This was fun for a while, but this is OT. The OP is about *WHY* do they sound different, thanks for passing by. I prefer chocolate ice cream to vanilla, should I try scanning graphs of my brain when I eat chocolate? Surely some MRI scanning should manage to prove that my brain is happier w/ chocolate than w/ vanilla.

 

[xnor]

leeperry, it seems like you're ignoring most of the replies that are directed at you. If anything, it's is your behaviour that borders on trolling and certainly is the opposite of what kwkarth and tmars78 suggested.
 
Quote:

should I try scanning graphs of my brain  [...]

Yes! Since you attack us in saying that some of us have "major auditory issues" it is only fair to say that you should see your brain thoroughly checked.
 
 
Quote:

This was fun for a while, but this is OT. The OP is about *WHY* do they sound different, thanks for passing by.

Maybe you should have read the OP and not just the title. Always a great idea to read the OP unless you want to ridicule yourself.
The guy is asking for solid proof that opamps sound different. He noticed the blabbing about how opamps sound (subjective impressions) and is now asking whether there is proof to back this up.
Anyway, to me it seems you're only trying to shoot down Willikan here.
 
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kwkarth
 
Somebody a little ways up-thread mentioned that the measurements being used are like trying to eat soup with a fork. That's got to be one of the best analogues I've ever heard.  If you measure the wrong things, don't be surprised when you don't find the differences you're looking for.

Leeperry wrote it and it's his way of invalidating/discarding measurements (ouch). What if the measurements are fine and also tell us what we want to know (we prefer to eat our soup with spoon), but some people fail to interpret the results (or bend the spoon like Uri Geller making it ineffective like a fork)?

If this weren't the Sound Science forum I wouldn't care, but did I mention that I don't like analogies for they are usually weak and support fallacious reasoning? Guess I just did it, for the hundredths time.
 

 

[Willakan]

leeperry, you are being obtuse. You are the second "everything makes a difference always" person I have accused of this, so I feel an example is in order:
 
You: Nick_charles' tests were a failure.
Me: Why?
You: Oh yeah, cos everything sounds the same right?
 
I somehow don't believe you're that stu...bloody-minded, hence I am forced to conclude that you are trolling.
I could repeat myself regarding the monstrously large flaws with what you are saying, (anecdotal evidence irrelevant, deliberate misinterpretation of arguments, hypocrisy of the highest order regarding appropriation of other's opinions and so on until my fingers are sore from typing) but it's blatantly obvious that you don't want to have a rational discussion; you would rather repeat "I heard differences so you're all wrong" until everyone loses their patience.
 
I would put money on you being totally unable to distinguish the DACmagic from another decent DAC in a blind test (and no, a DAC with 2% THD doesn't count).
 
 

 

[leeperry]

I would put money on you being totally unable to distinguish the DACmagic from another decent DAC in a blind test.

 
OK, now we're talking! What kind of amount did you have in mind? Please allow some fees to get a proper bailiff watching over the whole thing, and some live video recording would be good too.

 

[Willakan]

Regrettably, a certain paucity of funds prevents me from doing so, but by god, when I win the lottery...

 

[deadlylover]

Quote:

I would put money on you being totally unable to distinguish the DACmagic from another decent DAC in a blind test (and no, a DAC with 2% THD doesn't count).
 

Do you have a bunch of recommendations of what are some decent measuring DAC's? I'll be half in the market for one at the end of this year, and I'd like to get a short list of some sound science approved goodies so I can do some research. I'll be more than happy to try some honest level matched comparisons and whatnot when the time comes, and I figure if a DIY T2 and a 009 can't resolve the differences, nothing can.
 
Right now I was thinking of an Anedio D1 or a DAC1 and a couple of others which I've forgotten already.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

 
.......
 
 
Well, it very much sequitur, I can tell you that. At least from where I stand.
 
In 4 pages times, I've been told that the quality of a pot doesn't matter, that the differences between opamps are so minute that they are inaudible(based on what real world experiments and in what conditions? God only knows), and that most DAC's sound the same too due to those minute differences between their output stages.
 
I like the diyaudio.com forum because it's full of ppl who try stuff, you know, the so-called "real world experience" and then they give honest feedback about what they've heard. A while ago, I found a comparison of PCM1793/CS4398 that matched exactly what me and other head-fi members have heard. Would you call it some sort of "collective hallucination"?
 
Once more, lookee lookee what I've found: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/169484-what-wrong-op-amps.html
 
 
It's 24 pages long too, and I'm sure Scott Wurcer(the designer of many top of the range audio opamps, including AD797) must have given his opinion in there as well. Would you say that these ppl are delusional? Don't you find it a bit of a problem to talk about equipment you haven't heard? Roll some opamps, hear for yourself. If LT1028, AD797, OPA827, ADA4627 sound the same to you....well, at least you tried.

I am all up for being open minded and taking on board the experience of others. Since we are not all able to do everything, we need to accept others experience. That you roll opamps and hear a difference is good enough for me. That diyaudio do the same is also good enough for me. Opamps do sound different. The question is why.
 
Having read the thread you linked to, diyaudio are doing the same as you are doing, opamps are different, I hear a difference, therefore the opamp causes that difference. That argument only works if you can link one to the other with other evidence.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Regrettably, a certain paucity of funds prevents me from doing so, but by god, when I win the lottery...

You should realize the only way to win with trolls is not feed them.  He's never done a level matched DBT, and if you have and failed it's immediately used to disqualify you and your gear.  You could be using hundreds of thousands in audio equipment, but then he'll just retort your ears are broken.  You should know this by now.
 
Quote:

Do you have a bunch of recommendations of what are some decent measuring DAC's? I'll be half in the market for one at the end of this year, and I'd like to get a short list of some sound science approved goodies so I can do some research. I'll be more than happy to try some honest level matched comparisons and whatnot when the time comes, and I figure if a DIY T2 and a 009 can't resolve the differences, nothing can.
 
Right now I was thinking of an Anedio D1 or a DAC1 and a couple of others which I've forgotten already.

All of them generally measure the same territory (save USB on DacMagic).  Basically you're paying for specific features.  I compiled a quick comparison list.
 
DacMagic:
 
Price Today: $430
Outputs: Balanced and Unbalanced, coax and toslink passthrough
Inputs: 2 digital (toslink or coax spdif for each) and USB.
Warranty: 1 year
Extras: Filters to modify roll-off and ringing -- probably inaudible
Downside: USB jitter is source dependent though probably inaudible, no volume control/headphone out
Made in China (some are picky)
 
Benchmark:
 
Base Price: $995+ depending on model
Outputs: Balanced and Unbalanced (no digital passthrough)
Inputs: DAC1 has 1BNC and 1 Toslink, DAC1USB adds USB, anything above gets rid of BNC for normal coax spdif connections and increases the number available.  Also has competent heapdhone output with non-digital volume control.
Warranty: 5 years
Downsides: lack of input options on the bottom two models.
Extras: top model features remote and motorized alps pot though expensive.  Some higher models than the base have adjustable gain.
Made in USA
 
Anedio D1:
 
Price: $1270
Outputs: Unbalanced with direct volume control, another competent headphone output.
Inputs: Coax (both BNC and reguarly), Toslink, USB
Warranty: 1 Year
Extras: Remote control
Downside: Discontinued, volume control is digital which may cause some unjustified disdain.
Chassis: outsourced
Electronics PCB and stuffing: USA
 
 
In other words courses for horses, what you want and prefer should be the deciding factor in such categories.