[deadlylover]

Quote:

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

snip
 
In other words courses for horses, what you want and prefer should be the deciding factor in such categories.

 
Thanks man, much appreciated. The fancy stuff wont apply to me because all I need is coax input, and RCA output =P.
 
I really don't need a new DAC since I'm pretty skeptical about them anyway, but I always found it strange that people with 'high end' DACs don't want to do proper comparisons with lower end ones because it might mean they wasted money (fully understandable).
 
And the people with 'lower end' DACs don't want to buy any 'high end' ones for comparisons because they know they measure the same
 
So I figure I might as well do something about that when the time comes, as I'm curious about the results myself.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

 
Thanks man, much appreciated. The fancy stuff wont apply to me because all I need is coax input, and RCA output =P.
 
I really don't need a new DAC since I'm pretty skeptical about them anyway, but I always found it strange that people with 'high end' DACs don't want to do proper comparisons with lower end ones because it might mean they wasted money (fully understandable).
 
And the people with 'lower end' DACs don't want to buy any 'high end' ones for comparisons because they know they measure the same
 
So I figure I might as well do something about that when the time comes, as I'm curious about the results myself.

Well if it helps, I went from Cary Audio Xciter -> DacMagic and noticed a whopping zero difference in sound.  I gained more functional, though the Cary Audio was indeed a sexy piece of gear in terms of build quality.
 

 

[deadlylover]

Quote:

Well if it helps, I went from Cary Audio Xciter -> DacMagic and noticed a whopping zero difference in sound.  I gained more functional, though the Cary Audio was indeed a sexy piece of gear in terms of build quality.
 

Yeah I had more or less the same experience. Went from my computer sound card to the Audio-gd DAC19, I just instantly didn't bother to do any comparisons the moment I fired it up for the first time, because I couldn't hear any difference either.
 
Everyone was making a kick in the fuss about R2R chips being better than Sigma Delta chips at the time too, bloody hell.

 

[kwkarth]

To those of you who don't want to work together to truly find answers, you are either too stupidly proud or just too stupid, and it does not matter which side of the fence you're on.  If the shoe fits, ...  Lotsa people apparently love to hear their gums flap in the breeze.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

To those of you who don't want to work together to truly find answers, you are either too stupidly proud or just too stupid, and it does not matter which side of the fence you're on.  If the shoe fits, ...  Lotsa people apparently love to hear their gums flap in the breeze.

I think the objective side's done just about everything it can.  DBT's, measurements, rolling, etc.  Until the ones claiming they can hear it are willing to actually take part in a non-sighted listening test there isn't going to be a "finding answers" except for the answers the two camps present based on evidence or anecdotes.  That's at least how I see it.
 
If you're saying the objective side isn't working towards the goal, then please elaborate on what else can be put forth towards it.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

x2 with what Shike has posted.
 
It is the subjectivist sides point blank refusal to deal with the elephant in the room that is placebo which holds such enquiry back. The objectivist side has produced lots of evidence to back up it case and are continually faced with repetitive, non sequitir and ad hominem arguments.
 
As it stands much of hifi is like homeopathy where the science is clearly lacking and placebo provides a clear and obvious answer to how it works.

 

[cjl]

Quote:

 

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.

 
I notice you conveniently ignored all of the non-gamut based specs that I stated

 
Yes, if you do that, you'll have two screens that will measure identically in terms of color gamut. However, they will still not match in contrast ratio, black point, response time, input lag, and viewing angle. Which, as I stated above, is easily measurable.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

I think the objective side's done just about everything it can.  DBT's, measurements, rolling, etc.  Until the ones claiming they can hear it are willing to actually take part in a non-sighted listening test there isn't going to be a "finding answers" except for the answers the two camps present based on evidence or anecdotes.  That's at least how I see it.
 
If you're saying the objective side isn't working towards the goal, then please elaborate on what else can be put forth towards it.

Well, I said what I said.  No more and no less.  If what I said is in question, please refer to the post.
Thanks.
 
 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

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?

 


Quote:

To those of you who don't want to work together to truly find answers, you are either too stupidly proud or just too stupid, and it does not matter which side of the fence you're on.  If the shoe fits, ...  Lotsa people apparently love to hear their gums flap in the breeze.

 


Quote:

I think the objective side's done just about everything it can.  DBT's, measurements, rolling, etc.  Until the ones claiming they can hear it are willing to actually take part in a non-sighted listening test there isn't going to be a "finding answers" except for the answers the two camps present based on evidence or anecdotes.  That's at least how I see it.
 
If you're saying the objective side isn't working towards the goal, then please elaborate on what else can be put forth towards it.

Kwkarth, please answer the question. What more do you want the objectivist side to do to work towards finding out answers? If you have no answer to that then all your little rants have contributed is to get people's backs up.

 

[maverickronin]

So, just because I could, I did another little test.
 
I tried swapping between the stock OPA2134 and the extra AD8065 that I got with my XM6 once again.  I couldn't really tell them apart.  Since they're single channel chips I decided to use a different one in each channel.  Still nothing.  Gain even stayed the same as far as my ears and radio shack SPL meter could tell.  I ended up putting the ADs back in because I might as well use them if I paid extra for them.
 
I've got no clue where those fare among opamp royalty though so maybe I just need a better pair.  Leeperry shouldn't have a problem with the headphones I used (modded T50RPs) but I suspect he's going to complain about the DAC since its USB only and uses ASRC and he doesn't seem to like that either.  Maybe the BUF634s just ruin all the subtle differences.  

 
I still remain skeptical...

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Kwkarth, please answer the question. What more do you want the objectivist side to do to work towards finding out answers? If you have no answer to that then all your little rants have contributed is to get people's backs up.

I would love to see both sides put their pride aside and work together to better understand the issues.  This assumes that BOTH sides expect they don't have all the answers, and BOTH sides have things to learn from the other side.
 
 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I would love to see both sides put their pride aside and work together to better understand the issues.  This assumes that BOTH sides expect they don't have all the answers, and BOTH sides have things to learn from the other side.

That's exactly the problem.  One side dismisses data as inaudible, then attacks for lack of evidence yet sees no flaws in their data or methodology and accepts it as gospel.  Then extrapolates it beyond the constraints of the original experiment.  It's not an audio problem, it's an epistemological problem driven by ego.  A person who can't critique their own argument isn't worth having an argument with.     
 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

That's exactly the problem.  One side dismisses data as inaudible, then attacks for lack of evidence yet sees no flaws in their data or methodology and accepts it as gospel.  Then extrapolates it beyond the constraints of the original experiment.  It's not an audio problem, it's an epistemological problem driven by ego.  A person who can't critique their own argument isn't worth having an argument with.     

Sounds like arbitration may be in order.
 
 

 

[Shike]

Quote:

I would love to see both sides put their pride aside and work together to better understand the issues.  This assumes that BOTH sides expect they don't have all the answers, and BOTH sides have things to learn from the other side.

That still doesn't answer the question.  Surely working together is a part, but doing what?  What test, what method, etc.?  The objective side requires some evidence beyond anecdotal no matter what.  If such evidence is provided we'll examine it closer, and if it holds up to scrutiny we'd happily change our beliefs.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

That's exactly the problem.  One side dismisses data as inaudible, then attacks for lack of evidence yet sees no flaws in their data or methodology and accepts it as gospel.  Then extrapolates it beyond the constraints of the original experiment.  It's not an audio problem, it's an epistemological problem driven by ego.  A person who can't critique their own argument isn't worth having an argument with.     
 

Audibility is an issue and I have asked on a number of occasions is such and such audible based on the measurements given. Sometimes I get and answer and others I don't. I agree audibility of the differences found in opamps, cables etc is vital whcih is why I have tried to contribute by posting audio diff maker and asking questions. I am sorry I can't contribute to the actual measuring as I have no equipment and limited knowledge on that subject.
 
As for ego, I am afraid I see ego as more of an issue with the subjectivist side as they dismiss out of hand the possibility placebo is the answer to many questions as to why things sound different. Placebo needs to be discussed openly and without fear of being flamed. Do that and we have made a big stride towards working together.