[bixby]

I agree with @obobskivich in that the words we audiophiles use to describe differences are quite dissimilar to the way we would describe other things in nature. I often times (when writing a review for my blog) made a point of stressing that fact. We talk about minute differences that are only readily confirm-able through seasoned ears and listening as BIG. If we were to talk about other things in nature I do not think we would call these differences so big.

I would like to add a bit of fuel to the fire. I often remark to my local audio geeks (with whom I have enjoyed countless listening sessions) that in my main speaker based system, often changes to supports under equipment on my rack has a bigger change than swapping out dacs! They agree!

And then there is the room, don't even get me started on how many times I have moved speakers around a bit to discover a whole new perspective.

But back to headphones, I often marveled when trying to get a desktop computer based system to sound very good, at how effortlessly my cell phone an a little HRT dac would do with my middle of the road full sized cans. I have since figured out how to get the great sound out of the desktop setup such that I would not go back to a phone, but it took a lot of walks down audio equipment paths with dacs and amps to realize if you can get the source right that is most of the battle.

 

[bixby]

Music Alchemist said: ↑
Countless audiophiles (including myself) think said cheap DACs sound utterly mediocre while Chord DACs sound amazing. And Chord DACs do measure many times better as well. I just wanted to emphasize all this again because most Chord owners do hear a significant difference.

I haven't heard a chord DAC myself so I can't really speak on it. .

I know you are not a newbie, but you may have just committed the cardinal sin here on HF. Commenting on the sound of a product without ever hearing it is considered ..... well you know!

 

[bflat]

Put a playlist together of music tracks that you know really well and represents your music tastes. You want lossless files and ideally 44.1 and 48K based sampling rates since DACs use different clocks for each. The side benefit to this is you also have a good way to burn in your new DAC by looping this playlist. Add DSD files if you use those.

 

[TWerk]

Hahaha, and one with a sense of humor and it's Beyer not Bayer, they make aspirin and farm chemicals, hahaha

Sue me.

 

[TWerk]

Put a playlist together of music tracks that you know really well and represents your music tastes. You want lossless files and ideally 44.1 and 48K based sampling rates since DACs use different clocks for each. The side benefit to this is you also have a good way to burn in your new DAC by looping this playlist. Add DSD files if you use those.

How about if you don't normally listen to and own loseless files? I mean, for the purposes of comparing the hugo to the iphone it might be worth trying but I'd say it's only a small minority of people who have all (or majority) loseless files for listening.

 

[bflat]

How about if you don't normally listen to and own loseless files? I mean, for the purposes of comparing the hugo to the iphone it might be worth trying but I'd say it's only a small minority of people who have all (or majority) loseless files for listening.

In that case use the highest bit rate lossy files you have so you get the best quality playback. All lossy files get decoded to 44.1 PCM so no need to listen to different bit rates. However as others have noted, you get greatly limited dynamic range with lossy files so that will negatively impact the DAC's performance. Having said that, a great master lossy file will sound better than a bad master lossless file. I personally think AAC direct from Apple Music sound the best for lossy since most of their AAC files are compressed directly from 24/96 masters. You definitely don't want to play an AAC file that was decoded then recoded to MP3!

 

[Music Alchemist]

If it sounds vastly superior why is it that OP cannot tell any difference at all while A/B the two? Surely there should be some noticeable difference, no? OP is using resolving cans. OP is an experienced member on here, not some newbie who just bought his first HP. Something would not add up there.

Maybe apple DAC/Audio is far superior to most conventional/affordable DACS? Maybe that's the rub.

That's what I'd like to know. But again, you have to take all accounts into account. One person not perceiving a difference may be a fact, but it is also a fact that countless thousands of people do perceive a difference. And what matters to me is that the difference is big enough for me that I can't even stand listening to the cheap DACs anymore, now that I've got Chord in my life. We Chord owners act like rabid fanboys for a reason. hehe

I already mentioned that plenty of affordable DACs measure better, based on the linked article and what I know about the other DACs.

 

[obobskivich]

@bixby - yeah, I think that acknowledgement of "minute differences" is absolutely what I'm driving at. Basically be honest with ourselves - this isn't huge night and day. And I'd probably even agree with the "changing supports makes a bigger difference" depending on the gear - for my turntable it absolutely did more than most any other tweak, simply because that's a lot of vibration control ton a vibration sensitive thing.

@TWerk - Agree absolutely with the logic of what you're saying, and you definitely put it more bluntly than I did. I'd add (to further your devil's advocate point) that its somewhat peculiar if a given listener needs the community's validation of their equipment in order for it to sound good - if it's really so night and day it should be absolutely night and day for any hearing person, and shouldn't matter what so-called "dissidents" have to say about it. Sounds a lot like faith to me though, which perhaps should have no place in such a discussion.

 

[Currawong]

Something to add is that I usually listen to straight, close-mic'ed piano when trying out DACs. Guitar would work just as well. As well as how natural and real the reproduction sounds (I was brought up with a piano in my house and there is a piano dealer down the road I have been to where I remind myself of the sound) I listen for how much a DAC (or system) resolves the subtleties of the tones and harmonics of single notes. For most of my listening it doesn't matter, but for some of the music I like the enjoyment of listening with a good DAC is appreciable.

 

[Brooko]

Gents. - I had to remove a few posts. Let's keep things both on topic, and also avoid getting heated up or resorting to ad hominems.

John - you pretty much answered your question earlier.

Use music you are familiar with - try different bit-rates as long as they are from same masters. Always volume match. Test blind if you can get someone to help. Best advice I can give you is to rely on what you hear and ignore everyone else. I especially ignore people who claim night and day differences and who start questioning your ability to hear something (usually followed by questions about your gear, claims that most other people will hear a difference etc). In my experience the people who make these sorts of claims are often the least reliable - the quote in my sig is apt in my personal opinion. Even if they have super hearing, they are not you - and all that matters is you.

If you're listening out of a lower cost DAC / source to lossy formats and enjoying the heck out of it - more power to you. While I listen to redbook from my PC, I generally use aac256 from my portables, I spend the most money on actual headphones, and I use my HD800S with an iDSD. I ignore it if others tell me I'm doing it wrong. I'm the one enjoying the music - not the equipment. And I love my iPhone SE. Good pair of IEMs and I'm golden.

Suspect you and I might be similar. The testing you did should already have given the info you need. Just ignore those who question you now. All that matters is what you hear!

 

[squee116]

Music enjoyment is very personal. You might be able to get an aggregate of how something should sound before you use it, for research purposes, but the ultimate test is listening to things for yourself. No one's ears will be exactly like yours, so the things and sounds you enjoy will vary from everyone giving you advice. If you've got a setup you're happy with, it just means you got to the finish line before the rest of us. +1 to Brooko.

 

[obobskivich]

Something to add is that I usually listen to straight, close-mic'ed piano when trying out DACs. Guitar would work just as well. As well as how natural and real the reproduction sounds (I was brought up with a piano in my house and there is a piano dealer down the road I have been to where I remind myself of the sound) I listen for how much a DAC (or system) resolves the subtleties of the tones and harmonics of single notes. For most of my listening it doesn't matter, but for some of the music I like the enjoyment of listening with a good DAC is appreciable.

Serious question on this point - so my reasoning (for test music) is that "we hear voices better because we're human" so pick vocals but OTOH I know the piano/stringed instruments can occupy a similar frequency range. What I'm curious about is: I know human hearing is non-linear freq response (like the Fletcher-Munson curve), and I'm thinking perhaps its that we're more "midrange sensitive" than anything else, and anything that leans that way is potentially going to be easier to key into differences. For example listening to pure bass test tones may be useful for identifying room modes or resonance or whatever (trying to find and fix a specific problem), but if I'm being entirely honest picking apart two fairly different sounding headphones (like say Fostex TH-900 and JVC HP-DX1000) just by cycling bass sweeps is pretty inconclusive (both are bassy, both have decent low-end extension, the end), yet throw some Stevie Wonder on and voila, their individual sound sigs are on full display (and it'd take a whole article to fully explore said differences). I'm just wondering your (or anyone else's) thoughts on this since I'm seeing some commonality between different types of music being mentioned.

 

[Currawong]

I've read discussion about using vocals before. IIRC it was a professional who uses a spoken word track or something similar as a test. I wish I recalled the exact details. You've got me curious though as I was previously evaluating gear with music which included strong vocals.

Incidentally, since I'm testing three DACs at the moment the main focus of which is realistic reproduction, a friend was telling me about being present at the recording of a famous singer. Since he, along with everyone else, were in the actual room during the recording, he fully felt the emotion of her voice, and he had to hold back from crying. At the end of the recording, his face was covered in tears and nose running heavily, along with everyone else! I've only ever felt something approaching that kind of feeling with a couple of DACs.

 

[domsch1988]

Not that i'd be qualified to really whey in with my 2 pairs of mid-rangers, no decent DAC nor Amp and without years of experience of listening to music on high end gear. None the less, for my personal tests the release of "The Astonishing" was a major milestone. This Album covers everything i could ever need.
- Released on LP, so high quality lossless files are available
- Everything from Solo Piano, over full orchestra, Heavy Rock Band to Full Rang Synths and massive Choirs
- There are simple songs with just voice and one or two instruments
- Some of the most complex arrangements in any of the music i listened to
- Gap-less play back
- Insane dynamic Range in some Songs

Plus, the most important point, i like it so much i listened to it front to back several dozen times since release. I used it to verify Spotify vs Tidal recently and have it always on my phone to listen to Headphones in Stores. One Album and i have everything i personally need to verify new equipment.

 

[Jerrod]

the odac is the only dac worth buying, otherwise just use your onboard sound card.