To expand a bit on what bigshot stated:
[1] I then plugged the AK10 into my computer, which automatically downloaded a driver, and continued to play the same music from Spotify. It was immediately different!
[1a] leaps and bounds ahead in resolution and dynamics through listening to on the computer.
[2] My ears are far from critical as I could barely tell the difference between FLAC and 320Kbps MP3's, but this difference was night and day.
[3] It was a different colour when playing through UAPP compared to natively through android and the sound and amping power was a significant difference. To me, this indicated that a sampling rate issue caused a difference in sound quality.
Alternatively, could an android device send a signal through USB output to a DAC and not engage that external DAC but still uses the amp (double amping)? I am curious and baffled to know what's going on!
I am currently thinking of getting a bluetooth DAC/AMP like the Fiio btr5 to bypass any of these issues and if bluetooth streaming is at 320kbps i would be comfortable knowing that I would not be able to hear any better regardless. I could then compare it using it as a USB DAC and see if there is any sound degradation but I don't have high expectations using the USB output.
1. Yes, almost certainly it would be different. Almost certainly the output power of your computer sound card would be different (higher) from the output power of your mobile phone.
1a. As a higher output power would be somewhat louder and as somewhat louder is typically perceived as more "
resolution and dynamics", even when the resolution/dynamics are actually less (!), how do you know it was "
leaps and bounds ahead in resolution and dynamics" and not just somewhat louder?
2. If your ears were not "far from critical", if instead they were highly critical, then you then you wouldn't be able to tell ANY difference between flac and 320kbps MP3's. But "yes" a relatively small difference in volume (one or a few decibels) can be perceived as a significant difference in sound quality.
3. I don't get your logic. You state the difference was sample rate and amp power, so how does this
"indicate that a sampling rate issue caused the difference" UNLESS you've eliminated the amp power? If you haven't eliminated amp power then simple logic dictates that either sample rate and/or amp power must be the cause. However, you also (later) admit the possibility of "placebo effect", which you also haven't ruled out. So according to simple logic; sample rate, amp power or placebo effect are "indicated" as the cause, not ONLY sample rate. And, if we go a bit beyond simple logic and include some additional demonstrated facts, then of those three possibilities the different sample rate being the cause is leaps and bounds less likely than than the other two. Pretty much all recordings have gone through at least two sample rate conversions, probably four or more and not uncommonly, if you add up all the sample rate conversions during the mixing of the instruments/sounds, there will be a dozen or more, ALL of which are inaudible. On the other side of the coin, a small difference in volume is usually perceived as a difference in sound quality and other perception biases (which can lead to placebo effect) occur almost continuously. Music itself, as opposed to sound/noise, is effectively placebo effect! Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh but almost all the audiophile myths and marketing are based on this type of "illogic". Very much in your favour though is that you're willing to admit the possibility of placebo and question your assumptions/logic, the vast majority of audiophiles are not!
[1] I tried to keep the volume the same but I can't guarantee equality without any equipment.
[1a] Even at perceived lower volumes the dac connected through the PC was better.
[2] I would be interested to use a better method of A/B-ing, as you say. if you could post a link or quick run down? For $30 it's worth the experiment!
[2a] Other members may find it useful.
[3] I don't (and can't) rule out placebo affects and happy to look like a fool! In this case I didn't really have a vested interest for proving external dacs as my preference is to use my android's 3.5mm output and was ready to ditch the ak10 (with its silly proprietary connection).
1. Science requires volume matching to within 0.1dB, as even just a few tenths of a dB can be enough, under certain conditions, to affect perception but matching to this accuracy can't be done by ear.
1a. That would tend to indicate placebo effect is the more likely cause but to state that placebo IS the cause we would have to rule out everything else. For example, other electrical factors (such as impedance).
2. Of all the methods of direct comparison, "A/B-ing" is the LEAST reliable. Blind testing is better but still not accepted by science, ABX or double blind testing are required for science.
2a. As it turns out, surprising few other members find it useful. The majority of audiophiles are too invested in their marketing driven false logic and simply dismiss anything that contradicts their belief, even the most reliable methods of direct comparison. For a few though, it's extremely useful and after doing quite a number of reliable tests, very enlightening!
3. Careful, that's another common audiophile trap! Expectation biases and the effects they have on our perception are very complex. There's a whole raft of expectation biases, some are conscious, some are sub-conscious and often, these different biases conflict with other biases. Our perception is therefore typically "a judgement call" by our brain quickly balancing out all these biases. Most audiophiles appear to believe there's only one, obvious expectation bias and if that's eliminated there can be no placebo effect. A couple of easy to demonstrate examples:
1. A listener may have no conscious expectation of preferring either "A" or "B" and identifies say "A" as better sound quality than "B".
2. A listener may have a conscious expectation of preferring "A" but actually identifies "B" as having better sound quality.
Most audiophiles would consider that placebo effect cannot be a contributing factor in these two examples, especially the second one. Yet a relatively simple experiment can easily demonstrate that both can be due SOLELY to placebo effect. For example, "A" and "B" are actually the same identical unit, just in a different case, with a different brand name and/or some additional variables (that have no affect on audio output).
G
