[Sonic Defender]

No need for a debate, people can still be civil and engage in an exchange of ideas. Thanks for sharing your experience with me. I will say that 4 trials isn't really enough, you would need about 10 or 15 trials each, and maintain at least a 90% discrimination rate. As well, a larger sample would be optimum, get 10 people to do ten trials each and see if the results are the same. I do agree with your point about measurements, to an extent, some of the measurements for sure are so good now on all devices that the differences aren't audible. However, there are deviations in frequency response that could shift into audibility, resulting in a difference that can be heard, but really such a shift is not at all desirable and a well designed DAC really should never sound any different than any other well designed DAC. The job of a DAC is simple to convert, not colour the sound. If they are colouring the sound, something is wrong with the design, whether it is intentional or not.

As a point of inquiry, did you say that you were able to shift between DACs seamlessly, or did you have to take the time to swap them in and out? Our audio memory is extremely short, seconds at best, so if you or your wife were attempting to spot differences with any time in between comparisons, right there you would have a major confound that would/could invalidate the findings altogether.

I am glad that we were able to exchange ideas, and it isn't a debate at all, just two people having a chill conversation online. Thanks again for sharing your perspective and experiences with me, I do appreciate you doing that.

 

[Sonic Defender]

If I can arrange a properly designed comparison I might, I certainly have the right equipment for it in terms of pretty capable speakers and very good power to play well mastered Flac files that I ripped from my CDs directly.

 

[StarTreker]

As I am not an audio engineer, I am not an expert on audio, so when it comes down to the advanced audio science, thats pretty much where I have nothing to contribute. Having said that however, I always enjoy learning new things. But at the end of the day, you guys are talking about science, and to do any proper science, you have to have a control. And you also have to have a room that is completely isolated from outside contamination. So unless your doing tests like that, then you arn't going to get things 100% accurate in your tests, but you can get close.

For me personally, I am not that picky when it comes to audio. I pretty much go by a simple set of rules, its called V shaped sound. Give me deep low end base that is so powerful, I feel it in the loins. Keep the mid-flat, I don't like boomy over-inflated mids. And keep the high frequencies razed so that I can hear great clarity in vocals, or string instruments, or whatever the heck I am listening to.

I want my sound to have little noise floor as possible, that means THX AMPS are a must. And I want a DAC that produces clean digital to analog sound conversion, and my M200 can do that. And the SP200 provides all the clean amplification that I need. And so far, I have been very happy with my stack setup. Also keep in mind, I am not made of money, so buying anything more expensive then what I already have is out.

I will continue to read this thread as the conversation continues, but please remember, I am not an audio engineer, so please don't count on me providing words of wisdom on oscilloscope sine-waves, and a bunch of other highly technical stuff. lol

 

[Telin]

Good review, and I feel the same way when it comes to soundstage and separation.

Since the stack requires electricity from the wall to run, I don't know exactly how you intend on making the stack portable. They make portable units for a reason, for folks who like to be mobile all the time. The stack was made for in the home though so ya.

I probably wasn't clear enough with what I meant.
As you can see from the pictures I posted of my setup I now cable managed the stack under my monitor riser.
Very space efficient and clean setup. But also would've been nice if I could set it up in such a way that I could easily unplug the power cords, USB cable and then pickup the whole stack and plug the power back in with another USB input in another room of my house. "Mobile" sorta speak.

 

[Telin]

I personally do NOT believe that all equipment with good measurements sound the same. But even if going by ASR measurements only, there are significant differences between those of M200 and A18, and even more so of the X16 (which measured better than A18, although we don't have measurements of the 2nd Edition A18). Check those FFT, Linearity and Multitone tests.

I don't like ASR at all. (also has similar discussion about ASR with ifi in another thread)
In my opinion what ASR does is not worthy of the name review.
ASR does some measurements, put some graphs underneath each other and call it a day.. that is NOT a review. We're talking audio equipment here DACs and AMPs yet they don't spend a single word in this so called review talking about how it actually sounds..? DAC X is labeled bad and is not recommended because DAC Y measures 0.0002% better and has a 2dB higher SINAD.. they completely ignore the fact that even though it measures "worse" DAC X might sound actually better then DAC Y.
Unless you're spending your hard earned cash on a new fancy DAC to bring it home and feed it a 1Khz tone all day those measurements don't mean a whole lot. You're listing to music, not test tones so who the screw cares if it measures 0.00002% higher then something else, is about how you experience music, that it what you spend your money on.

I like Jason Stoddard as he is very outspoken about the "measurement culture" under audiophiles.
In one of his interviews he said about this measurement controversy "Let me put it this way. I can stuff some components in a box within a day that will measure extremely well but... I can tell you now it will sound horrible."

In another interview Jason talked about how he setup a blind test between two setups. One measures extremely well and the other setup measures significantly worse.
He let everyone in the company listen and then asked them which setup sounded the best. Everyone single person without exception choose the worse measuring setup as the best sounding. It sounds quite a bit better they all said..

Don't get me wrong I do think measurements have a place within a review of audio equipment. But those measurements should be part of the bigger picture where every aspect is being touched upon. A review should mainly be about what the equipment is meant to do, offer one an enjoyable listening experience when listening to music. That way the measurements can be put in perspective.

I find it sad that also here on Head-Fi I see post from people who buy or recommend a product solely based on a "review" by ASR.
How many post I've read on this forum that goes like "this new DAC measures so well even better then <product x> so it must become a complete hit, everyone should get one the moment is available for sale" Within the shortest time this new product is totally hyped and everyone wants one... yet nobody seems to ask themselves how it actually sounds.

/rant off

 

[Sonic Defender]

I don't like ASR at all. (also has similar discussion about ASR with ifi in another thread)
In my opinion what ASR does is not worthy of the name review.
ASR does some measurements, put some graphs underneath each other and call it a day.. that is NOT a review. We're talking audio equipment here DACs and AMPs yet they don't spend a single word in this so called review talking about how it actually sounds..? DAC X is labeled bad and is not recommended because DAC Y measures 0.0002% better and has a 2dB higher SINAD.. they completely ignore the fact that even though it measures "worse" DAC X might sound actually better then DAC Y.
Unless you're spending your hard earned cash on a new fancy DAC to bring it home and feed it a 1Khz tone all day those measurements don't mean a whole lot. You're listing to music, not test tones so who the screw cares if it measures 0.00002% higher then something else, is about how you experience music, that it what you spend your money on.

I like Jason Stoddard as he is very outspoken about the "measurement culture" under audiophiles.
In one of his interviews he said about this measurement controversy "Let me put it this way. I can stuff some components in a box within a day that will measure extremely well but... I can tell you now it will sound horrible."

In another interview Jason talked about how he setup a blind test between two setups. One measures extremely well and the other setup measures significantly worse.
He let everyone in the company listen and then asked them which setup sounded the best. Everyone single person without exception choose the worse measuring setup as the best sounding. It sounds quite a bit better they all said..

Don't get me wrong I do think measurements have a place within a review of audio equipment. But those measurements should be part of the bigger picture where every aspect is being touched upon. A review should mainly be about what the equipment is meant to do, offer one an enjoyable listening experience when listening to music. That way the measurements can be put in perspective.

I find it sad that also here on Head-Fi I see post from people who buy or recommend a product solely based on a "review" by ASR.
How many post I've read on this forum that goes like "this new DAC measures so well even better then <product x> so it must become a complete hit, everyone should get one the moment is available for sale" Within the shortest time this new product is totally hyped and everyone wants one... yet nobody seems to ask themselves how it actually sounds.

/rant off

You are wrong. Sorry, but I have to be honest. ASR is focused on measurement, not subjective reviews. Amir does put in subjective listening notes for gear that you can do that with. DACs are not something that have sound signatures, unless they are terribly designed. If I bought a DAC that had a signature I could actually tell apart in multiple trial, level matched, blind listening tests, I would know it was flawed and return it. A DAC MUST NOT introduce anything into the sound, it simply converts digital to analogue. That is it, 100% of the job of a DAC. The notion of using a DAC to colour sound is absurd. Speakers and headphones are the components where the sound is coloured.

I am not saying that you can't design a DAC to have a signature, I am saying that you shouldn't.

 

[Zeka]

A DAC MUST NOT introduce anything into the sound..

But they do it ... in the analog stage.

 

[Sonic Defender]

But they do it ... in the analog stage.

I know, however; all efforts must be made to minimize any colouration introduced by this stage, taking into account the target price range the item must be sold at. If the colouration is easily detectable, the device is flawed, or hopefully the sound colouration was unavoidable despite appropriate efforts.

 

[Telin]

You are wrong. Sorry, but I have to be honest. ASR is focused on measurement, not subjective reviews. Amir does put in subjective listening notes for gear that you can do that with. DACs are not something that have sound signatures, unless they are terribly designed. If I bought a DAC that had a signature I could actually tell apart in multiple trial, level matched, blind listening tests, I would know it was flawed and return it. A DAC MUST NOT introduce anything into the sound, it simply converts digital to analogue. That is it, 100% of the job of a DAC. The notion of using a DAC to colour sound is absurd. Speakers and headphones are the components where the sound is coloured.

I am not saying that you can't design a DAC to have a signature, I am saying that you shouldn't.

I hear you that a DAC should not define the sound signature. But there are nuances between an AKM based DAC and an ESS based DAC for example.

Lets look at the S.M.S.L. SP200 "review"
Again in my opinion also an AMP should not be a source for the sound signature, you want a certain sound get a headphone that provides that specific sound for you. But an AMP does have influence on the sound signature. Those little nuances and differences can't be expressed just by some numbers.
The whole headphone listening test is about how far he can turn up the volume... sorry but I'm not impressed by that "listening test".

Measurements have their value but is not the whole story. And one should definitely not buy/recommend one AMP over another just because it measures 0.0002% better in an ASR review like what is happening now on this forum and others.

 

[Sonic Defender]

I hear you that a DAC should not define the sound signature. But there are nuances between an AKM based DAC and an ESS based DAC for example.

Lets look at the S.M.S.L. SP200 "review"
Again in my opinion also an AMP should not be a source for the sound signature, you want a certain sound get a headphone that provides that specific sound for you. But an AMP does have influence on the sound signature. Those little nuances and differences can't be expressed just by some numbers.
The whole headphone listening test is about how far he can turn up the volume... sorry but I'm not impressed by that "listening test".

Measurements have their value but is not the whole story. And one should definitely not buy/recommend one AMP over another just because it measures 0.0002% better in an ASR review like what is happening now on this forum and others.

I agree with much of the substance of what you are saying. However, if say an amp with the inaudible technical benefits has all the features of, and is the same price as an amp (only for example purposes, could be any piece of equipment) as compared with another perfectly suitable amp, it still makes sense to buy the better measuring device all else being equal. We need to be clear about where I am coming from, I do not base my decisions on measurements alone, I do recognize there are other salient factors, but what has been happening is that many companies have been engaging in sloppy engineering because nobody was holding them accountable. Or worse, they make idiotic claims about the special characteristics with a whole bunch on meaningless mumbo jumbo, technical sounding talk to sell gear. I think we can all think of companies with great marketing (no I am not talking about Schiit, they have redeemed themselves) that measure terribly. Why should we reward companies for lazy engineering efforts?

I put my money into companies that think my dollars deserve solid R&D efforts, not just pretty cases and marketing hype. It just turns out that the Chinese audio companies are the big kids in the school yard and are now stealing the lunch money from western companies, and they are doing it for less money. Domestic companies need to, and can do better where engineering is concerned. Schiit did it, ASR simply lambasted them, deservedly so, for some pretty weak engineering efforts in the past. Now Schiit has really upped their game (a trend that I hope continues).

I am not against good looking or sexy gear, or ignorant of the fact that a coloured sound signature can still be pleasant sounding. Heck I liked my La Figaro 339 OTL amp just fine. What I am against is poor engineering and if we do not insist on the companies we love competing hard, we will lose them. In the end consumers vote with their wallet and if I can get a feature rich, audibly transparent DAC with good enough build quality for a few hundred dollars, I am pretty likely to ignore esoteric high priced offerings that offer flash and pomp, but no improved sound quality despite their marketing hype.

 

[Telin]

I agree with much of the substance of what you are saying. However, if say an amp with the inaudible technical benefits has all the features of, and is the same price as an amp (only for example purposes, could be any piece of equipment) as compared with another perfectly suitable amp, it still makes sense to buy the better measuring device all else being equal. We need to be clear about where I am coming from, I do not base my decisions on measurements alone, I do recognize there are other salient factors, but what has been happening is that many companies have been engaging in sloppy engineering because nobody was holding them accountable. Or worse, they make idiotic claims about the special characteristics with a whole bunch on meaningless mumbo jumbo, technical sounding talk to sell gear. I think we can all think of companies with great marketing (no I am not talking about Schiit, they have redeemed themselves) that measure terribly. Why should we reward companies for lazy engineering efforts?

I put my money into companies that think my dollars deserve solid R&D efforts, not just pretty cases and marketing hype. It just turns out that the Chinese audio companies are the big kids in the school yard and are now stealing the lunch money from western companies, and they are doing it for less money. Domestic companies need to, and can do better where engineering is concerned. Schiit did it, ASR simply lambasted them, deservedly so, for some pretty weak engineering efforts in the past. Now Schiit has really upped their game (a trend that I hope continues).

I am not against good looking or sexy gear, or ignorant of the fact that a coloured sound signature can still be pleasant sounding. Heck I liked my La Figaro 339 OTL amp just fine. What I am against is poor engineering and if we do not insist on the companies we love competing hard, we will lose them. In the end consumers vote with their wallet and if I can get a feature rich, audibly transparent DAC with good enough build quality for a few hundred dollars, I am pretty likely to ignore esoteric high priced offerings that offer flash and pomp, but no improved sound quality despite their marketing hype.

I agree with much of what you say but..
Great measuring devices does not automatically mean great engineering efforts.
As I said before Jason mentioned he can throw something together quickly what will measure extremely well but will sound like schiit.. but hey it measurers well so at least great engineering effort went in to it... I don't think so.
Great engineering combines best possible sounding devices with best possible measurements. One comes with the other and only looking at one or the other does not give a complete picture.

But hey we're getting more and more in agreement

 

[StarTreker]

Thats why I don't own Bose, Beats, or Harmon Kardon. All those brands signify style over function. Their full of flash and pomp as Sonic Defender would put it, and don't produce any good sound whatsoever. But often they full rich people into thinking that they have quality gear, cause it cost them 300 to 2000 dollars.

You know what it reminds me of too? People who own sound bars. People think their sound bars sound great, simply because their small, take up little space, and keep the area looking clean and organized. But in reality they don't know what good sound is. If I brought huge JBL speakers in that were full range, the kind that don't need a subwoofer in the chain, they would blow your mind how good they sound.

The problem is, we really are a nich site and group. Most people don't listen to quality sound systems or headphones, they live out their days working for the man trying to make a buck to keep food on the table. I enjoy our little hobby, I enjoy good sound, but I am also not willing to go deeper into the rabbit hole to get it. I got what I need now and I am happy.

 

[Dannemand]

My apologies, gentlemen: First for dropping out of the discussion last night just as it heated up. And second for stirring up this hornets nest with my posts comparing SMSL M200 and Gustard A18/X16. I had deliberately avoided posting my M200 experiences sooner because I didn't want to troll this nice thread, and because I didn't want M200 owners to think less of their DACs.

OTOH, I really like the way you guys conducted the discussion. And I like the consensus a lot!

We owe Amir and ASR a debt of gratitude for calling out some of the bluffs in the high-end audio industry over the last 50 years. Some of these manufacturers were (and still are) on the border of outright scams. And for decades they've had this unholy alliance with publishers and reviewers, who were rewarded with gear worth tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars, and often advertising too, in exchange for positive reviews. The claims of which nobody could verify.

No doubt measurements have a place in responsible design, manufacture and review of audio gear. I am not hearing anybody say otherwise. It's a great way to catch design flaws, production snafus -- and yes, snake oil salesmen -- because analyzers can detect faint signals which our ears cannot.

ASR has provided some transparency for consumers in comparing the measurable aspects of components from different manufacturers. No established business in any industry ever wants transparency, since it forces them to compete on price -- that's the last thing they want! Marketing departments exist almost entirely to shield companies from having to compete on price. So that contribution from ASR is indisputably a great thing!

But some ASR members have taken it too far, believing that their $100 component is fully comparable (or even superior to) $5,000 ones based on measurements alone. Sure, sometimes they really are comparable or superior! Other times not. There is a reason Amir uses a $50,000 pair of Mark Levinson No53 to drive his speakers: One being he can afford it, the other that they just sound better!

In addition to being a forum for folks who truly know their science, ASR has also attracted crowds who have no clue, and don't know what the measurements really show -- or what their limitations are. They just want to feel they got a great deal and are sticking it to the man (the expensive manufacturer). It is very comforting to be in a group where all agree on the same viewpoint, even if it's a fantasy.

There is nothing wrong with being a newbie, we all have been and still are in various fields of life. I know I am. But newbies who think they discovered the Holy Grail can be dangerous. To themselves and to others.

This success of ASR has led to a shift in the industry towards products that measure well, regardless of how they sound -- as long as they sound good enough that people with untrained ears cannot hear the flaws. And that, in my opinion, is NOT a great thing!

I have more to say on the subject of DACs supposedly all sounding the same, but I'm afraid it'll have to be another day

 

[Dannemand]

No need for a debate, people can still be civil and engage in an exchange of ideas. Thanks for sharing your experience with me. I will say that 4 trials isn't really enough, you would need about 10 or 15 trials each, and maintain at least a 90% discrimination rate. As well, a larger sample would be optimum, get 10 people to do ten trials each and see if the results are the same. I do agree with your point about measurements, to an extent, some of the measurements for sure are so good now on all devices that the differences aren't audible. However, there are deviations in frequency response that could shift into audibility, resulting in a difference that can be heard, but really such a shift is not at all desirable and a well designed DAC really should never sound any different than any other well designed DAC. The job of a DAC is simple to convert, not colour the sound. If they are colouring the sound, something is wrong with the design, whether it is intentional or not.

As a point of inquiry, did you say that you were able to shift between DACs seamlessly, or did you have to take the time to swap them in and out? Our audio memory is extremely short, seconds at best, so if you or your wife were attempting to spot differences with any time in between comparisons, right there you would have a major confound that would/could invalidate the findings altogether.

I am glad that we were able to exchange ideas, and it isn't a debate at all, just two people having a chill conversation online. Thanks again for sharing your perspective and experiences with me, I do appreciate you doing that.

Thank you buddy!

We didn't set out to conduct a science experiment or prove anything. We were merely trying to determine if the M200 would be good enough for our use -- both because money is tight here, and because it really is more practical due to its display.

We had about a dozen tracks of different genres, with each being played four times in random order from each DAC. Seamless switching would have been great, but I don't have a switch. So each time it was power off, moving XLR cables to the other DAC, powering back up, plugging phone (USB source) into other DAC. I got it down to about 30 secs, but still not ideal. Sometimes switching for real, other times pretending. We had established gain levels for each DAC using a 1Khz tone and the Sound Meter app.

I will maintain that it is statistically improbable that my wife would have picked the Gustard as her preferred 100% of time on classical and acoustic tracks and 75% of the time on "studio tracks" unless there was an audible difference between them.

And my ears would tell me almost every time -- not as an analytical matter, but by becoming aggravated and fatigued after awhile when listening to the M200. Or rather: More so and sooner than on the A18. My only explanation is that my over-sensitivity to certain frequencies (it's not the entire 3-8Khz range) may pick up some of those harmonics on the M200's FFT.

Anyways, that was our experience

 

[Sonic Defender]

Great discussion. I think it would be difficult to have gear measure well, but sound bad, certainly with a DAC. A DAC that measures well should pass through the information essentially unchanged so you would just be hearing the original recording with excellent fidelity. At least as passed by the DAC to the downstream equipment.