Quote:
Originally Posted by nicke2323 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Question to Elias:
I just posted a link to several ABX tests comparing low-end to high-end CD players:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=246048
I have been considering an upgrade to the Benchmark DAC1, but as I mention in the above thread, ABX tests like these are starting to make me reconsider. Since your recent 20-generation D/A-A/D loop test shows that you at Benchmark are no strangers to ABX testing, perhaps you can shed some light on the sonic advantages of a high-end DAC like the DAC1?
More specifically, do you think the DAC1 can be distinguished from modern entry-level CD-players in an ABX test? Have you done such tests at Benchmark?
I have no doubt that the DAC1 measures very close to perfection, as all reviews seem to indicate. But I am not certain this translates to an audible difference. Does it?
|
Nicke,
I've read the thread you posted, but I choose to steer clear of such debates for a number of reasons (particularly because people get very angry in these types of debates
)
In response to your question "What are the sonic advantages of the DAC1"...: To answer this, I'd like to address the debate of objectivity vs. subjectivity. If you can permit a metaphor for the sake of explanation, audio is like a picture. Some people prefer classic black and white pictures, some people like Sepia, some like classic film, some like crisp digital, etc. All of these preferences are absolutely valid...they should not be discredited as user inexperience / ignorance / etc. Subjectivity is as real and valid as objectivity....but very different.
Subjectivity has the uncanny ability to change over a period of time. If you looked at the world through Sepia lenses 24/7, you would be in awe if you caught a glimpse of full, natural color, even if it is a blurry, out-of-focus image. You see my point?
Our goal with the DAC1 is to offer 20/20 vision for D-to-A conversion. This is why measurements are very important. It is important to know exactly what is happening to the audio from a completely objective standpoint. Objectivity does not change over time. That is not to say that listening (subjectivity) is less important...its apples and oranges.
In response to your question "Do you think the DAC1 can be identified vs. a cheap CD player"...: This depends on the listener and the test setup. But, regardless of whether or not one can discern between the two in an ABX test, the inaccuracies of the CD player will be apparent more when you listen for long periods of time.
If we may use the picture analogy again: if someone put a film picture next to a digital picture, some people could tell the difference, and some would not be able to. However, if you looked at a film picture everyday for a few days/weeks/months, then saw the same image but captured digitally, the difference would jump right at you. Thats not to say one is better then the other, but the differences are accumulative and, therefore, more pronounced over time.
This accumulative difference is why we conducted the 20-generation test. If there were severe artifacts in the D-to-A conversion process, they would be exposed in early generations. If the conversion is well done, the accumulative affect should be minimal.
I apologize for all the metaphors...sometimes I feel its easier to make a point that way. I can elaborate on any point(s) if this isn't clear enough.
Thanks,
Elias
ps. If the root of your question is, "Should I buy a DAC1 even if I don't hear a difference", that is something only you can answer. If you're happy with your CD player as-is, then don't buy a DAC1. Even if it is better, happiness is a state of mind, not a signal-to-noise ratio. However, if you want to hear every detail of the music without missing something thats hiding behind jitter-induced artifacts, then the DAC1 can and will achieve that.