[deafmutelame]

You are free to draw your own conclusions, but they cannot be excepted as scientifically proven

Please, let me reframe that, for I think we are going to understand it better:

Nobody has been able to prove anything in 400 years of science. Proofs are within the domain of Mathematics.

Science proceeds by aproximations to "Truth". Whatever "Truth" is.

We are talking about RESOLUTION/granularity here.

In other words: I think I have aproximated this test to a RESOLUTION/granularity that meets my expectations: to know whether there was a difference or not. And it seems that there isn't: This —for me— validates my test within a 95-99%? of exactitude (subjectively speaking).

Going the extra mile to get the scientific 99.99999 reassurance is beyond my reach: and EVEN then, the test wouldn't PROVE anything but that a "greater" resolution was reached.

See my point?

 

[bigshot]

they cannot be excepted as scientifically proven

In sound science, findings are excepted more than they are accepted!

 

[pinnahertz]

Please, let me reframe that, for I think we are going to understand it better:

Nobody has been able to prove anything in 400 years of science. Proofs are within the domain of Mathematics.

Science proceeds by aproximations to "Truth". Whatever "Truth" is.

We are talking about RESOLUTION/granularity here.

Good up to here....

In other words: I think I have aproximated this test to a RESOLUTION/granularity that meets my expectations: to know whether there was a difference or not.

And it seems that there isn't: This validates my test within a 95-99%? of exactitude (subjectively speaking).

I agree that that's what you think you've done. But that's not correct scientifically. You have many uncontrolled variables and biases and you have arrived at an absolute conclusion in spite of them.

Going the extra mile to get the scientific 99.99999 reassurance is beyond my reach: and EVEN then, the test wouldn't PROVE anything but that a "greater" resolution was reached. See my point?

You aren't anywhere close to that though. You have made a fully sighted and biased test. If you had inverted your bias and expected a clearly audible difference you'd have "proven" that too, and we'd still be having this argument.

 

[ev13wt]

In other words: you would expect at least some obviously noticeable difference between a $5 soundcard and a $220 one, wouldn't you?

Try it with a hard to drive headphone. Get a 600 Ohm 880.

 

[pinnahertz]

Try it with a hard to drive headphone. Get a 600 Ohm 880.

Sure, but that's more of an issue of a mismatch of devices and their application than a comparison of devices both operated as intended and within design parameters.

 

[castleofargh]

there is no problem setting a test without all the controls and all the rigor of a research experiment. you can do as much as you please, I do it all the time and I feel just fine ^_^. the consequence however is that the confidence we put in the drawn conclusions will drop exponentially with each new variable that wasn't properly controlled. so as others have suggested, there are tests we do for ourselves, where the test needs to be just good enough to convince ourselves. and there are tests made with the attempt to convince everybody else, in which case the test does need to be as specific and rigorous as possible. otherwise you end up with a result that people will hardly consider more relevant than a sighted test.

just a note about the titles you make. this is just my very personal opinion, but if you try to look objective, maybe you should start by avoiding those horrible click bait titles. they could also probably do with being slightly shorter. it's a title, not a story.

 

[bigshot]

I think the titles are funny. It's the sound science equivalent of THE VEIL HAS BEEN LIFTED, I'VE REACHED AUDIO NIRVANA!

 

[bcschmerker4]

Problem is, the Creative Laboratories® SB1040 will not operate under all operating systems, so a twelve-way ABX is impossible. The Advanced LinUX Sound Architecture Project abandoned work on the Driver snd-ctxfi in 2014 due to lack of manufacturer cooperation concerning the Creative Technology CA20K1 and CA20K2 DSP families, which use a nested-register technology unique to Creative Technology at the time. OtOH, the C-Media® CMI8788 has open-source LinUX drivers in ALSA (snd-virtuoso for the ASUS® XONAR® family, snd-oxygen for all other vendors using the CMI-8788) in addition to vendor support across Microsoft® Windows® and Apple® Mac OS® X™.

 

[pinnahertz]

A 12-way ABX test is always impossible.

 

[Redcarmoose]

In my 10 years here at Head-Fi I’ve always looked for the thread that encapsulates the emotion and subjective tests each member has bestowed upon their self in quest of better sound.

I think I may have found it here in SS.

Though this “nirvana” is also without it’s duality of innocence.........as much perception of emotional nirvana is. It’s not like for this member a reality has been discovered. Though it may seem so, and could be a chance of being true?

Perception is a fickle bride and each of us bask in our own self-found bubble of confirmations and lies to ourself. Everyone has a perfected sound if they feel all done. Who is to say that that sound is audiophile perfect as.......what you hear or don’t hear is a matter of hearing ability and musical taste.

What we need this memeber to do is get some more DACs and find either more nirvana or snake oil tomfoolery! Someone needs to mail the OP a different DAC!

If anything this thread shows how each of us live in our own self built castle of belief. Only through what scientific measurement can provide can we grasp of the reality at hand. And........for the stuff that falls from being able to be detected scientifically..........well that’s what we argue over.

 

[skwoodwiva]

In my 10 years here at Head-Fi I’ve always looked for the thread that encapsulates the emotion and subjective tests each member has bestowed upon their self in quest of better sound.

I think I may have found it here in SS.

Though this “nirvana” is also without it’s duality of innocence.........as much perception of emotional nirvana is. It’s not like for this member a reality has been discovered. Though it may seem so, and could be a chance of being true?

Perception is a fickle bride and each of us bask in our own self-found bubble of confirmations and lies to ourself. Everyone has a perfected sound if they feel all done. Who is to say that that sound is audiophile perfect as.......what you hear or don’t hear is a matter of hearing ability and musical taste.

What we need this memeber to do is get some more DACs and find either more nirvana or snake oil tomfoolery! Someone needs to mail the OP a different DAC!

If anything this thread shows how each of us live in our own self built castle of belief. Only through what scientific measurement can provide can we grasp of the reality at hand. And........for the stuff that falls from being able to be detected scientifically..........well that’s what we argue over.

I nominate this to be pinned, but at the top of the Sound Science posting advice.
Lol! Best take on the heart of all SS controversies.

 

[deafmutelame]

Hi again guys,

Thanks for all your replies.

First of all, I would like to apologize for my "enthusiasm" regarding the "creative" presentation of these findings. It's true, I'm like that whenever I "see the light" in any way.

As you may have already realized I'm not a professional reviewer in the very least. I just wanted to share with you my findings.

I just like to enjoy my music in the best possible way within the limits of my —already limited— budget. There's a concept in the realm of Pharmacology that explains this very well: The minimum effective dose. It's a metaphor for optimizing your listening experience with the minimum harm to your wallet instead of throwing big amounts of money at the problem hoping for it to resolve by itselft instead of doing your homework, which is what I humbly have attempted to do. And, IMHO, this minimum effective dose is what has been achieved here.

I understand your concerns regarding the methodology used. Even though I doubt an ABX switch that would mess with the inputs and outputs of the C370 amplifier would be better than directly and manually switching from one channel to the other without any noise or click whatsoever: that's the closest thing to transparency that occurs to me. I also doubt that increasing the number of subjects from 5 to 50 would yield a different outcome. But hey, that's science, right?

Come on guys, it's not that difficult to understand that when 5 different people —2 of them without a "proper" listening ear, but with personal preferences and 3 of them with "trained" ears, 2 of these without any bias at all for I didn't ask them anything other than to express their opinion to me on what, if any, difference they perceived— manifest that they find no difference whatsoever between the two DACs maybe it is because there is none?

In other words: I would expect a $220 device to sound so much better than a $5 one, such as to make a noticeable difference within the very first seconds of listening to it, right? Well, here it's not the case.

This is not aimed at anybody in particular but I perceive a lot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder in the adiophile scene, mixed with phat wallets. A combination waiting for financial disaster if you ask me...

Anyway, if you advice me which DAC to get to test it against this Soundblaster, I'll happyly try to get it in the coming months. I was thinking of getting either the Chord Mojo or the Audiolab M-DAC. Both have "impressive" reviews within the scene.

I have learned here that money should be put on a good pair of speakers or headphones instead, probably the only? variable in the equation that makes real sense to throw money at.

The way I see it, once you pass a certain quality threshold, enjoy the music instead of OCD'ing over the last .9999% of quality to reach that impossible 100% of audio nirvana, it's that simple!

I'd like to dedicate this theme to all of you. It sounds absolutely wonderfull on my limited budget $5 soundcard + second hand $250 C370 amp + second hand $300 B&W 602 speakers + $350 Etymotic ER4XR IEMs and I'm sure? it will sound much better on way more expensive sound systems...

...or maybe not.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Hi again guys,

Thanks for all your replies.

First of all, I would like to apologize for my "enthusiasm" regarding the "creative" presentation of these findings. It's true, I'm like that whenever I "see the light" in any way.

As you may have already realized I'm not a professional reviewer in the very least. I just wanted to share with you my findings.

I just like to enjoy my music in the best possible way within the limits of my —already limited— budget. There's a concept in the realm of Pharmacology that explains this very well: The minimum effective dose. It's a metaphor for optimizing your listening experience with the minimum harm to your wallet instead of throwing big amounts of money at the problem hoping for it to resolve by itselft instead of doing your homework, which is what I humbly have attempted to do. And, IMHO, this minimum effective dose is what has been achieved here.

I understand your concerns regarding the methodology used. Even though I doubt an ABX switch that would mess with the inputs and outputs of the C370 amplifier would be better than directly and manually switching from one channel to the other without any noise or click whatsoever: that's the closest thing to transparency that occurs to me. I also doubt that increasing the number of subjects from 5 to 50 would yield a different outcome. But hey, that's science, right?

Come on guys, it's not that difficult to understand that when 5 different people —2 of them without a "proper" listening ear, but with personal preferences and 3 of them with "trained" ears, 2 of these without any bias at all for I didn't ask them anything other than to express their opinion to me on what, if any, difference they perceived— manifest that they find no difference whatsoever between the two DACs maybe it is because there is none?

In other words: I would expect a $220 device to sound so much better than a $5 one, such as to make a noticeable difference within the very first seconds of listening to it, right? Well, here it's not the case.

This is not aimed at anybody in particular but I perceive a lot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder in the adiophile scene, mixed with phat wallets. A combination waiting for financial disaster if you ask me...

Anyway, if you advice me which DAC to get to test it against this Soundblaster, I'll happyly try to get it in the coming months. I was thinking of getting either the Chord Mojo or the Audiolab M-DAC. Both have "impressive" reviews within the scene.

I have learned here that money should be put on a good pair of speakers or headphones instead, probably the only? variable in the equation that makes real sense to throw money at.

The way I see it, once you pass a certain quality threshold, enjoy the music instead of OCD'ing over the last .9999% of quality to reach that impossible 100% of audio nirvana, it's that simple!

I'd like to dedicate this theme to all of you. It sounds absolutely wonderfull on my limited budget $5 soundcard + second hand $250 C370 amp + second hand $300 B&W 602 speakers + $400 Etymotic ER4XR IEMs and I'm sure? it will sound much better on way more expensive sound systems...

...or maybe not.

We are all on the same boat here. We are all on the same journey.

 

[deafmutelame]

We are all on the same boat here. We are all on the same journey.

Indeed!

 

[castleofargh]

Hi again guys,

Thanks for all your replies.

First of all, I would like to apologize for my "enthusiasm" regarding the "creative" presentation of these findings. It's true, I'm like that whenever I "see the light" in any way.

As you may have already realized I'm not a professional reviewer in the very least. I just wanted to share with you my findings.

I just like to enjoy my music in the best possible way within the limits of my —already limited— budget. There's a concept in the realm of Pharmacology that explains this very well: The minimum effective dose. It's a metaphor for optimizing your listening experience with the minimum harm to your wallet instead of throwing big amounts of money at the problem hoping for it to resolve by itselft instead of doing your homework, which is what I humbly have attempted to do. And, IMHO, this minimum effective dose is what has been achieved here.

I understand your concerns regarding the methodology used. Even though I doubt an ABX switch that would mess with the inputs and outputs of the C370 amplifier would be better than directly and manually switching from one channel to the other without any noise or click whatsoever: that's the closest thing to transparency that occurs to me. I also doubt that increasing the number of subjects from 5 to 50 would yield a different outcome. But hey, that's science, right?

Come on guys, it's not that difficult to understand that when 5 different people —2 of them without a "proper" listening ear, but with personal preferences and 3 of them with "trained" ears, 2 of these without any bias at all for I didn't ask them anything other than to express their opinion to me on what, if any, difference they perceived— manifest that they find no difference whatsoever between the two DACs maybe it is because there is none?

In other words: I would expect a $220 device to sound so much better than a $5 one, such as to make a noticeable difference within the very first seconds of listening to it, right? Well, here it's not the case.

This is not aimed at anybody in particular but I perceive a lot of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive-compulsive_disorder in the adiophile scene, mixed with phat wallets. A combination waiting for financial disaster if you ask me...

Anyway, if you advice me which DAC to get to test it against this Soundblaster, I'll happyly try to get it in the coming months. I was thinking of getting either the Chord Mojo or the Audiolab M-DAC. Both have "impressive" reviews within the scene.

I have learned here that money should be put on a good pair of speakers or headphones instead, probably the only? variable in the equation that makes real sense to throw money at.

The way I see it, once you pass a certain quality threshold, enjoy the music instead of OCD'ing over the last .9999% of quality to reach that impossible 100% of audio nirvana, it's that simple!

I'd like to dedicate this theme to all of you. It sounds absolutely wonderfull on my limited budget $5 soundcard + second hand $250 C370 amp + second hand $300 B&W 602 speakers + $350 Etymotic ER4XR IEMs and I'm sure? it will sound much better on way more expensive sound systems...

...or maybe not.

we're skeptical in nature. several people here do believe that a DAC isn't very important and that most will sound about the same once level matched. I'm one of those people and my DACs are cheap stuff. but if I was picky only toward tests disagreeing with me, I wouldn't be looking for fact, I'd just be trying to win. ^_^