[Hubert H]

I do use the Genelec volume control which is via the GLM. That is not dependent on digital input. I use the DAVE in DAC mode and feed line out to the Genelecs. My thinking is that I get the sound I like from the DAVE so putting that analogue in to the speakers ensures the sound I get at my ears, after the GLM has done it’s part, is still the sound I like. The whole point of the Genelec speakers with GLM is to get as close to perfect transparency at your ears as possible. In other words they transfer the DAVE sound exactly as the DAVE does with headphones.

Understood but my point was that the Genelecs always digitise an analogue input using the built in ADC, therefore it’s always going to be worse than a digital signal in. They have to digitise in order to apply the volume and DSP.

It might just be worth trying digital in and comparing.

One issue I have with the Genelecs is that one ideally needs a digital interface with multiple and various inputs and possibly a volume control.

 

[AnalogEuphoria]

But when the graphs are a distant memory and you are sat down at home with your new dac to listen to a few albums it is only your ears which you actually can rely on to tell you if you are enjoying the music. Or do you keep having to rummage through a few graphs to reassure you that you have bought the ‘right’ dac?

Many people do otherwise this whole measurements ordeal would have no attention. Its already been proven over and over that the human brain can be easily tricked so at this point I think it comes down to do you take the red or blue pill?

 

[zeluiz22]

Isn’t perception reality when we’re dealing with how the senses perceive things?

What I’d love to see is Amir rating products objectively first and measuring second.

 

[JamieMcC]

Many people do otherwise this whole measurements ordeal would have no attention. Its already been proven over and over that the human brain can be easily tricked so at this point I think it comes down to do you take the red or blue pill?

Personally I don't think that's the case it's just a tiny minority imo

As I see it folk interested in audio with the means and who are willing to invest and see value in the purchase of a five figure plus DAC will most likely have traveled a long path up to that point they are making informed choices based on years in the hobby and how they personally like to enjoy music.

Those and there will be many who purchase such expensive components for clients who have second homes yachts jets etc do so because they are looking for a premium product for wealthy clients and it doesn't matter how good a Chifi product sounds your wealthy customer is not going to want a $500 budget built product that looks cheap is cheap and feels like cr#p.to interact with in their penthouse apartment or learjet.

There is a place for measurements and without doubt Chifi continues to push the envelope with regards to value vrs performance but I feel many of those who can afford premium or aspirational products could not give a flying fig about charts or budget Chifi.

Folk with limited budgets worry about comparing charts and getting the best value for their cash are interested in charts and comparing specifications to the minute detail probably most of us here have done that at one time or the other in the past or still do

Those fortunate enough to have deep pockets just buy what they like and have more important things to do with their lives than spend hours posting on bullet boards.

The trolls who seem to have endless spare time posting on bulletin BBs might wish to spend a moment to reflect on the above.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Understood but my point was that the Genelecs always digitise an analogue input using the built in ADC, therefore it’s always going to be worse than a digital signal in. They have to digitise in order to apply the volume and DSP.

It might just be worth trying digital in and comparing.

One issue I have with the Genelecs is that one ideally needs a digital interface with multiple and various inputs and possibly a volume control.

So you know for a fact that the Genelec A to D sucks?
Looking at measurements from various sources the transfer function of analogue input to sound output is near perfect.
The point you are missing is that the Genelec is not doing upsampling of the digital input when using the analogue input (that I am aware of). That’s what I am relying on the DAVE to do, it being one of its strengths.

 

[Triode User]

Many people do otherwise this whole measurements ordeal would have no attention. Its already been proven over and over that the human brain can be easily tricked so at this point I think it comes down to do you take the red or blue pill?

The human brain can just as easily be tricked by a few graphs into thinking a dac sounds good when in reality it sounds fair to rubbish (this obviously on the basis that the graphs do NOT tell the whole story).

I prefer not to take either pill because that implies self deception either way. I prefer buying a dac based on how it sounds. I bought my Dave soon after it was released without even looking at any graphs or measurements and I have yet to hear anything better. I have bought my power amps, speakers, streamer, switch and usb reclocker all based on home trials without looking at a single measurement. The same goes for my Mscaler purchase.

Basically I'm with @JamieMcC, I have better things to do with my life than pour over graphs especially when I do not think they are relevant to the final sound anyway. This conclusion is based on my personal experiences of buying hifi gear for the last 50 years!

 

[Merkurio]

I prefer not to take either pill because that implies self deception either way. I prefer buying a dac based on how it sounds. I bought my Dave soon after it was released without even looking at any graphs or measurements and I have yet to hear anything better. I have bought my power amps, speakers, streamer, switch and usb reclocker all based on home trials without looking at a single measurement. The same goes for my Mscaler purchase.

But actually you've already done it.

You didn't spontaneously gain audio knowledge from one day to another nor discover Chord by chance knowing absolutely nothing about the brand previously, we all start by learning from other people's opinions (including the marketing claims from manufacturers themselves) and from that precise moment your subconscious is already working to alter the perception of your senses —hearing in this case—, what we normally know as biases.

In the same way that someone can be fooled by thinking that something sounds better because the numbers and graphs objectively prove it, as you criticize, they can also (and with much more ease) be fooled into thinking that something sounds better just because of their previous expectations about the prestige of a brand, subjective opinions of other buyers, reviews, etc. This is where the relevance of controlled blind tests comes into play, to confront brain stimuli biases with reality.

Only people with a false sense of high confidence (also know as Dunning-Kruger effect) could deny that their perception is not biased by multiple factors outside of their control, especially knowing how easy it is to fool our brain:



If you can trick the brain in a matter of minutes into accepting a fake limb as its own and stop feeling the real thing, what can we expect after years of subconsciously reading nonsense like DACs must have their own sound signatures?

 

[Frankie D]

But actually you've already done it.

You didn't spontaneously gain audio knowledge from one day to another nor discover Chord by chance knowing absolutely nothing about the brand previously, we all start by learning from other people's opinions (including the marketing claims from manufacturers themselves) and from that precise moment your subconscious is already working to alter the perception of your senses —hearing in this case—, what we normally know as biases.

In the same way that someone can be fooled by thinking that something sounds better because the numbers and graphs objectively prove it, as you criticize, they can also (and with much more ease) be fooled into thinking that something sounds better just because of their previous expectations about the prestige of a brand, subjective opinions of other buyers, reviews, etc. This is where the relevance of controlled blind tests comes into play, to confront brain stimuli biases with reality.

Only people with a false sense of high confidence (also know as Dunning-Kruger effect) could deny that their perception is not biased by multiple factors outside of their control, especially knowing how easy it is to fool our brain:



If you can trick the brain in a matter of minutes into accepting a fake limb as its own and stop feeling the real thing, what can we expect after years of subconsciously reading nonsense like DACs must have their own sound signatures?

I am not saying you are incorrect, but I do feel the video is somewhat misleading. At no time do they only stroke the rubber hand. So of course the person will make the inference. I had thought they were going to only stroke the rubber hand at some point, and the person would feel it. That would have been even more scary to me.

 

[GuiltyRocker]

But actually you've already done it.

You didn't spontaneously gain audio knowledge from one day to another nor discover Chord by chance knowing absolutely nothing about the brand previously, we all start by learning from other people's opinions (including the marketing claims from manufacturers themselves) and from that precise moment your subconscious is already working to alter the perception of your senses —hearing in this case—, what we normally know as biases.

In the same way that someone can be fooled by thinking that something sounds better because the numbers and graphs objectively prove it, as you criticize, they can also (and with much more ease) be fooled into thinking that something sounds better just because of their previous expectations about the prestige of a brand, subjective opinions of other buyers, reviews, etc. This is where the relevance of controlled blind tests comes into play, to confront brain stimuli biases with reality.

Only people with a false sense of high confidence (also know as Dunning-Kruger effect) could deny that their perception is not biased by multiple factors outside of their control, especially knowing how easy it is to fool our brain:



If you can trick the brain in a matter of minutes into accepting a fake limb as its own and stop feeling the real thing, what can we expect after years of subconsciously reading nonsense like DACs must have their own sound signatures?

I discovered Chord this way, I had no idea what it was at all, or who Rob Watts was. Funny that the Qutest is what I listened to and in the store I listened to it was the cheaper DAC around, i auditioned many others there at 10k or above and the Qutest smoked them all.
We switched them back and forth because I couldn't believe what I was hearing, it was better in every way than all the other DACs and it was the cheapest!

 

[Rin1990]

Are we really continuing the discussion of blind test in this hobby?

Why does it matter if one can hear the difference or not when the one questioning someone's hearing ability would not like the answer regardless of how the explaination is presented?

 

[GuiltyRocker]

Are we really continuing the discussion of blind test in this hobby?

Why does it matter if one can hear the difference or not when the one questioning someone's hearing ability would not like the answer regardless of how the explaination is presented?

Very true, I'll just go and enjoy my Qutest/M scaler.

 

[Rin1990]

Very true, I'll just go and enjoy my Qutest/M scaler.

That's for the best.

This may sound a bit rude but at this point I couldn't care less. Graph crusaders can cram their measurement graphs up their own buttocks for all I care because no one can have a conversation when all one side care is push their objectivist opinions and agendas down another's throat.

 

[number1sixerfan]

But actually you've already done it.

You didn't spontaneously gain audio knowledge from one day to another nor discover Chord by chance knowing absolutely nothing about the brand previously, we all start by learning from other people's opinions (including the marketing claims from manufacturers themselves) and from that precise moment your subconscious is already working to alter the perception of your senses —hearing in this case—, what we normally know as biases.

In the same way that someone can be fooled by thinking that something sounds better because the numbers and graphs objectively prove it, as you criticize, they can also (and with much more ease) be fooled into thinking that something sounds better just because of their previous expectations about the prestige of a brand, subjective opinions of other buyers, reviews, etc. This is where the relevance of controlled blind tests comes into play, to confront brain stimuli biases with reality.

Except blind tests aren't without fault, and this is extremely relevant when done by hobbyists in an uncontrolled setting. Sighted tests are also clearly faulty. Graphs and measurements also are unreliable. All of these can be useful and are best when used comprehensively together rather than relied on individually but... (edit* also meant to say that I agree with what your'e saying in the first part of this post).

This is why this entire argument (as in the past 4 pages and the continuous ridiculous that keeps plaguing this thred) is literally stupid as ****. People are seeking some absolute way to point to an absolute "best product" or "correct answer". And it simply doesn't exist in this hobby--seriously if you dispute this, I cannot take a word or impression of yours seriously. And worse, on these forums and others, it's mainly all ego driven. Almost none of this conversation is genuine, people are trolling and/or want to be right, and/or want the product they paid for to be universally seen as "king" (which imo is incredibly stupid, but very prominent in this and other chord threads even before all of the Amir bs).

What I do agree with, is the perspective that your own ears are ultimately the best deciding factor, with the other data points as supplements. That's been extremely reliable for me, but to each their own.

 

[Merkurio]

I am not saying you are incorrect, but I do feel the video is somewhat misleading. At no time do they only stroke the rubber hand. So of course the person will make the inference. I had thought they were going to only stroke the rubber hand at some point, and the person would feel it. That would have been even more scary to me.

The video was the first one I found on YouTube, but the experiment is widely known and documented in more complex ways, just look it up (the phenomenon is called body transfer illusion).

My point is that the brain is very easy to manipulate at a subconscious level and even more so if we enter to the realm of psychoacoustics, I've only limited myself to clarifying that the biases can deceive us in both directions, not only if you are an "objectivist blinded by measurements" as Triode User stated.

 

[GuiltyRocker]

Except blind tests aren't without fault, and this is extremely relevant when done by hobbyists in an uncontrolled setting. Sighted tests are also clearly faulty. Graphs and measurements also are unreliable. All of these can be useful and are best when used comprehensively together rather than relied on individually but...

This is why this entire argument (as in the past 4 pages and the continuous ridiculous that keeps plaguing this thred) is literally stupid as ****. People are seeking some absolute way to point to an absolute "best product" or "correct answer". And it simply doesn't exist in this hobby--seriously if you dispute this, I cannot take a word or impression of yours seriously. And worse, on these forums and others, it's mainly all ego driven. Almost none of this conversation is genuine, people are trolling and/or want to be right, and/or want the product they paid for to be universally seen as "king" (which imo is incredibly stupid, but very prominent in this and other chord threads even before all of the Amir bs).

What I do agree with, is the perspective that your own ears are ultimately the best deciding factor, with the other data points as supplements. That's been extremely reliable for me, but to each their own.

At the end of the day I buy what I love, I love the Chord stuff so I bought and continue to enjoy it. I learned about Rob Watts because i liked the stuff so much i wanted to know who designed it after the fact.