leeperry
Galvanically isolated his brain
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2004
- Posts
- 13,824
- Likes
- 1,685
all DAC's sound the same, all opamps sound the same...oh gawd, nðt ågåïñ
So do you think you would be able to determine the components of a DAC without opening it, just by how it sounds? That would make an interesting test.
I'm not sure how measurements aren't indicative when all the differences are well below audibility. It doesn't matter how the frequency response deviates from one DAC to another of the deviations are on the order of 0.1 dB.
This reminds me of the salesperson who kept telling me I could not have possibly heard a high sqeak in a Yamaha SACD. Yes, he knew it was there, it was a known issue with this model (for me it was only a known issue after he told me so!). But I could not possibly have heard a noise so high ...
Point is that "well below audiblity" is very subjective, and even more so when properly amplified. But I agree that measurements alone are not indicative. (I agree with someone's tagline that says: If it sounds rotten but measures right, we've measured the wrong thing.)
Don't be swayed either way. Using foobar and the AB-X comparison plug-in, you can test the theories yourself.
My experience is as follows. I had a P.S. Audio level 3 mod DAC, a Tien ZERO Dac, and a Little Dot DAC 1. I made a series of high def recordings using them. I posted all the results, as well as the recordings here, some time ago.
It's safe to say that myself, and several others who listened to what I'd posted were unable to tell a reliable difference between any of them. Some "knew" that they could hear a difference, but none were able to demonstrate this with results beyond random guessing.
I'd say that if you buy a stand-alone DAC at a price of say $150 or more, it will convert digital to analog with an accuracy better than anyone's ear could ever discern. Any more money is a waste on glamour and placebo. That isn't necessarily bad, Many here enjoy the expense, and esotaric nature of high end components, and delight in believing they can hear things that they cannot. It's their money, more power to them.
What you say about commercial DACs and their price point may be true to an extent, but I think it's more market-driven than a true result of DAC similarity. Every DAC chip can be different and every DAC chip can vary widely in its implementation. I'm not saying that they do at or below a certain price-point, but there's a point somewhere above that where significant differences are noticed. Or, in a DIY-world, they can vary widely in sound characteristics even at relatively low price points.
Just an example, but I sell/kit two DACs that sell for less than $50. I'm not advertising and won't mention them specifically except to say that one is based on output coupling caps and sounds very similar to two other DACs that came before it that used the same chip family (TI PCM2702). However, another DAC below that $50 is based on a DAC chip with a charge-pump scheme (Wolfson WM8524), negating the use of output coupling caps. It sounds totally different. I think the hundreds of builders that have built the charge-pump DAC compared to the thousand or more that were built in the family of the other DAC, can all attest to the fact that both DACs sound quite different.
The TC7510 is using such an obsolete DAC chip that they actually burn the top of its package w/ acid, but it's supposedly an old chip from CS. Obviously, old Delta/Sigma DAC's(that don't even reach 96dB of SNR) don't sound as soon as the newest...as you've noticed
I just want to clarify for the record this is not true. Say what you will about beresford's forum activities, and even performance - but it has a PCM1716E.
Don't be swayed either way. Using foobar and the AB-X comparison plug-in, you can test the theories yourself.
My experience is as follows. I had a P.S. Audio level 3 mod DAC, a Tien ZERO Dac, and a Little Dot DAC 1. I made a series of high def recordings using them. I posted all the results, as well as the recordings here, some time ago.
It's safe to say that myself, and several others who listened to what I'd posted were unable to tell a reliable difference between any of them. Some "knew" that they could hear a difference, but none were able to demonstrate this with results beyond random guessing.
I'd say that if you buy a stand-alone DAC at a price of say $150 or more, it will convert digital to analog with an accuracy better than anyone's ear could ever discern. Any more money is a waste on glamour and placebo. That isn't necessarily bad, Many here enjoy the expense, and esotaric nature of high end components, and delight in believing they can hear things that they cannot. It's their money, more power to them.
... Hell the earth was flat because we couldn't measure it, ok I'll stop.
Hi-def recordings means budget computer interfaced ADC ?
Actually, I used the top-end E-Mu interface in a box set up solely for Soundforge and Pro-tools. Both are industry standard recording/editing tools.
So you compared three S-D DAC's recorded with a S-D ADC, no masterclocking,no studio?
This is incorrect.
I guess top studios should throw away their PM2's and other quality ADC/DAC's? Right? If all DAC's sound the same then all ADC's sound the same and hell recording engineers should just be using $150 sound cards?
Many (but not all) of the latest top recordings have done exactly that.
Can't measure it means it is inaudible? We can't measure an electron either, they don't matter? 100 Years ago we couldn't measure the ozone layer, so it didn't matter. Today we can't measure the ear's temporal membrane response to sound, so it doesn't matter, only thing that matters are soundcard measurements, fancy soundcard measurements (dscope) and the subsequent FFT's, yep we have it all figured out. The perception of hearing is a closed book. A few people on the internet have perception nailed it down to dsope measurements , hell you guys should all be awarded a collective Nobel Prize.
No debating whether it's measurable, or audible... One can't prove a negative. I can't prove that you can't hear a difference. What I can prove is that you cannot SHOW that you can hear a difference.
No , the Earth seemed flat because our perceptions were lying to us. You might want to use a different analogy in this particular debate.