[sterling1]

Here's what I know for sure: my HDtracks 24/96 downloads sound really bad when played from my Dell Inspiron 14's little speakers. It's kinda like listening to my circa 1959 Magnavox AM Transistor Radio. The same 24/96 tunes sent  to my home theatre amplification and speakers sounds really good, almost life-like, especially any kind of vocal or instrumental solo. Now, there must be a reason for my HT making things sound really good and my Dell Inspiron's amplification and speakers making music sound really bad, like fingernails being dragged on a chalk board. I know it does not have anything to do with the material, the player, or the DAC. I think everybody knows what I know, but instead of figuring out how we can make big sound from little speakers, we instead argue over DAC's, really?

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

 
Do we not see a problem here?  As for the grounded in science comment - that's where the measurements come in.  The problem is we have people advocating disregard for the scientific groundings and underpinnings we know based on their mental state, hearing, and business practices.  That's why I imagine a good many people are "up in arms" about this - to advice against people being inherently wronged for what they believe is a bad reason.

What there is a disregard for is people who are not scientists or engineers promoting what they think science is, but is not. Science doesn't say that everything can be measured. Nor does it treat measurements as absolutes. All scientific papers will include caveats which show the limitations of the experiments undertaken, for example.
 
Consider the OP's original question, which has been ignored, we need to get back to the important question of, what other gear does he have? What music does he like? People trashing threads to trumpet their own beliefs doesn't help anyone.
 
So, back to the OP, his profile states he has: "HD598, ALessandro MS1i, MOdded Fostex T50RP (Soon)". Why not combine a bit of science as well as subjective experience for this? They are all low-impedance headphones. However, though, we still need to ask the OP what other gear he has, such as an amp. We don't know what he is thinking.

 

[Stereodude]

Quote:

What there is a disregard for is people who are not scientists or engineers promoting what they think science is, but is not. Science doesn't say that everything can be measured. Nor does it treat measurements as absolutes. All scientific papers will include caveats which show the limitations of the experiments undertaken, for example.

I don't think anyone is saying everything can be measured.  However on the flip side there's no evidence that there are characteristics of audio reproduction that can't be measured by existing measurement techniques.  Evidence so far shows that things can be measured that aren't audible.  You're also correct that science doesn't treat measurements as absolutes.  What it treats as absolute is the process of testing of falsifiable hypotheses.  Frankly speaking, focusing on measurements or not, the scientific process is noticeably absent from high-end audio.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

What there is a disregard for is people who are not scientists or engineers promoting what they think science is, but is not. Science doesn't say that everything can be measured. Nor does it treat measurements as absolutes. All scientific papers will include caveats which show the limitations of the experiments undertaken, for example.
 
Consider the OP's original question, which has been ignored, we need to get back to the important question of, what other gear does he have? What music does he like? People trashing threads to trumpet their own beliefs doesn't help anyone.
 
So, back to the OP, his profile states he has: "HD598, ALessandro MS1i, MOdded Fostex T50RP (Soon)". Why not combine a bit of science as well as subjective experience for this? They are all low-impedance headphones. However, though, we still need to ask the OP what other gear he has, such as an amp. We don't know what he is thinking.

 
I hope you aren't accusing me of trashing this thread.
 
Anyway, his gear is of little relevance to the source (DAC) if trying to retain signal accuracy.  The only way a DAC would play into this is if you're specifically cherry picking a certain characteristic (like a steep roll-off filtered one) to fix something the OP feels is inherently wrong (like bright treble).  I would personally advise a proper eq in such a case anyway, but it's really beside the point.
 
Stereodude is correct in saying that no one is claiming our current level of understanding is complete as it is arguable whether it will ever be.  However, to disregard what we do know because of this is doing us the disservice of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 
So in reality the answer to his question as posted is "Yes, but in varying degrees and amounts of inaccuracy" since accuracy (as measured) is surprisingly easy to reach early on with boutique shaped sounds usually costing more.
 
PS:
 
It's questionable whether the OP is even paying attention any longer due to the age of the thread, which is disheartening.

 

[estreeter]

I find both of these arguments equally futile:
 
1. I can't hear a difference between A and B, therefore I cant comprehend that anyone else could hear a difference
 
2. I can hear a difference between A and B, therefore the rest of you are clearly cloth-eared neanderthals.
 
For the objectivists, I would note that even measurements dont always settle arguments - they are often qualified by 'unlikely to be audible' etc. The golden-eared will always have the rest of us at a disadvantage with their bat-like hearing.
 
Not hard to see how quickly it becomes a religious debate, hence my use of the word 'futile'. I'm off to worship at a Hindu temple, because having multiple Gods is way more fun. 
 
 

 

[Willakan]

Quote:

What there is a disregard for is people who are not scientists or engineers promoting what they think science is, but is not. Science doesn't say that everything can be measured. Nor does it treat measurements as absolutes. All scientific papers will include caveats which show the limitations of the experiments undertaken, for example.
 
Consider the OP's original question, which has been ignored, we need to get back to the important question of, what other gear does he have? What music does he like? People trashing threads to trumpet their own beliefs doesn't help anyone.
 
So, back to the OP, his profile states he has: "HD598, ALessandro MS1i, MOdded Fostex T50RP (Soon)". Why not combine a bit of science as well as subjective experience for this? They are all low-impedance headphones. However, though, we still need to ask the OP what other gear he has, such as an amp. We don't know what he is thinking.

This is a non sequitur. Just because science isn't and cannot be perfect, it does not follow that audiophiles and the stuff they have absolutely no evidence for can be held to be a perfectly reasonable belief system. Anyhow, I think the OP has long since buggered off.
Science is imperfect, therefore the alternative I made up in 5 minutes on the back of a napkin is perfectly reasonable? I exaggerate, but I trust you take the point.
 
@estreeter
 
Good thing nobody is making the first argument then!
 

 

[Currawong]

Shike and Willakan: I'm not sure how to reply to your posts that suggest things that I didn't say.  This is where the problem is.

 

[Willakan]

What else do you mean by drawing attention to the limitations of science? How do the limitations of science in any way lead to people misrepresenting it in this particular area?
 
I'm sorry if I get the wrong end of the stick, but I fail to see how drawing attention to the limitations of science could be anything other than an attempt to somehow reduce what we gain from it in value relative to audiophile beliefs.
 
I'll admit that my post was fixated on the opening lines of yours, but those opening lines implied quite a lot of things, some of which I disagreed with. Misinterpretation is common so I would be grateful for any cast-iron clarification of what you're trying to say.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Shike and Willakan: I'm not sure how to reply to your posts that suggest things that I didn't say.  This is where the problem is.

Clearly if two people are not following what you're trying to say according to you, maybe you can elaborate to explain it better?  Besides, I don't believe I accused you or said you suggested anything. I said that I think one point was moot, hoped you weren't accusing me of trashing a thread, and conveyed my thoughts on why disregarding what we know via scientific findings was a bad idea (I never accused you of such, but a few here have gone so far).

 

[DRUB]

Quote:

What there is a disregard for is people who are not scientists or engineers promoting what they think science is, but is not. Science doesn't say that everything can be measured. Nor does it treat measurements as absolutes. All scientific papers will include caveats which show the limitations of the experiments undertaken, for example.
 
Consider the OP's original question, which has been ignored, we need to get back to the important question of, what other gear does he have? What music does he like? People trashing threads to trumpet their own beliefs doesn't help anyone.
 
So, back to the OP, his profile states he has: "HD598, ALessandro MS1i, MOdded Fostex T50RP (Soon)". Why not combine a bit of science as well as subjective experience for this? They are all low-impedance headphones. However, though, we still need to ask the OP what other gear he has, such as an amp. We don't know what he is thinking.

The OP's original question is not based around his personal preferences, rather he asked a more general question, which is the very topic of this thread:
 

("Does which DAC you have really matter?")

Specifically, he asked whether more expensive DACs are worth it and whether it's worth spending significant (relatively speaking) money on one. He also asked for justifications for arguments, which is exactly what Willakan and Shike have done. 

 

[estreeter]

Quote:

The OP's original question is not based around his personal preferences, rather he asked a more general question, which is the very topic of this thread:
 

("Does which DAC you have really matter?")

Specifically, he asked whether more expensive DACs are worth it and whether it's worth spending significant (relatively speaking) money on one. He also asked for justifications for arguments, which is exactly what Willakan and Shike have done. 

And my argument is that they are only 'worth it' if you, personally, can hear a worthwhile difference between DAC A and DAC B. If I tell you I cant hear a difference between the DAC in my MSII and the more expensive DAC in the Anedio D1, you are likely to think 'Man, are your ears painted on ?'. You can post measurements galore, but that wont change the fact that none of the people who responded to this thread have the OPs tastes/background/hearing. Whatever objective measures you want to implement, and I'm all for that, the 'is it worth it' question remains subjective, IMO.
 

 

[Tassie Devil]

I have not read all the replies so forgive me if I'm repeating earlier postings.
 
In my experience the DAC is critical for good audio and many are not so hot.  This was why the very valid crits were made about the harshness etc of digital were made in early days.  And such crits can still apply.
 
Two essential factors with DACs are:
1.  minimise jitter
2.  have effective digital filtering
 
The cheaper DACs do not all do a very good job although some are better than others.  At the moment I'm using a NuForce DAC9 and it does a superb job but I tried a NuForce icon HDP recently and, although not as good, it was VERY acceptable.  You can buy refurbished units from NuForce at tempting prices close to your budget.
 
In all of this remember that the DAC is just one link in the chain so it the source is not up to scratch, no DAC can improve it.  And IMHO this is why otherwise good headphones like the ADK701/2 and Sennheiser HD800 get seemingly inconsistent reviews with some loving them while others hate them.  Being accurate transducers they reproduce what is fed in.  The old GIGO (garbage in -> garbage out) still applies here as everywhere else.
 
I'll not try to expand on jitter - Google it and become confused.  Ditto with digital filtering as it is a bit of a black art.  The latest "in" thing is "apodising" but it can be a bit of a gimmick/advertising hype so be sceptical.  That said I'm getting the best audio I've ever heard and that is the result of apodising from Meridian followed by top processing from NuForce.
 
You are right not to become too sidetrtacked about synergy as it can be an excuse for a more inferior link in the audio chain.  That said the headphones must match up with the head amp output but I guess you have that covered.
 
John (for years a digital luddite but now digitally converted - we will not say into what!)

 

[Gwarmi]

Quote:

I have not read all the replies so forgive me if I'm repeating earlier postings.
 
In my experience the DAC is critical for good audio and many are not so hot.  This was why the very valid crits were made about the harshness etc of digital were made in early days.  And such crits can still apply.
 
Two essential factors with DACs are:
1.  minimise jitter
 

I have to say that for a long time I thought 'USB jitter' was just another glorified and exaggerated form of audio marketing.
It was not until I sourced my current DAC and felt a little underwhelmed with the straight USB laptop to USB DAC in overall performance. It just felt flat.
 
Eventually, curiosity got the better of me and I thought ~ SPDIF is still the go-to 'input' for many reference quality DAC's, not being equipped with
a Macbook proved difficult in overcoming this issue. One day though I came across a guy at the local store who had brought along his Audiophilleo-2
USB to SPDIF converter, I lamented away at how my recent $$ source purchase was 'ok' but I was starting to feel like I'd bought into too much
hype with DAC's in general.
 
'Thought about trying this?' he said
 
So we did ~ WOW ~ not the same DAC at all, we all get carried in this hobby at times making mountains of mole hills but anyone that day
who heard the different between the inputs going from straight on the Audiophilleo to without was flabbergasted.
 
I think it's an often over-looked area for PC audio for anyone who's sitting on a $500-$1500 DAC ~ chances are, you're not hearing what it
can do just off USB. The ultra high end DAC's appear to have jitter under control with proprietary clocks built-in but for mid range priced gear
it's what is missing at that price point.
 

 

[Tassie Devil]

Now have read some of the replies and must strongly disagree with those who claim there is little difference between the less expensive DACs and their more sophisticated brothers.  OK, no argument you cannot judge on price alone but there ARE differences in audio quality, even between high end DACs.
 
This has been driven home to me when I first tried out the NuForce DAC9.  Prior to that I had a Benchmark DAC1, virtually rebuilt for me by Steve Nugent at Empirical Audio (he no longer does this work).  This DAC ended up costing me close to $5,000 with all the modifications so I genuinely thought I had the absolute best which would not be surpassed by the NuForce DAC9.  Well I was wrong, the DAC9 IS audibly superior, and that just not my opinion - others have confirmed it.
 
So, IMHO if someone is not hearing differences between DACs then either the source is not up to scratch or the headphones being used are not great.  Note I'm assuming here that we are using a DAC/headamp combo - my preferred option although I'm not trying to diminish the importance of that head amp but do think the combo is a better option.
 
But it all boils down to personal preference.  If someone is happy with their gear that is all that matters.  The cost of it should not be the issue. But my experience over the 60 years I've been messing around with audio (started off making a crystal set!!!) is that generally you get what you pay for although that must not be interpreted as meaning the more expensive article is always better.  However it is a VERY competitive world out there so most companies keep their prices keen.  I should add that NuForce are good value IMHO because they will deal direct to the public so cut out the middle man profit.
 
John
 
 

 

[estreeter]

Are there any independent measurements for the DAC-9  ?