I Don't Understand You Subjective Guys

[Chris J]

Quote:

Xaborus, to do this topic justice would require countless pages of circular arguments, ending in frustrating stalemate.
 
So I'll speak on behalf of at least some subjectivists and get to the bottom line:
 
We don't care!
 
We don't care if the sceptics believe us or not. We're not out to convert anyone. If you can't, or won't, tell the difference between DACs then good for you - you've saved yourself a shed full of money.
We're happy to discuss our hobby with like-minded enthusiasts. We're not bothered if a different group of people disagree with us.
 
What we are bothered about is if some rude troll butts into our conversation to declare what gullible fools we are. We've already got that bit and are happy to continue regardless.
 
If you do want to follow the for and against arguments, then go to the Sound Science forum and try any thread about cables - there's more of these threads around and the principles are the same, just more extreme views.
Or the thread about high end audio being a scam.
 
A lot of the sceptics' points are worthy of note, but... I don't care )

Big +1,
 
I am somewhat of a sceptic, but I am not big on people (and there are a few on Head Fi) using Head Fi to ram their opinion into someone else's brain.

 

[estreeter]

Hype on, kiddies, hype on. You clearly have all the answers. 

 

[olor1n]

Quote:

Quote:

It's their money so they can buy anything they want. Plus, it's subjective and not everyone's ears are the same, so maybe you hear the ODAC is good but some people may hear that the DAC1 is better
 
It's subjective, so you have to respect their opinion

Very original response. Very good indeed *sarcasm*
 
I always say value people's experiences, analyze their opinions. Opinions aren't meant to be respected. Where did you get this idea? From another insecure idiot who can't stand a good argument?  Science proves that the ODAC performs at an extremely similar level to DACs ten times its prices. If people truly enjoy spending their hard earned cash for the "fun" of it, without a care in the world for true improvement in sound quality - which seems to be the case here, because they don't CARE what the data shows -, why the insecurity? Why the anger? It's true that people who are willing to spend so much do not affect anyone else around them (well, usually). But society should discourage the growing number of fools and idiots, who will in time affect others around them. Subjectivists shouldn't be angered at objectivists for putting scientific data up their asses. It's intellectual and educational, good for the masses. People who demand their opinions respected are sometimes the most selfish beings. 

 
Classy. Your parents must be proud.

 

[estreeter]

I would add this to the discussion, and I made the same point when the O2 was released - Voldemort's design effort has been valued at exactly zero dollars. Research the Audio Note DACs when you get a moment, and take note of the difference between the price of their commercial DACs vs their DiY kits, Ask Justin or one of the other professional amp builders how much time and effort goes into getting a new product to the point where he can offer it for sale. 

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Hype on, kiddies, hype on. You clearly have all the answers. 

 
No, but ignoring the facts as they stand helps absolutely no-one.  Is there evidence of an audible difference using proper testing methodology?
 
If the answer is "no", then I would hope someone would at least raise an eyebrow regarding the price of a product and various claims.  If the answer is "yes" then one should do their best to figure out why.  Some NOS DACs I've heard sounded different.  Why?  They did a very steep and early roll-off which was audible.
 
This isn't aimed at just the ODAC, but multiple commercial offerings.  This has been a question well before the ODAC's release.
 
 
 

I would add this to the discussion, and I made the same point when the O2 was released - Voldemort's design effort has been valued at exactly zero dollars. Research the Audio Note DACs when you get a moment, and take note of the difference between the price of their commercial DACs vs their DiY kits, Ask Justin or one of the other professional amp builders how much time and effort goes into getting a new product to the point where he can offer it for sale. 

 
True enough, had his design been a true commercial offering I don't think it would have gone for less than double to triple the build cost.
 
 
This debate umbrellas more than just the ODAC and costly options, but also can expand to "why would someone pay $2k, 3K , etc" which is a valid question to ask and examine.

 

[estreeter]

I don't question why Ferrari continue to build cars when you can clearly go faster on a motorcycle, look cooler in a street rod (IMO) or carry a lot more groceries in a Volvo. All for a fraction of the cost. 
 
Ask the Ferrari owner if he or she would swap their experience for any of the other 3. 

 

[Shike]

Quote:

I don't question why Ferrari continue to build cars when you can clearly go faster on a motorcycle, look cooler in a street rod (IMO) or carry a lot more groceries in a Volvo. All for a fraction of the cost. 
 
Ask the Ferrari owner if he or she would swap their experience for any of the other 3. 

 
The problem with this example is when the audible experience is identical.  When they both sound the same, arguments for practicality and objective analysis become abundant.  In terms of performance or ride, they're the same.  In terms of features and the items I listed before, they're not.  And if they aren't the same in terms of sound when properly tested, then one or both are not meeting the performance criterion.
 
In this case, the "experience" could be having a really nice case for example - which I went out of the way to acknowledge myself.  The fit and finish on the Xciter was top-notch bar none, but ultimately the results were the same and the cost difference did not warrant it for me.  This is not saying it's without merit, for some people fit and finish is absolutely necessary combined with performance.  In such a case I could understand one wanting to spend more, in-spite of not wanting to do it myself.

 

[JadeEast]

My simple question is why "trust your ears" given the knowledge of bias and errors?

 

[autumnholy]

1. The law of diminishing return. It's not always: You get as much as what you have paid, when it comes to high end products. Sure, built quality, workmanship, labor cost, marketing cost, etc. But the marginal difference is getting smaller and smaller in terms of quality (if there is) for every penny you spend.
 
2. Just like fashions. IMO, it's not necessary a "better" sound, but rather, "different". Some people buy tube amp because it sounds different. Some people buy pricier stuff because it sounds (and/or looks) different. People just want to be unique, and to obtain the status of uniqueness or belonged to a specific "higher" class, people are willing to pay for it.
 
3. Is there truth behind all this $100 sounds the same as $1000 audio equipment? Nobody knows 100% for sure. Science is a mean (tool) to explain if there is (or there isn't, as most skeptics have pointed out) difference(s). It can be refuted with good solid and reproduce-able proofs. But since we are talking about subjectivity here, then there's no need for proofs. YMMV.
 
4. Will I buy a pricier gear? Maybe. If the looks are captivating, owning it will make me feel good about myself, and I really have that much cash to spend for and willing to do it. So far I'm happy with where I am, so there's no need to thirst for those pricier stuffs which don't belong to my league.

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Why would anyone buy a $1000 DAC when the $150 ODAC performs just as good in blind testing as a DAC1?
 
Sometimes i think most of you guys are just buying an expensive placebo effect.. just like $1000 Cables.
 
Edit: Please note- I'm not trolling. Explanation of my viewpoints on the second page.

 
I actually hooked up the ODAC and my "audiophile" DAC, matched the levels (my DAC has digital volume control), and had my wife turn the input selector (we sync'd up the recordings on J River and Foobar feeding separate sources.) The difference between the DACs was obvious. I could immediately tell which one was which. It's not even funny which one is the superior DAC, although it can be argued that the ODAC is a much better value proposition.
 
You assume too much when you imply that "most of us guys" are stupid audiophiles who don't seriously evaluate equipment, including blind testing, examining measurements (when available) before making a serious purchase.
 
Finally, you have a flawed view of measurement science. If you know what I did as a side hobby, you would know that I also strongly believe in science. However, I also understand the limitations of measurement science: 1) Measurements are very specific in what aspects of sound reproduction are being measured; 2) There are many aspects of sound reproduction which don't have corresponding measurements to correlate to; 3) Most measurements use steady state signals into simulated loads - most engineers, if they went to a good university, know that things get really hairy when we start to model dynamic behaviors - in other words "super-computer" time; 4) Measurements are sometimes just downright deceptive and need serious analysis, comparison, and corroboration with other measurements to make sense.
 
Believing in measurements are fine, but it's critical to understand what they really mean before we come to any conclusions about them, especially in regards in how they correlate to the subjective experience. So let me ask you four relatively simple questions: 
 

• What is intermodulation distortion. Give me an example and expected behavior of such. How it is commonly measured in the audio industry? Why does the audio industry measure it this way?
• What is linear distortion?
• What is non-linear distortion?
• Given two tones one at 220 Hz and another at 4000Hz, if I said the IMD was 4%, the 2nd order HD of the two tones was 3%, and the 3rd order HD of the two tones was 6%, and the noise floor was consistent at -130db with the tones at 0db reference level, how would the spectrum look like? Please provide a simple illustration.

 
If you cannot immediately answer these questions, then in my opinion, you are not qualified to give an meaningful opinion regarding "scientifically proven lower distortion methods of playback", although you certainly may.
 
P.S. Granted that it may not be prudent to purchase a $1000 or $5000 DAC. But it's not probably not prudent to purchase a Mercedes S Class or Porsche 911 Turbo either (those cars do eventually depreciate to zero), but some people can easily afford these things.
 
I'll just come right out and say it: I strongly suspect people who post these kinds of threads, especially those who parrot others and have no deep understanding of the objective measurements they cite, are internally poor (and probably also materialistically poor) souls who are simply envious of others who have better toys than them.

 

[stv014]

Quote:

I actually hooked up the ODAC and my "audiophile" DAC, matched the levels (my DAC has digital volume control), and had my wife turn the input selector (we sync'd up the recordings on J River and Foobar feeding separate sources.) The difference between the DACs was obvious. I could immediately tell which one was which. It's not even funny which one is the superior DAC, although it can be argued that the ODAC is a much better value proposition.

 
How did you match the levels, and with what accuracy (it should preferably be 0.1 dB or better) ? Not that I necessarily question that you can really hear a difference, and I do not have an ODAC anyway, but there are many false positives in not properly conducted blind tests. The lack of accurate level matching is also not the only potential issue. Of course, an audiophile DAC may also try to "enhance" the sound in some way rather than just being accurate (producing output as close to a theoretical ideal DAC as possible); in that case, an audible difference could easily exist.

 

[purrin]

To +/- 0.1db (as per my usual practice with headphone HD measurements.) SPL weighed A. Not that it matters as both DACs measure flat - yes I actually measured their frequency responses. I also have various coarse (the noise floor on my measuring equipment goes only about 135db down) J-Test jitter measurements of various DACs, but I haven't hit the ODAC yet. I've seen notable differences on the "jitter spectrum", so I think it's working.
 
I'm not a big fan of "enhanced" DACs, and I know very much what you mean. And no, I don't have one of those NOS or ladder DACs w/ filters that prematurely roll off the treble by 3db @20kHz. Not that any human over 20 years old could hear that; but I've seen the lunatic fringe objectivists, when it's to their convenience, point out slightly non-linear measurements, even when inaudible, because it suites the extremists views of their religion.

 

[joeyjojo]

Quote:

To +/- 0.1db (as per my usual practice with headphone HD measurements.) SPL weighed A with white noise. Not that it matters as both DACs measure flat - yes I actually measured their frequency responses. I also have various coarse (the noise floor on my measuring equipment is only about 135-140db down) J-Test jitter measurements of various DACs, but I haven't hit the ODAC yet.
 
And no, I don't have one of those NOS or PCM1704 DACs w/ filters that prematurely roll off the treble by 3db @20kHz. Not that any human over 20 years old could hear that; but I've seen the lunatic fringe objectivists, when it's to their convenience, point out slightly non-linear measurements, even when inaudible, because it suites the extremists views of their religion.

 
So they both have flat responses in the (your) audible range? Can you state the measured/specified/methodological differences (which you're aware of) between the two? E.g. Sampling frequency, bit depth, power/votlage output, noise/THD/dynamic range/crosstalk/phase etc., jitter?
 
The working hypothesesis it seems to me in this subforum is: if you can tell them apart with your ears there must be measurable differences with test equipment, but the converse may or may not be true.
 
Thanks for your efforts, there's lots of discussion and too little action in these kind of threads. (I picked up an maudio 2496 recently for simple measurements but it turned out to be far worse than the xonar dx I had already.)

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

 
I actually hooked up the ODAC and my "audiophile" DAC, matched the levels (my DAC has digital volume control), and had my wife turn the input selector (we sync'd up the recordings on J River and Foobar feeding separate sources.) The difference between the DACs was obvious. I could immediately tell which one was which. It's not even funny which one is the superior DAC, although it can be argued that the ODAC is a much better value proposition.
 
You assume too much when you imply that "most of us guys" are stupid audiophiles who don't seriously evaluate equipment, including blind testing, examining measurements (when available) before making a serious purchase.
 
Finally, you have a flawed view of measurement science. If you know what I did as a side hobby, you would know that I also strongly believe in science. However, I also understand the limitations of measurement science: 1) Measurements are very specific in what aspects of sound reproduction are being measured; 2) There are many aspects of sound reproduction which don't have corresponding measurements to correlate to; 3) Most measurements use steady state signals into simulated loads - most engineers, if they went to a good university, know that things get really hairy when we start to model dynamic behaviors - in other words "super-computer" time; 4) Measurements are sometimes just downright deceptive and need serious analysis, comparison, and corroboration with other measurements to make sense.
 
Believing in measurements are fine, but it's critical to understand what they really mean before we come to any conclusions about them, especially in regards in how they correlate to the subjective experience. 
 
I'll just come right out and say it: I strongly suspect people who post these kinds of threads, especially those who parrot others and have no deep understanding of the objective measurements they cite, are internally poor (and mostly likely materialistically poor) souls who are simply envious of others who have better toys than them.

 
 
I think you have pretty much summed it all up! Thanks.
 
You compared the ODAC to another DAC, frankly, it does not surprise me in the least that two DACs may sound different.
I have not performed any audio testing this rigorous for years (call me lazy, I leave this to the other guys, I get to measure enough stuff at work, thank you). But I have heard enough equipment to know that occasionally you do hear a piece of equipment in your own system and you just know something is wrong, something is missing, or something was added, etc.
Sure, more often that not everything sounds the same, i.e. most DACs sound the same. Frankly, last time I bought a CD player, I bought it based on features, look, etc because at my price point they basically sounded the same.
 
I call myself a sceptic not because I don't believe in science or measurement, but rather, at this point in time I am certain that we do not fully understand how audio works. We do not completely understand what needs to be measured.
If we did then I would think that sometimes we should be fooled into thinking that an instrument or a voice is in the room with us.  Because this happens so very rarely I would argue that we have a long way to go to truly reproduce musical instruments and the human voice properly.
 
Science has limits, but we must alway push the envelope of those limits to expand those limits.
I can't help but think it sounds rather close minded to think that in the year 2012 we have developed the perfect DAC (or amplifier or whatever) and you can buy it for a few bucks.

 

[JadeEast]

Quote:

I'll just come right out and say it: I strongly suspect people who post these kinds of threads, especially those who parrot others and have no deep understanding of the objective measurements they cite, are internally poor (and mostly likely materialistically poor) souls who are simply envious of others who have better toys than them.

Why not be a bit more charitable? Your argument is solid and convincing based on your tests and experience, throwing suspicions about the moral character and financial status of posters adds nothing.