R2R RIP or Resurrection?

[Diet Kokaine]

This is me enjoying it BTW

It looks ugly hahaha, but I bet it sounds incredible.

What are you pairing it with?
Speakers or headphones?

 

[theveterans]

It looks ugly hahaha, but I bet it sounds incredible.

I was in nirvana how truly convincing it sounds, i.e. my brain was completely fooled with the illusion of sonic transparency as it relates to real life performance

 

[Diet Kokaine]

I was in nirvana how truly convincing it sounds, i.e. my brain was completely fooled with the illusion of sonic transparency as it relates to real life performance

What are you pairing it with?
Are you using headphones?

 

[theveterans]

What are you pairing it with?
Are you using headphones?

It's paired with Woo Audio WA24 20th Anniversary (with the Stradi PP3/250 tubes) with Raal 1995 Immanis (arguably the current best sounding headphone on the market). This is head-fi so yes all the setups are for headphone listening. I would bet it will provide the same or more immersive performance with 2 channel systems which I haven't heard yet

 

[Diet Kokaine]

It's paired with Woo Audio WA24 20th Anniversary (with the Stradi PP3/250 tubes) with Raal 1995 Immanis (arguably the current best sounding headphone on the market). This is head-fi so yes all the setups are for headphone listening. I would bet it will provide the same or more immersive performance with 2 channel systems which I haven't heard yet

I’ll admit it—I’m a little jealous! My all-time favorite headphone listening experience was with the *Abyss AB1266 headphones, paired with a Woo Audio amp (I wish I could recall the DAC). The clarity was otherworldly, and the realism so convincing, I might as well have been listening to live musicians right in front of me.

When it comes to IEMs, the **Sony DMP-Z1** stole the show for me. Its holographic soundstage wasn’t just immersive—it felt like standing on stage with the performers. It was drug infused holographic levels.
A used one is definitely on my list of things to pick up someday.

Moments like these remind me why high-end audio is magic. I wish more people could experience how transformative truly great sound can be.

 

[bagwell359]

Who is "gaslighting"? Happy to take $10k off you if you want to find out you can't tell the difference between a $9 Apple dongle and your absolute best DAC. I'll even come out to LA to do the test.

How sad is it that this is the state of "Hi-Fi" these days? I mean, it's always been like this to a degree, but ever since the mainstream started buying soundbars and "smart" speakers (like Google Home or Apple HomePods) and abandoning traditional speaker/amplifier/source setups, the state of discourse around "hi-fi" audio has devolved into some kind of weird cult ritual where "perception" is the only real goal. Just 100% feelings over facts that's led to an absolutely stagnant, festering industry (with a few noteworthy exceptions, like Dan Clark Audio).

The arguments between objective vs subjective go well back over 55 years ago when I first started paying attention.

Audio playback equipment isn't possible w/o Engineering and quantification. The availability/development of equipment is driven by hobbyists - of all sorts. And marketing is a tool used to draw attention, along with magazines, dealers, and fellow hobbyists. Very similar to exotic cars, watches, wines, etc.

Blind AB testing is a key tool. Listening is a subjective sense, which can be educated.

Why people choose one side and denigrate the other? It creates heat, but little light. This thread is yet another frustrating and fruitless example.

 

[theveterans]

I’ll admit it—I’m a little jealous! My all-time favorite headphone listening experince was with the *Abyss AB1266 headphones, paired with a Woo Audio amp (I wish I could recall the DAC). The clarity was otherworldly, and the realism so convincing, I might as well have been listening to live musicians right in front of me.

When it comes to IEMs, the **Sony DMP-Z1** stole the show for me. Its holographic soundstage wasn’t just immersive—it felt like standing on stage with the performers. It was drug infused holographic levels.
A used one is definitely on my list of things to pick up someday.

Moments like these remind me why high-end audio is magic.I wish more people could experience how transformative truly great sound can be.

Just go to a lot of shows and you'll get to demo some of them hehe. But yes, I didn't want the time to move faster when I was there. The whole system is definitely incredible and the most convincing performance I've had (makes my system feel less transparent sounding after the experience hehe), and I've got to try some other things too such as A/Bing power cords , A/Bing network filters . (Not my system of course since I could never afford one unless I win the lottery or YOLO all my life savings on FD calls on the stock market and win)

I would guess it's most likely the Woo WA33 amp since it's the classic amp that the 1266 is usually paired to. I've listened to the DMP-Z1 a long time ago as well during my IEM days though back then I didn't have a grasp of "trained listening" that I have now so I couldn't quantify the experience compared to now. It's only when I got into headphone and headphone system where the magic and the phrase chasing the dragon started to make sense

 

[Diet Kokaine]

Just go to a lot of shows and you'll get to demo some of them hehe. But yes, I didn't want the time to move faster when I was there. The whole system is definitely incredible and the most convincing performance I've had (makes my system feel less transparent sounding after the experience hehe), and I've got to try some other things too such as A/Bing power cords , A/Bing network filters . (Not my system of course since I could never afford one unless I win the lottery or YOLO all my life savings on FD calls on the stock market and win)

I would guess it's most likely the Woo WA33 amp since it's the classic amp that the 1266 is usually paired to. I've listened to the DMP-Z1 a long time ago as well during my IEM days though back then I didn't have a grasp of "trained listening" that I have now so I couldn't quantify the experience compared to now. It's only when I got into headphone and headphone system where the magic and the phrase chasing the dragon started to be understood

I make my own power cables— they’re a very unconventional design, but they still nail that crisp silver sound most audiophiles love. I think I must've made over 200 different cables before stumbling onto this particular one.
Since you're in Torrance, maybe I'll let you try some of mine in your system. (USB, XLR, and power cables.. Trifecta)
Would be interesting to see what you think.

Anyways.
This is getting off topic.

 

[BS5711]

................ but sight is needed to form this perception of the sound of a DAC

Sorry but that is misguided thinking, there is no more polite way to say it.

Sight disrupts the accuracy of our perception of sound (in its literal sense - sound waves entering your ears) it isn't inherently part of sound or needed to hear all of the sound.

I venture that you are so entrenched in the whole audiophile mindset that rational thought is overpowered by what you feel despite that a robust test can prove that your hearing alone can't actually differentiate sound like your sighted listening leads you to believe you can, you said so yourself.

It might sound like a daft comparison but I can hear a bird out my window as I type, the chirping didn't take on additional qualities when I stood up and looked out the window at the bird. Where is the added information in the sound provided by me having sighted the bird, there is none. The 'information" you receive from having and sighting nice gear while you listen is purely an emotional response that changes your perception. I have no emotional response looking at the bird so it doesn't change my perception of the sound of the bird.

 

[Diet Kokaine]

@BS5711
"the chirping didn't take on additional qualities when I stood up and looked out the window at the bird"

False. Your brain absolutely enriches the sound with context. If you see a bird, your auditory cortex cross references visual data to sharpen and enhance your senses. You should try observing a cat that is locked in on it's prey. Ears vision, everything is focused in on it's target.
Vision provides spatial and temporal cues that the brain uses to resolve ambiguities in sound. This isn't added information-it's complimentary data that refines perception.

You treat senses as isolated silos. THEY AREN'T. The brain has evolved to fuse sensory inputs for survival. Dismissing this integration as irrelevant is antiscientific.
Food, Art, Music, are shaped by context.

By your logic, a $5 steak should taste identical to a $500 steak if blindfolded, so haute cuisine is a scam. Chef's are emotional fools.

Finally.
For individuals unaccustomed to it, being blindfolded or being sight deprived, can create significant sensory disorientation, hampering their ability to focus on auditory cues. If you want an actual "BLIND" test, the best candidates are people who are already blind. They usually have heightened auditory perceptions and you're not disorienting them before conducting Pseudoscientific tests. Plucking people off the streets without prior warning or training is about as unscientific as it gets.

 

[bigshot]

Black metal boxes full of electronics are a matter of technology and fidelity, not magic and feelings. MUSIC is about feelings and can create moods that feel magical. The fundamental misunderstanding of hardcore audiophools is applying attributes to electronics that aren’t a part of those electronics. It’s based on fetishism of the object and not having a clue how creativity works.

 

[VNandor]

Correct, all those people that never do well controlled double blind tests don't trust their ears, but their completely unreliable uncontrolled subjective perception instead. Thus coming to bizarre and totally hilarious conclusions, like hearing a difference in cases where that difference is too small to even exist as sound!

The "trust your ears" group gets very upset when you tell them to trust their ears instead of their eyes for once even though doing a proper listening test is what is really about trusting the ears.

 

[gregorio]

A $200 DAC and a $1.5M system aren’t the same—diminishing returns ≠ no returns. ***Tech trickles down***

Huh? You think the difference between a $200 DAC and a $1.5M club system has something to do with diminishing returns rather than the difference between sitting at home listening to headphones and amplifying a live jazz band in a club? You’ve got to be joking, how can anyone be that deluded/ignorant? And, the tech of amplifying a live jazz band obviously does not “trickle down” to consumers because their homes are not clubs with live jazz bands inside, didn’t you know that?

The million-dollar markup isn’t 6x the sound—it’s exclusivity, impatience, and flex. With expertise, you could match its fidelity for about $250k…

The million dollar markup isn’t for 6x the sound, it’s for thousands of times the sound. You think 6x the sound your HPs are producing will fill a jazz club? You clearly don’t know anything about sound, it’s got absolutely nothing to do with “exclusivity, impatience and flex”. And, you’ve therefore got no chance to “match it’s fidelity for about $250k”, if as you claim it takes expertise, because you’ve just demonstrated you don’t know anything about sound, let alone have any expertise!

For example, if a Delta Sigma DAC such as Nagra HD DAC X is providing me a better sound than the Rockna Wavedream Balanced (R2R), I would keep the Nagra on my system. Yes it's sighted and with all the personal preferences and biases involved I perceive the Nagra as better sounding as an example. It's as simple as that.

It is “as simple as that”, you stated: “IF a DAC provides me better sound …” but then you don’t ascertain IF the sound is actually any better, because you cannot ascertain anything about sound with your eyes and biases. So, why is it that you can’t understand something “as simple as that”?

There is that sonic signature that's convincing with the PBD/Nagra/EMM Labs family.

Again, how can you ascertain anything about a “sonic signature” with your eyes and biases? You talk about “that sonic signature” but you show no reliable evidence of what that sonic signature is, or even that it’s anything other than flat within the audible range.

So to me multiple senses create that magic of enhanced hearing through what science calls personal biases aka subjective preferences but sight is needed to form this perception of the sound of a DAC

A DAC doesn’t have multiple senses, magic, enhanced hearing, perception, sight or sound. How do you not know that? Why don’t you measure the audio performance of a brick or a teapot, which also don’t have any of those abilities/attributes? A DAC is a relatively simple piece of modern technology that converts digital data into an analogue signal, hence its name, its task was defined ~80 years ago.

I make my own power cables— they’re a very unconventional design, but they still nail that crisp silver sound most audiophiles love.

Power cables don’t have any sound, let alone “crisp silver sound”, they transfer power. That’s why they’re called “power cables” rather than “sound cables”. You talk about expertise but don’t even know what power cables are, what they do or why they’re called “power cables”. Not knowing what even a child should know is NOT “expertise”, it’s the opposite!

Demonstrating at every turn that you have no idea what you’re talking about is going to achieve what in a science discussion forum?

G

 

[Diet Kokaine]

hardcore audiophools is applying attributes to electronics that aren’t a part of those electronics. It’s based on fetishism of the object and not having a clue how creativity works.

"Ideologues are Bullies. They use fidelity to a grand theory to justify their rudeness.
Not exactly creativity, but about rigidity. "

David brooks

 

[71 dB]

Your brain absolutely enriches the sound with context.

Yes, and this is the subjectivity in perceived sound. How our brain "enriches the sound with context" is a property of our brain, not a property of audio devices. Your brain creates the context. If your brain thinks a $2000 R2R DAC must sound better than a $9 Apple dongle, then that is the context your brain uses to evaluate the sound. My brain thinks a $2000 R2R DAC and a $9 Apple dongle probably both sound transparent to human hearing, at least to my hearing, and this is the context my brain uses.