[bigshot]

He won't do that because he believes he has trained his ears to hear the unbearable things he measures.

The problem with people focused on audio science sometimes is that they spend all their time on the electronics and do no research into the science of perceptual thresholds.

 

[DenverW]

So this topic is fascinating to me! I’ve read a lot of reviews and information from ASR, as well as topics and info from places. They don’t mesh. Who do I “believe”? The measurement group, or the opposite?

I think I’ll only be able to answer this question for myself. I currently have a topping d30, a much loved asr dac. I purchased a used A1 Gumby, a much loved ‘audiophile’ dac (using that in quotes, and in no way implying the d30 or asr isn’t ‘audiophile’)

Is my a/b testing of these DACs going to answer anyone’s question? No way! Unscientific, placebo ridden testing for sure.

What it will do for me, is help me answer for myself alone if an expensive dac has audible enough differences for me to justify the cost. I’d actually rather NOT hear differences. If I do, and it’s all placebo, then is that personal satisfaction worth the cost?

very curious. The point of this post is to say: go test for yourself, it’s been the only way for me to answer questions so far.

 

[castleofargh]

So this topic is fascinating to me! I’ve read a lot of reviews and information from ASR, as well as topics and info from places. They don’t mesh. Who do I “believe”? The measurement group, or the opposite?

I think I’ll only be able to answer this question for myself. I currently have a topping d30, a much loved asr dac. I purchased a used A1 Gumby, a much loved ‘audiophile’ dac (using that in quotes, and in no way implying the d30 or asr isn’t ‘audiophile’)

Is my a/b testing of these DACs going to answer anyone’s question? No way! Unscientific, placebo ridden testing for sure.

What it will do for me, is help me answer for myself alone if an expensive dac has audible enough differences for me to justify the cost. I’d actually rather NOT hear differences. If I do, and it’s all placebo, then is that personal satisfaction worth the cost?

very curious. The point of this post is to say: go test for yourself, it’s been the only way for me to answer questions so far.

Everybody suggests to listen. It's the only way to test if something is audibly different and which we prefer. The big disagreement is about what constitutes a conclusive listening test. And on that there will always be 2 sides:
Those who properly experiment so that the listening test is a test and is about listening.
Those who do it wrong.

Whatever you decide to do to answer your question, I suggest to check that both DACs give the same output into the amplifier before starting to "look" for audible differences. Because of course louder is a sound difference, but maybe not the one we want to pay for in a DAC.

 

[bigshot]

A conclusive listening test is one that hits the basic marks... level matched, blind, direct switched. The only person any casual person has to prove it to is themselves, so if you have done these things in good faith and you hear a significant difference, then that is all you need. The problem is the "good faith" part. A lot of people claim they have crossed their ts and dotted their is, but they know they haven't. The only person they are fooling is themselves.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

A conclusive listening test is one that hits the basic marks... level matched, blind, direct switched. The only person any casual person has to prove it to is themselves, so if you have done these things in good faith and you hear a significant difference, then that is all you need. The problem is the "good faith" part. A lot of people claim they have crossed their ts and dotted their is, but they know they haven't. The only person they are fooling is themselves.

Yep, which is why I don't pay much attention at all to claims made by individuals on forums like this. Anyone can say they've done a legit blind comparison test and conclusively proven to themselves that they heard a real difference between a budget DAC and an expensive one (for instance). I have no way of verifying the reality of a claim like that. I look for published tests done by reputable groups...if pretty much all of those point in one direction I'll accept that that's probably the correct conclusion and assume the guy on the forum is either not conducting a valid comparison test of is actually outright lying.

 

[bigshot]

If you aren't going to believe people who have conducted tests themselves, you don't go looking for a better source... Maybe they are wrong too. You do a test yourself with your own ears and your own equipment and make your own mind up. I'm of a mind that Sound Science shouldn't be people in lab coats sitting around quoting dusty old published studies. We should be getting out there and working with scientific principles in our own rigs. The most basic element of science is the controlled test. We should all be doing them and sharing our results, not to convince, but to understand.

When it comes to outright lying, I have a knack for discerning those types of people. It really isn't hard. They're the ones who take no real interest in finding out the truth and look at doing a test as a chore to convince the rest of us. It's the lazy way to win an argument. If the facts don't support your case, just make up some facts. That becomes obvious. It can't be hidden.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

yup agreed. i just haven"t got the resources to do the tests. I don't have access to measuring equipment, nor a variety of different gear to conduct tests on. I also don't have any accomplices to help with flicking switches and so forth. I have done limited tests that give me some insight, but not such that I'd go on a forum and give advice of my own accord.

 

[bigshot]

The only equipment you need is a friend, a switch box a volume pot and your ears.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Plus at least 2 pieces of the same type of gear that you want to compare. I do have a few dacs around my place but none of them are more than $100 and I don't think any of them sound notably different really. I'd be more interested ni comparisons between a $100 and a $1000 one but I'm not prepared to order an expensive one just to compare them and I don't know anyone who even has a dac let alone an expensive one. In the end, I'm not writing any peer-reviewed papers or anything. This is just fun and a hobby for me. I'm ok with looking for what I can find out there as far as "evidence" and evaluating it. I mean like I said, I have done some limited testing of my own and I try and hold my own evaluations up to a pretty harsh standard. I don't easily buy what my ears are selling me. I've also run through a bunch of the online tests comparing lossy and lossless files and proven some things to myself in that regard as far as what I can and can't hear. Those results point me in a certain direction which is mostly backed up by the various published research I've found from different sources who appear to be reputable and respected.

 

[bigshot]

I've compared my DVD players to my phone to my DAC to my iPods. It isn't hard at all. I compare stuff all the time. It's not hard at all. Kinda fun actually.

I listen to all of my music and all of my audio equipment with my ears. They are where the rubber meets the road. Numbers on a sheet of paper are nice to verify what I can and can't hear, but ultimately, all I care is if stuff sounds good to my ears. If the mathematics and published authorities back that up, great.

 

[castleofargh]

Not sure I agree with the easiness of a proper listening test for DACs. The average audiophile on the forum will usually need to procure some extra gear to implement a fast enough switch, and to very closely match the volumes(in case it's needed). Then if we're talking about using something like a phone against a computer+DAC, the matter of synchronizing the tracks is not easy. The "good enough" by ear is probably not good enough(same as with volume matching). On some devices, moving to another track or just going in a loop at the end of it, causes a different delay. Some DACs are slower than others by a bunch of samples every minutes, if we take a long time relying on the original sync(like creating a super long test file so we don't have to worry about getting out of sync all the time) it seems possible to start noticing the delay from the clocks after a while in some worst case scenarios where many people get to take the test on the same rig.
And those are just some of the issues I've had to deal with myself, there are probably other problems I have yet to find out about.

Of course if the question is to know if some difference will bother you while playing music casually, then the answer is almost always no with DACs. Because we're then wondering if anything objectionable will be noticed under some of the worst testing conditions possible:
casual listening
music as test signal(often making subjects notice something only when it's a magnitude louder than what they'd notice with the right test signal)
no reference to switch with

 

[bigshot]

Not sure I agree with the easiness of a proper listening test for DACs.

No, I think your only disagreement would be with the definition of "proper". If someone is doing a test for their own edification, it doesn't require laboratory standards. Check your OCD at the door! All you need to do is eliminate bias with blind testing (easy), switch directly between inputs and balance levels (a couple of inexpensive preamps will do the trick). If you take care of the lion's share of the potential problems, it doesn't matter if you're off a little one way or the other. You're going to find out pretty quick if it really matters or not. If you can sorta hear something... maybe... if you strain real hard... and worked super hard on refining the test... it flat out doesn't matter for the purposes of listening to music in the home. We all know that there are differences between how DACs measure. The only question is "Will it mess up me listening to music in my living room with my equipment?" Finding that out just needs a blind test, with level matching using tones by ear, and a friend to flip the input switch back and forth for you. If everyone did just that, Sound Science would be the jumpin'est forum on Head-Fi and no one would be coming in here believing they can hear the unhearable.

 

[Harry Manback]

I find it amusing when an objectivist says a DAC sounds bad, but the measurements show only clarity in the range of human hearing. You can't have you cake and eat it too! If there is something wrong with a dac in the audible range, it should show up on the measurements.

I think today, 99% of any perceived difference is due to the DAC output stage, and not the chip.

For headphones, I now mostly use a $9 Apple Lightning dongle. It sounds just as good as anything else I've listened to. It makes me kind of mad at myself for wasting money on equipment, but an education always costs money.

 

[Steve999]

I don’t think you‘ll find an informed objectivist that says a DAC sounds “bad.” Unless they are presented with the very unusual case where the DAC is super-weird or just plain broken. I think you’ll find objectivists who go chasing rainbows for the best-measuring DAC, and spend an arm and a leg on it, but intellectually they will know and even argue ardently that under normal listening conditions, even for critical music listening, it sounds for all practical purposes the same as the cheapest mainstream DAC on the market. They just want the best-measuring one they can afford, or at a given price point, well, because DAC. It can seem just as irrational and to the the same end result as the “subjectivist” view—spending a whole lot more money for no audible benefit. But they are choosing to do so on a more factually accurate basis, even self-mockingly at times.

Currently listening via what is probably a $2 DAC chip in my receiver. . .

 

[bfreedma]

I don’t think you‘ll find an informed objectivist that says a DAC sounds “bad.” Unless they are presented with the very unusual case where the DAC is super-weird or just plain broken. I think you’ll find objectivists who go chasing rainbows for the best-measuring DAC, and spend an arm and a leg on it, but intellectually they will know and even argue ardently that under normal listening conditions, even for critical music listening, it sounds for all practical purposes the same as the cheapest mainstream DAC on the market. They just want the best-measuring one they can afford, or at a given price point, well, because DAC. It can seem just as irrational and to the the same end result as the “subjectivist” view—spending a whole lot more money for no audible benefit. But they are choosing to do so on a more factually accurate basis, even self-mockingly at times.

Currently listening via what is probably a $16 DAC chip in my receiver. . .

if you still have the same receiver, the DAC chip is around $2 at the purchase volume likely in place for a big electronics vendor. Under $4 for one unit.

You can always upgrade to a $16 DAC in a future purchase!