[Mach-X]

 
So you honestly believe there is no difference? And then further go on to say that actually listening to these devices proves nothing? Ok, I think we'll just leave it at that for Mach-X....

 
As was previously stated, solid state dacs that output perfectly linear, distortion free sound cost pennies to manufacture. This isn't my "theory", it is scientifically measured fact. Now if you are going to tell me that these 'audiophile' daps are doing something OTHER than outputting linear sound (euphonic distortion/eq sweetening), I will buy that, although I would consider that an undesired behaviour, considering an amp/dac's job is fairly simple. The only device I ever used that did something other than this was my first android phone, a Motorola Charm that produced a quite audible buzz while listening to music and using the screen. Also what I said was SIGHTED listening proves nothing. All human beings are subject to expectation bias, if you believe that you are not, then this discussion can go no further for obvious reasons.
 
A few years ago I had a Samsung Galaxy, you know the ones with the Wolfson DAC and Class 'H' headphone amp. After installing voodoo sound I ran around telling everybody who would listen (and some who wouldn't) how amazing it sounded. As I liked trying out different firmwares, it was inevitable that one day I forgot to reinstall voodoo. I never noticed and still believed how amazing my device sounded, way superior to those horrible sounding iDevices because that's what Mr. Curio was telling me. Imagine my surprise when I finally DID notice and then after reinstalling I did back to back listening with and without. Couldn't hear a difference. All that stuff about unlocking the analog amp and oversampling and direct DAC was boola boola, at least as far as my ears were concerned. Would it measure differently? Who knows? Probably, but it certainly wasn't an AUDIBLE difference. It wasn't any louder, cleaner or more magical sounding. In fact, after discovering all of this, the sound quality became inferior to my ears, demonstrating the power of subjective listening. Then it was back to back with my sansa clip+. All the differences I swore up and down I heard before on my Galaxy (wider soundstage, deeper bass, higher highs) were gone because they NEVER EXISTED.
 
The comment about 'my world' is rather insulting as it implies that I am stupid or somehow have inferior hearing abilities. I passed the golden ears test with $30 headphones, if that means anything, although with practice I assume that most people with normal hearing could as well.
 
I want to add that what I am saying hear has nothing to do with needing an amp to drive high impedance headphones, (obviously an unamped ipod can't drive 600 ohm Beyerdynamics), I am assuming normal conditions within spec.

 

[eke2k6]

I think the problem here is that there is on side who thinks "different" is better, while another thinks there is no difference at all.
 
All I'll say is that, from my experience with various DAPs, the difference almost always comes from sound signature.
 
Most people here have experience with TOTL headphones and iems. If you've heard enough of them, you'll see recurrent themes where one phone sacrifices one aspect of SQ to do a certain thing better than most other phones can. Even so, both phones are roughly equal in actual SQ reproduction if you spend th time getting the tuning right. Raw detailing (not from tipped up treble) is usually the same, soundstage sizes can be somewhat equalized, like I managed to do when I EQ'ed the 1plus2 and ASG-2 to the same sound signature, and clarity is a matter of tuning. You can trade things like timbre and heft for clarity and shimmer, etc.
 
With DAPs, I have never heard on surpass my iphone 4, regardless of price. I don't even find my iphone to sound better than my clip+. Of course, driving power is a factor, but within their capabilities I find them equal. My philosophy on DAPs is that as long as things like distortion are kept in check, it's all up to the voicing of the DAP. That' why I don't bother listing my source gear in my profile, whereas I list my phones.
 
I personally think it's all up to the quality of the files you load on your DAP. If you have a noisy file with poor mastering, no $3,000 DAP or iem will fix that. I don't mean that hi-res or DSD "crap" either (sorry, I feel very strongly about it ever since I opened a few albums with hex editors and found hundreds of megabytes of zeroes). A well mastered file on a good phone with a good, neutral DAP is all you need IMO.
 
Either way, headphones and IEMs make FAAAR more of a difference in sound than most amps or DAPs or DACs.

 

[fumanchu]

Can someone help me find a computer program to analyze my choices to find the most realistic sound? In that the sound is computer generated, what program is best suited for determining the very closest sound to "being there"?

 

[DMinor]

What's the score now?

 

[truckdriver]

  What's the score now?

 
I think it's just a scrimmage between members of the same team so they may not be keeping score.
 
My first portable player was a Sony Walkman cassette player so it seem "poetic" (with the Sony NWZ ZX1 in my inbox)  that my first "audiophile grade portable DAP" will be (wait for it---) the HiFiMAN HM-802. Wish me luck in my entry to "audio nirvana".

 

[DMinor]

   
I think it's just a scrimmage between members of the same team so they may not be keeping score.

 
That's the sad state of the game and what a waste.

 

[Gintaras]

so in that argument a Marantz CD63 CD player sounds the same as Linn CD12?

The source is the most important and most difficult to get right, I agree all properly 
designed amplifiers should sound the same, a straight wire with gain, but they don't.

A well designed NAD Integrated does not sound like Naim 55/500 amps

nonono... you are very mistaken mate, all these engineers making pricey amps and all us buying them are plain dumb.
moreover did not you know all violins cut from wood must sound the same? Stradivari or Amati were pure charlatans just selling overpriced wood.... same goes for Steinway and Faziolli grand pianos, i simply think all those great pianists playing them are just wasting their time and money because any piano must sound the same if perfectly assembled

moreover we all overpay for Michelin restaurants when the same food can be had in next to you McDonalds.

Aah....... I must apologise for all nonsense i posted here about my gear and not my gear, and i know what i will do tomorrow, i will grab all my gear and put into sink but i will not tell anyone the location

ahhhhhhhh ...back to listening music, have to visit a doctor who can inspect my faulty ears because they can hear differences between different DAPs, god bless i have good medical insurance.

 

[HWTest]

Can someone help me find a computer program to analyze my choices to find the most realistic sound? In that the sound is computer generated, what program is best suited for determining the very closest sound to "being there"?

Try Audio DiffMaker.
 
It is a very good tool for comparing the sound of DACs, DAPs, CDPs, cables ...

 

[Hutnicks]

  Try Audio DiffMaker.
 
It is a very good tool for comparing the sound of DACs, DAPs, CDPs, cables ...

+1 for audio diffmaker
 
You can also try FourierWorks
 
And I would suggest downloading the Audiocheck Ultimate Headphone test wav files.
 
http://www.audiocheck.net/soundtests_headphones.php

 

[james444]

moreover did not you know all violins cut from wood must sound the same? Stradivari or Amati were pure charlatans just selling overpriced wood....

 
Exactly.

 

 

[Gintaras]

Exactly.  

 

[Gintaras]

Guys, if a person cannot hear differences it makes no sense to recommend any tools. You know one can play piano and hear differences between upright and grand, another person cannot play no matter how good you teach him, he will learn to strike keys but that will not help playing technique and expression.

So we had some fun but lets leave it here and move on.

 

[pietcux]

But.....

 

[HWTest]

Guys, if a person cannot hear differences it makes no sense to recommend any tools.

 
It makes sense, if the tools amplifies the differences and makes them easy noticeable even for an untrained ear.
It's like a magnifying glass for the sight, it makes sense even if your sight is impaired.

 

[Gintaras]

It makes sense, if the tools amplifies the differences and makes them easy noticeable even for an untrained ear.
It's like a magnifying glass for the sight, it makes sense even if your sight is impaired.