[KyPeN]

Let me start this off by stating that I understand that switching between a high end amp and a perfectly capable "low end" amp makes no discernible difference, despite (potentially) superior specs.  Same with DACs, cables, etc.  I'm currently listening to my LCD-3s on a $300 (a couple years ago) Audio GD NGD-12 via USB to Spotify and compared it side-by-side with a $4000 McIntosh and heard no difference.  I get that.  
 
However, I got to thinking if anyone has done any kind of study on several mechanically superior but indiscernible upgrades amounting to a consistently perceivable impact?  For instance, I have my LCD-3s and let's leave those constant.  $500 cables on my system wouldn't do anything at all.  Switching from MP3 -v 0 to FLAC wouldn't be perceivable.  Neither would upgrading to that $4k Mc.  Or getting the latest and greatest in DAC technology, whatever it is.  But, what if I did ALL of those upgrades?  Can several small, unnoticeable upgrades amount to a real upgrade?   
 
Any thoughts?  

 

[SunshineReggae]

No, because if something can't improve the sound, it simply can't improve the sound.
 
If you have a transparent dac, a transparent amp that delivers enough power, normal cables and good headphones, the only real way to get improvement at all is by either DSP or better headphones.
 
You have to understand that DACs and amps improving sound quality is a fallacy. Same for cables. It's because it's not their job to create a certain quality of the sound. It's the headphone's and the music file's job to create the quality of the sound. It's the DAC's and amp's job to move that quality from the music file to the headphones without loss of said quality. They can't magically add quality in some way. They can only take away from it.

 

[castleofargh]

adding 2 or 5 inaudible noises have little chances to make for one audible noise. one noise at -96db and a distortion at -105db wont magically make something at -30db in your music. so overall, trying to get the very best of everything will in most cases push something already inaudible on a transparent system, down to an even more inaudible level. having an actual effect on your hears of "nope".
so I guess what you need to make sure of, is if what you have is really audibly transparent.
 
now for real audio improvement, just raising the volume level on your LCD3 can lower most of the headphone's distortion to -50 or -60db. something real, something possibly audible.
so technically, listening to something cheap but transparent(and with enough driving power obviously)+LCD3 at say 100db or 105db will completely humiliate the best system in the world+LCD3 at 70 or 75db. at least when it comes to the total distortions in what you're listening to.
sorry for your hears, not for your wallet. I would usually tell people who want actual improvement to invest in headphones or speakers, but the LCD3 is already a good headphone. so maybe buy a good chair, or a nice whiskey. that should make a transparent sound even better ^_^.
 
 
 
now mp3 can sometimes be audibly different(usually it's hard to tell, but it happens) so that's another story.

 

[esldude]

Well it depends.  If your total system is truly audibly transparent, no upgrades can improve upon that. 
 
If you had some part making your system short of full transparency then yes.  Improvement A, might not be audible, improvement B might not be audible, but improvement A and B might be audible.  The easiest to consider would be frequency response.  Maybe your source is -1 db in the upper edge of the top octave.  With music that might not be audible with comparison to something fully flat for a source.  Now perhaps the pre-amp is also -1db, which again might not be audible with a flat pre-amp.  And then your amp to repeat is -1 db at the very top.  Vs a flat amp maybe inaudible.  But replace all three slightly drooping top end components with flat components, and you are comparing -3db with flat and it might well be audible.  
 
But don't go thinking all these questionable upgrades will add up when they don't work individually.  For instance there is no wire upgrade that will do anything as long as the LCR components are fine.  Wire simply has residuals buried well below any system.  They are a non-factor. 
 
For distortion it isn't hard to see if components are inaudible or not.  And with noise pretty much the same.  As already said, if your system is transparent then there is no upgrade for that. 

 

[ab initio]

Find the difference between the frequency response of each component you're swapping. Sum up the differences in the frequency responses (in dB) and look at the overall change. If the overall changes happen to constructively add up anywhere by more than 1 dB, it is possible you might be able to ABX the difference under controlled circumstances.
 
By that point, you should think: (e.g.,) "hey, if I swap out all my gear from source to headphone cable and can achieve a difference of 1.5 dB in the 20-40Hz range, how much does that cost me and how does that compare to trying different headphones where the differences in frequency response can vary by 10s of dB?"
 

 Can several small, unnoticeable upgrades amount to a real upgrade?   

 
Technically, yes. If for some band of the spectrum 3 component swaps each change the output by +0.5 dB, the end result is a 1.5dB change
in that band while you might not notice a 0.5 dB difference, you're more likely to detect a 1.5dB difference.
 
What parts are you planning on changing that just so happen to have the perfect storm where the slight differences from the old components all happen to line up to generate a large overall change? Seems pretty unlikely to me.
 
Cheers

 

[blades]

These days, electronics are all good enough that they don't degrade sound.  Sound quality is all in the transducers and room acoustics (or headphone acoustics.)

 

[haloxt]

  Let me start this off by stating that I understand that switching between a high end amp and a perfectly capable "low end" amp makes no discernible difference, despite (potentially) superior specs.  Same with DACs, cables, etc.  I'm currently listening to my LCD-3s on a $300 (a couple years ago) Audio GD NGD-12 via USB to Spotify and compared it side-by-side with a $4000 McIntosh and heard no difference.  I get that.  
 
However, I got to thinking if anyone has done any kind of study on several mechanically superior but indiscernible upgrades amounting to a consistently perceivable impact?  For instance, I have my LCD-3s and let's leave those constant.  $500 cables on my system wouldn't do anything at all.  Switching from MP3 -v 0 to FLAC wouldn't be perceivable.  Neither would upgrading to that $4k Mc.  Or getting the latest and greatest in DAC technology, whatever it is.  But, what if I did ALL of those upgrades?  Can several small, unnoticeable upgrades amount to a real upgrade?   
 
Any thoughts?  

 
Whenever I test the sound of a cable I always try to use long stock cables to compare. I even made a set of cannibalized power cables to be very long and thin to test against my set of barely bendable power cables. I figured if it was hard to hear the sound difference of a power cable, it would be easier if I swapped all five in my headphone audio chain with a particularly bad set.
 
As for people saying transparent this transparent that, should keep in mind a lot of audio equipment manufacturers, especially audiophile ones like Audio-GD, don't go for transparent this or transparent that. They tweak the sound so that their gear score horribly in actual measurements but sound good or sound "accurate" subjectively. If you ask the designer of your audio-gd nfb 12 what he thinks about the nfb 12 compared to, say, audio-gd's top of the line headphone audio chain (their power regenerator and totl transport too) that costs over twenty times more, he'd tell you the subjective sound difference is massive, and the measurement difference would be massive as well, because audio-gd gear have deliberately bad scores through subjective testing and tweaking, with their low, mid, and high end gear tweaked differently by ear for different purposes.

 

[Roly1650]

As for people saying transparent this transparent that, should keep in mind a lot of audio equipment manufacturers, especially audiophile ones like Audio-GD, don't go for transparent this or transparent that. They tweak the sound so that their gear score horribly in actual measurements but sound good or sound "accurate" subjectively. If you ask the designer of your audio-gd nfb 12 what he thinks about the nfb 12 compared to, say, audio-gd's top of the line headphone audio chain (their power regenerator and totl transport too) that costs over twenty times more, he'd tell you the subjective sound difference is massive, and the measurement difference would be massive as well, because audio-gd gear have deliberately bad scores through subjective testing and tweaking, with their low, mid, and high end gear tweaked differently by ear for different purposes.

By definition, if it measures "horribly" it can't also be "accurate", subjectively or otherwise.. Audio-GD use 3 manufacturers dac chips, all of which are audibly transparent according to the manufacturers spec sheets. So are you saying that Audio-GD progressively hobble the performance of some of their equipment, from low end to high end, or high end to low end? Why would anyone want a piece of equipment "voiced" by the manufacturer to less than the best that that equipment can give? Hi-end = lo-fi maybe?

This from the Audio-GD website, describing the Master 7, which even allowing for English being his second language is pretty inventive:

"The newly designed DSP processor is soldered on the main board directly for best signal transfer and faster data processing and clocking, it brings the detail, transparency and dynamics to another level over all other audio-GD dacs."

There just aren't levels of transparency, just like there aren't levels of pregnancy, it's either transparent or it isn't and measurements will tell you that.

 

[nick_charles]

   
... a lot of audio equipment manufacturers, especially audiophile ones like Audio-GD, don't go for transparent this or transparent that. They tweak the sound so that their gear score horribly in actual measurements but sound good or sound "accurate" subjectively.

 
Accurate subjectively is a bit of an oxymoron. Many people think that LP is "subjectively" more accurate than CD when it has far less potential for accuracy in the signal theory sense of the word.
 
I am always amused by the reviews in Stereophile, every now and again JA will measure a product that one of his staff drool over and conclude that it is technically terrible. The latest example is this http://www.stereophile.com/content/lector-strumenti-audio-digitube-s-192-da-converter-measurements but there have been even more terrible examples. Sometimes JA asks "does x sound good despite measuring bad or because it measures bad". I think this is the wrong question, to me there are far more interesting questions to ask
 
1. Are reviewers incapable of detecting truly incompetent design i.e apalling levels of distortion that would not meet even the comical DIN 45500 standards of the 60s/70s - When Sean Olive compared the critical listening abilities of different populations even Hifi salesmen did better than the professional reviewers he tested
2. If truly awful kit can sound acceptable in sighted tests then maybe our ability to detect gross distortion is a lot worse than we like to think it is - maybe professional reviewers should themselves be tested for their capability rather than just taking their word for it
3. The evidence we have to date (though admittedly not too much exists) indicates that blind tests are more sensitive than sighted tests why not just hide the identity of items under review until after the review - a sophomore level of knowledge of psychology will tell you that it is easy to be influenced by non audio variables such as appearance, brand and price, in fact some of the worst measuring kit Mags have reviewed is the most blingy (?)

 

[KyPeN]

"The newly designed DSP processor is soldered on the main board directly for best signal transfer and faster data processing and clocking, it brings the detail, transparency and dynamics to another level over all other audio-GD dacs."

 

 
This is hilarious to me for multiple reasons.  First of all, they're subtly trash talking their own "lower" end products.  Secondly, what does soldering the chip directly on the board have to do with anything at all?  The leads on the board are going to be so much thinner than any connection, by definition.  Strong solder points have nothing to do with sound or affecting performance at all.  It has everything to do with creating a strong connection so if you move your desk or drop the device, the chip doesn't fall off the board.  It's about QA, not Q.  I heard this same BS from a salesman trying to get me to go all in on a Linn system.  The bookshelf speakers were very nice, about $2000. Whole system?  $6500 with swappable DAC boards, custom OS, and all the trimmies.  I'm going to be writing to the owner of the shop about how this kind of bullcrap makes it impossible for new people to approach higher end audio.
 
On a related note, I went to a meet yesterday.  I was told that investing in the Abyss orthos would be a waste of time because I'll never "outgrow" my Audeze LCD-3 with my current amplifiers unless I'm willing to invest another $3000 in tubes yada yada.  What does that even mean?  I didn't like the Abyss because they were uncomfortable, but how do you "outgrow" a pair of headphones with an amplifier?  

 

[nick_charles]

   
What does that even mean?  I didn't like the Abyss because they were uncomfortable, but how do you "outgrow" a pair of headphones with an amplifier?  

 
This is audiophile myth #15a - that your other gear is now so good that the headphones are now the audio bottleneck #15b is the "do not scale" myth that some headphones will get better with better sources/amps bit some will not...#15c (related) is that even a perfectly transparent amp with negligible distortion, flat FR and more than adequate voltage swing will not allow headphones X to realize their full potential unless supported by something much more expensive

 

[bigshot]

I love salesmen like that. It's not enough to get a sale of a pair of headphones, they have to convince you to buy an amp too.
 
I have very nice headphones and a very nice headphone amp that was designed for them. The cans sound the same plugged straight into my iMac as it does through the headphone amp.

 

[i019791]

  Let me start this off by stating that I understand that switching between a high end amp and a perfectly capable "low end" amp makes no discernible difference, despite (potentially) superior specs.  Same with DACs, cables, etc.  I'm currently listening to my LCD-3s on a $300 (a couple years ago) Audio GD NGD-12 via USB to Spotify and compared it side-by-side with a $4000 McIntosh and heard no difference.  I get that.  
 
However, I got to thinking if anyone has done any kind of study on several mechanically superior but indiscernible upgrades amounting to a consistently perceivable impact?  For instance, I have my LCD-3s and let's leave those constant.  $500 cables on my system wouldn't do anything at all.  Switching from MP3 -v 0 to FLAC wouldn't be perceivable.  Neither would upgrading to that $4k Mc.  Or getting the latest and greatest in DAC technology, whatever it is.  But, what if I did ALL of those upgrades?  Can several small, unnoticeable upgrades amount to a real upgrade?   
 
Any thoughts?  

I am not aware of any Audio GD NGD-12 and I have not heard any Mcintosh.
If in reality you have the Audio GD NFB-12, I have heard clearly better gear. 
I suggest you try the Chord Hugo.

 

[KyPeN]

  I am not aware of any Audio GD NGD-12 and I have not heard any Mcintosh.
If in reality you have the Audio GD NFB-12, I have heard clearly better gear. 
I suggest you try the Chord Hugo.

My mistake.  Typo.
 
Can you define how an amp make the sound better?  How did you do the comparison?  Blind?  Same pair of headphones with levels matched across the amplifiers using the same source?  If so, you should drop the $300 (or so) for the NFB-12, buy whatever amp is "clearly better," and collect your check.  

 

[SunshineReggae]

That chord hugo seems like the biggest scam ever. I can't think of any condition where a 'reference grade dac' has to cost 2500 bucks. Sure it's portable. But who would use such a device out on the street? That's crazy. A fiio e7 is portable too and under many circumstances is reference grade.
 
Good thing it can support 384 kHz sampling rate though, for those high definition recordings. Works best with a couple of silver dragon cables.