Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

DAC blind test: NO audible difference whatsoever
DAC blind test: NO audible difference whatsoever
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 20th July 2018, 07:37 PM   #1891
00940 is offline 00940  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
00940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Liège
Simple: I know I'm listening to 24/192. I know it must be superior. I'm feeling good about it. I'm more relaxed listening to it. I thus prefer it.

The ABX effort is nice and indeed proves he can differentiate between various operation points of his gear. It is however unproved that it has any correlation at all with his earlier preferences.

Edit. It also shows that it's real hard to differentiate small differences leading to no obvious artefacts (surprised?) and that one can rationalise something as better when it might in fact be less accurate. The jury is still out on whether this is due to a more pleasing distortion pattern or the need to harmonise our knowledge.
__________________
All that is excessive is insignificant. Talleyrand

Last edited by 00940; 20th July 2018 at 07:45 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 07:40 PM   #1892
mmerrill99 is offline mmerrill99
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00940 View Post
Simple: I know I'm listening to 24/192. I know it must be superior. I'm feeling good about it. I'm more relaxed listening to it. I thus prefer it.

The ABX effort is nice and indeed proves he can differentiate between various operation points of his gear. It is however unproved that it has any correlation at all with his earlier preferences.
As I edited my previous post while you were writing this, I'll just repeat what I said in my edit:

Quote:
am I correct in thinking that you want your cake & eat it too? First, you contend that sighted preference might be difficult; then you contend that sighted preference is because of bias. Do you know that an ABX positive result 'proves' that it is not bias?? I really can't fathom the pretzel like logic that is continually displayed here?
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 07:48 PM   #1893
00940 is offline 00940  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
00940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Liège
Not when multiple factors are entangled.
__________________
All that is excessive is insignificant. Talleyrand
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 07:48 PM   #1894
mmerrill99 is offline mmerrill99
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00940 View Post
Not when multiple factors are entangled.
Please detail the "multiple factors"

Let me just reproduce a recent post of yours from another thread "What kind of evidence do you consider as sufficient?" about blind test evidence which you consider sufficient

Quote:
First of, a claim must be made. It means the testing starts with someone who claims to be able to hear something in sighting listening with a particular system.

If we're speaking "evidence", then the factor under test has to be isolated as much as possible. It has to mean blind testing, keeping the system under test as similar as possible to the one that allowed a claim to be made.

I'm not very strict on how "blindness" is achieved. But if the test has to convice people, then it must involve a fair third party (with no particular interest in the outcome) to control the process.

And finally, the test has to be documented, so it can be reproduced.

It has been made clear that blind testing is stressful but I don't see how to avoid its use. Restricting the test to a very particular claim (allowing for training if needed) and allowing the person taking the test as much familiarity with the test setup as he wants might help.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 07:56 PM   #1895
00940 is offline 00940  Belgium
diyAudio Member
 
00940's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Liège
The main problem is that the formation of the preference is unclear (it probably wasn't made on upsampled files though) and that the test system likely creates a difference (typically higher distortion) that is detected by the ABX but might not be the factor at the origin of the preference (might it be bias or other more valid reasons).
__________________
All that is excessive is insignificant. Talleyrand
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 08:19 PM   #1896
mmerrill99 is offline mmerrill99
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00940 View Post
The main problem is that the formation of the preference is unclear (it probably wasn't made on upsampled files though)
Please quote the evidence you have for this?
Quote:
and that the test system likely creates a difference (typically higher distortion) that is detected by the ABX
It's the same hardware used for both sighted listening & ABX testing - so your contention is that Foobar ABX is creating distortions that aren't there in sighted listening through the same equipment? Got some evidence?
Quote:
but might not be the factor at the origin of the preference (might it be bias or other more valid reasons).
So, you've built a strawman with "probably", "likely" "might be" & you talk about "multiple factors being entangled"
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 08:24 PM   #1897
Xoc1 is offline Xoc1  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Xoc1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Devon UK
I have followed this thread from the beginning - While progressing on a digital audio journey of my own.
I started with a 18 year old Arcam CD player with extensive modifications.
I built a Cheap Chinese Ebay DAC kit with as many tweaks as DIYaudio could provide and liked it so much that It gave me the motivation to go further.
I now have a Cyrus CDT digital only CD player, and a Chord 2 Qute DAC.
The Cyrus CD source does not use the normal error correction algorithms used with CD, and the Chord is based on a Field Programmable Gate Array so does not use a normal commercial DAC chip. The DAC also takes the digital output from the TV and a PC.
I'm very happy with the performance of the of the digital sources.
And the acid test? My family don't really give a damn about audio BS but I know that they are happier with the audio environment that they now have - What else matters?
Cheap digital sources are a godsend - they have made a radical difference to audio. They are so good that far more consideration needs to be made to the amplification and speakers.
But I am convinced that differences do exist in digital and they are audible!
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th July 2018, 08:43 PM   #1898
mmerrill99 is offline mmerrill99
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00940 View Post
......

Edit. It also shows that it's real hard to differentiate small differences leading to no obvious artefacts (surprised?) and that one can rationalise something as better when it might in fact be less accurate. The jury is still out on whether this is due to a more pleasing distortion pattern or the need to harmonise our knowledge.
I see you edited while I was posting
I posted this real-world ABX example to show what's involved in ABX testing - it's not the simplistic 'ears only' scenario that is usually portrayed. You argue everything else but this central point

The usual defense for ABX testing before preference testing is to ascertain IF a difference can actually be detected - you now try to turn this on its head by attempting to assign to ABX testing something it was never claimed for it.

As I said the pretzel-like convoluted logic on display is breathtaking
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2018, 01:57 PM   #1899
Max Headroom is online now Max Headroom  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Max Headroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: West Australia, near to the beach, natural ambient sounds mostly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoc1 View Post
....Cheap digital sources are a godsend - they have made a radical difference to audio. They are so good that far more consideration needs to be made to the amplification and speakers.
But I am convinced that differences do exist in digital and they are audible!
Yes, it is quite amazing what digital SQ can be had for very little nowadays.
You bet there are differences in digital....oscillator stability/spectrum is the first thing to address.


Dan.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


DAC blind test: NO audible difference whatsoeverHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will a small cap value difference be audible? jb0194 Multi-Way 2 8th February 2012 05:39 PM
Audible difference between DTS and Dolby? arjscott Everything Else 3 1st February 2007 12:33 PM
Which caps make the most audible difference? TDWesty Solid State 5 31st January 2007 05:49 PM
BrianGT Basic v/s Premium - any audible difference ? percy Chip Amps 1 4th September 2004 03:18 PM
RC Tolerance -- audible difference r_s_dhar Analogue Source 6 11th August 2003 07:47 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:52 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki