Sound Quality Vs. Measurements - Page 245 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

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 16th February 2012, 10:37 AM   #2441
tvrgeek is offline tvrgeek  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Md
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShaman View Post
I was just looking at the measurements of AMR's DP-777 in the latest Stereophile and I can't help but compare them to those of the Weiss DAC-202 (published in the same magazine a couple of months ago).

Measured performance suggests the 202 is a clearly superior DAC.
Which part of the measurements, if any, could explain why AMR's approach to building a D/A converter might "sound better" than Weiss' to some listeners?
....
Not sure I am ready for $6000 DAC's, but the reviews finally point out some software that makes building a music server easier. No way would I put up with having to change software settings just to play a different format. That reminds me, I need to get around to improving the analog and power supply in my DAC.

Pet peeve: Too many units no longer fit on a bookshelf. Several of my systems are on 12 inch shelves. Even at that, I have to make right angle plugs or have routed cables out the side. Look inside and the box is almost empty; sometimes not even used to separate the transformer from the signal. Marketing arrogance " mine is bigger" mentality. This has prevented me from buying several new pieces. Almost don't know what to do when I run out of old CD players.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:07 AM   #2442
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 105
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek View Post
Pet peeve: Too many units no longer fit on a bookshelf. Several of my systems are on 12 inch shelves. Even at that, I have to make right angle plugs or have routed cables out the side. Look inside and the box is almost empty; sometimes not even used to separate the transformer from the signal. Marketing arrogance " mine is bigger" mentality. This has prevented me from buying several new pieces. Almost don't know what to do when I run out of old CD players.
Excellent points - I have a plan to build my business not on traditional audio components (source, pre, amp), but rather on modules which can be interconnected to build systems (or components if desired). Perhaps the building blocks will just be PCBs (credit card sized) which link together simply. Any interest?
__________________
I have the advantage of having found out how hard it is to get to really know something... how easy it is to make mistakes and fool yourself. - Richard Feynman
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:30 AM   #2443
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
I'm not sure where beliefs come into this.
Here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
I'm making a leap of faith
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
<edit> As regards to your remarks about absence of 'structured evidence to justify my approach' - why would you feel there's a need for me to provide such? The market is the final arbiter - if my approach sucks in terms of sound quality, I have no doubt the market will let me know by voting with its collective wallet.
That's a marketing/sales driven approach of building gear which I must say I do not agree with. I would rather invest in gear I know have been built with an engineering-based approach.
But I'm just one customer and perhaps the majority does not care for that.

Still, I do not think it's interesting to focus on how anyone chooses to run his company or make a living.
It's better to stay on a technical level and that's why I asked for some form of evidence.
I would like to think of us more like engineers/scientists/hobbyists/inquiring minds/whatever-label-one-wants-for-himself who seek to correlate sound quality vs measurements, not businessmen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
I am neither interested, nor do I have the time to put together a complete list of references in support of all the many facets and aspects of my views, where they are backed by work of others (some is based on personal experience and evaluation).

If you ask more specifically with regards to a specific view, I can provide references.
One at a time would be an effective approach.
A couple of examples...

When telling Bruno Putzeys his math in the feedback article is wrong, I think it's reasonable to expect you'll provide the correct math.
It'd be nice both for the progression of the discussion (so that he has something meaningful to respond to) as well as for third parties to understand whether current knowledge and understanding of established engineers like Bruno is lacking or if it's just his or your math that are lacking.

When telling Dustin Forman of ESS (the brain behind the Sabre DAC chips, more or less), that noise shaping is bad, it'd be nice to provide some evidence as to why he's wrong when saying:

Quote:
I could go on forever about noise shaping and how cool it is, and how it shows up in placed we would never suspect, but I will leave it at that for now.
I'm not talking about building yourself a better DAC chip than the ESS - even if you could this is not part of your job description - but any solid evidence would do.
Especially since Mr. Forman, a man who has proven that he knows his game, admits:

Quote:
Noise shaping took me a long time to wrap my head around, but I think I have it figured out.
It'd be nice both for the progression of the discussion (so that he has something meaningful to respond to) as well as for third parties reading your (Audioasylum in this case) discussion to understand who has actually figured out noise shapping and who hasn't.

In both cases I'm assuming you're not withholding "trade secrets" (i.e. "I could publish those papers but I won't because then I'll have more good sounding competition") and you participate with the evident (at least to me) enthusiasm of someone who's genuinely interested in these topics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
If for example you needed some background on how much distortion speakers produce, I can give a specific reference or raft thereof.
Not all speakers, nor speaker drivers for that matter, produce the same levels of distortion.
I would assume someone who builds, say, an amp or a source component would aim for the best performance possible in all areas without using "bad speakers", "bad amps", "bad listening rooms" or "middle-aged+ listeners who cannot hear above 16kHz" as an excuse.

I also assume that you could give the DP-777 higher resolution than its current 16bits if you wanted to.
But why didn't you?
It's not really convincing to say that a "20-bit true resolution" version of the DP-777 would sound exactly the same as the current 16bit one since speaker/room effects dominate in all or most systems.
On the other hand it'd make sense to say that in order to get 20bit or even 18bit true resolution you'd have to compromise other areas of performance that are perhaps more audible (thus the end result would sound worse) - but then it'd be good to know which areas will be affected and why that would have a negative impact in sound quality.

In any case, I think we can all agree it's not useful to consider our arguable lack of absolute sound quality/measurements correlation in some areas to be a "free-to-ignore-even-the-most-basic-engineering-principles-and-all-measurements" card and market whatever abomination of a design one can come up with as a high-fidelity component.
I'm not referring to Thorsten's gear but "source" components like Zanden and "loudspeakers" like Rehdeko come to mind...
Or perhaps Zanden can say they built that thing the way they did because measurements don't tell anything about sound quality and, anyway, there are speakers like the Rehdeko out there!
__________________
"You have a hierarchy: a mathematician, a physicist (which is a failed mathematician), and an engineer (which is a failed physicist)." - Andrew Jones

Last edited by TheShaman; 16th February 2012 at 11:40 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:34 AM   #2444
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek View Post
Marketing arrogance " mine is bigger" mentality. This has prevented me from buying several new pieces. Almost don't know what to do when I run out of old CD players.
If you're going to charge a premium price, it has to look and feel expensive. That means big. Many decades ago, I worked with a company that distributed a high end tube preamp with a switching power supply. Despite good performance and great versatility (as well as rave reviews in the then-underground press), it didn't go flying off the shelves like Audio Research did. Some inquiries to dealers and some direct observation provided the answer- when the salesman wasn't looking, the prospective customer would almost always lift the front of the preamp to judge its heft. Ours was quite light, Audio Research's was quite heavy. The marketing approach: add a lead sheet to the bottom, then talk about special alloys used in aerospace for damping of vibrations. If the Internet were around in those days, one could plug it relentlessly on discussion boards to generate and enhance the "buzz" necessary for fashion-oriented markets.

CD players are obsolete. Use a computer.
__________________
The more you pay for it, the less inclined you are to doubt it.- George Smiley
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:34 AM   #2445
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvv View Post
Wayne, I don't keep a tab on who did what, when and how, but I seem to remeber some writers, like Tolstoy and Dostoyevski, a series of classic music composers, and so forth. I seem to remeber a Dr Pavlov, who "invented" the Pavlov reflex, used today to the hilt by the US adevrtising, and so forth.

Ultimately, if memory serves, the first man in space was one major Yuri Gagarin, was he not?

Let's not get into that sort of thing, Wayne, not here, or we would necessarily have to bring in those people who claim and show evidence that the US astronuts never really landed on the Moon until much later than advertised. Some even poke fun at this, like in the James Bond movie "Diamonds are forever".

This would also necessarily start invoking of names, which may mean nothing to most of us, but were people whose feats in their fields are considered most important by people in those fields.

Just a small example - today's debate of whether we are globally warming or heading into a new ice age (which does not have to be taken literally) has been foreseen and a schedule worked out in 1901 by a Serbian scientist called Milutin Milanković. Fortunately, he had a tendency to write everything down, so there is a volume of his works to check this up. The best thing is that everything DID go down EXACTLY as per his calculations. And he and his work are very well known in climatology, but to us, we never herad of him.

Besides, evaluating entire NATIONS is both ridiculous and mostly untrue, simply because nations are a living body, they change, they evolve, just as we as individuals should be doing as well. I would have thought we were past things like those pesky xxx, those stinking yyy, etc.
DVV all's good ,
Agree ..... I responded not started , I'm most interested in discussing amplifier topology and how we can all move ahead , more of your thoughts on psu design
Than on cultural superiority or lack thereof

I,m sure we could fill tons of pages laughing at such ......
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:39 AM   #2446
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
@Sy,

Cd players are obsolete due to downloads, not for those purchasing disc formats. I do agree this will be the case over the next couple of years as everyone moves to files instead of shipping discs ..
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:48 AM   #2447
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.wayne View Post
Cd players are obsolete due to downloads, not for those purchasing disc formats.
They're even obsolete for that.

When I moved to Austin, I calculated the cost of buying CD rackage and found that it greatly exceeded that of a large drive. So I got a terabyte drive and have been ripping CDs to it as I buy them, then put them in a box in the closet. My existing CDs are now nearly entirely ripped to the computer and boxed for storage. My CD player is in the closet under those boxes. That's the nice thing about digital- perfect archiving is trivially easy.
__________________
The more you pay for it, the less inclined you are to doubt it.- George Smiley
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:48 AM   #2448
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrgeek View Post
Not sure I am ready for $6000 DAC's, but the reviews finally point out some software that makes building a music server easier.
Music servers are now trivially easy.

Use J-River Media Centre correctly set up and suitable hardware.

Done.

Ciao T
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:51 AM   #2449
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 105
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShaman View Post
That's a marketing/sales driven approach of building gear which I must say I do not agree with. I would rather invest in gear I know have been built with an engineering-based approach.
Why would you see those two approaches as polar opposites? I seem them as two sides of one coin. Peter Drucker is my guru here, his saying that 'The purpose of business is to create a customer' nicely synthesizes for me the two complementary approaches. Marketing tells me what's the right product or service to design, engineering informs the design process so its done right.

Quote:
But I'm just one customer and perhaps the majority does not care for that.
I'm sure the majority does care which is why I'm not neglecting my engineering efforts.

Quote:
Still, I do not think it's interesting to focus on how anyone chooses to run his company or make a living.
It's better to stay on a technical level and that's why I asked for some form of evidence.
I gave you a description of the evidence of my ears. If you don't accept what someone perceives as evidence, then that's your business and probably does mean you'll not be one of my customers. My customers will 'listen, and see' to borrow a strap line from a former employer.

Quote:
I would like to think of us more like engineers/scientists/hobbyists/inquiring minds/whatever-label-one-wants-for-himself who seek to correlate sound quality vs measurements, not businessmen.
I'm an inquiring mind for sure - I'm also curious about what it takes to make a business run successfully.

Quote:
When telling Bruno Putzeys his math in the feedback article is wrong, I think it's reasonable to expect you'll provide the correct math.
I do agree with this. If you read my posts, particularly recent ones to Thorsten where he's disputed some points with me, I repeatedly ask for the reasoning. It rarely appears

Quote:
When telling Dustin Forman of ESS (the brain behind the Sabre DAC chips, more or less), that noise shaping is bad, it'd be nice to provide some evidence as to why he's wrong when saying:
Where have I said 'noise shaping is bad' please? I am saying I don't much care for the sound, that's something rather different. I'd be curious to ask, as Thorsten has just now, if he did rigorous listening tests when developing it. Perhaps sonic qualities weren't high up the list? If it was designed with THD and SNR as primary metrics, then its a splendid job, no doubt about it. Impeccable.

Quote:
In both cases I'm assuming you're not withholding "trade secrets" (i.e. "I could publish those papers but I won't because then I'll have more good sounding competition") and you participate with the evident (at least to me) enthusiasm of someone who's genuinely interested in these topics.
I'm not a believer in 'trade secrets' myself. You'll see if you read my posts I sometimes call Thorsten's bluff on that - so far he's not produced a reasonable justification for having them. But he's under no obligation to remain reasonable at all times. I entertain all curiosity-driven questions about my approach. Its all marketing after all
__________________
I have the advantage of having found out how hard it is to get to really know something... how easy it is to make mistakes and fool yourself. - Richard Feynman
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th February 2012, 11:54 AM   #2450
a.wayne is offline a.wayne  United States
Sin Bin
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Front Row Center
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
Excellent points - I have a plan to build my business not on traditional audio components (source, pre, amp), but rather on modules which can be interconnected to build systems (or components if desired). Perhaps the building blocks will just be PCBs (credit card sized) which link together simply. Any interest?
Maybe an age thing but I do not like little modules when purchasing hi-fi gear, especially amplifiers . There must be a certain size ,presence and associated build quality , I love retro gear for their functionability , abhor those one knob boxes....

With so much talk about feedback , I have yet to see adjustable feedback and bias switches on amplifiers, there's some marketing for yah ....
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide 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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Quality Control differences = variations in sound quality? KT Class D 3 4th June 2014 12:02 AM
Sound Card for Measurements Marik Solid State 2 2nd January 2012 08:59 PM
Sound Card Recommendations (For Audio Measurements) dchisholm Equipment & Tools 5 16th July 2011 09:40 AM
How to protect sound card during amp measurements? okapi Everything Else 13 2nd September 2008 03:06 PM
Sound cards - test and measurements jackinnj Everything Else 2 5th July 2003 03:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2