First you said they measured equally well, then you said one measured better than the other, now you are refusing to post your measurement numbers, is that correct?
No, actually I think you have the axe to grind. You keep coming after me, contradicting me, criticizing what I say, then when I respond in kind you say its me that's the problem? Its always you who starts it, then when I respond you try to play innocent. Eventually the powers that be will figure out your game.
Getting back to what U101222 and I were discussing, since we don't have exact numbers for bohrok2610 dac and since his story keeps changing, maybe we can take some hypothetical problem instead?
Suppose we have a Topping D30 that measures, I dunno, what number would say is most important, SINAD, THD+N, something else?
Also, what number would say is 'below audibility' where proof of sounding different would be required? Thanks 🙂
Suppose we have a Topping D30 that measures, I dunno, what number would say is most important, SINAD, THD+N, something else?
Also, what number would say is 'below audibility' where proof of sounding different would be required? Thanks 🙂
Honestly i came here because I am perplexed on what makes a DAC sound good.
And to learn
please be respectful of me and that I don’t know electronics and explain to me what makes a DAC sound good with todays technology
I have an older Marantz HD DAC1 and I have yet to have found a DAC that sounds better than it.
and I’ve tried many.
I’ve said this again on here before , I am a musician of over 35 years so yeah I can hear the differences in how instruments should sound.
so why have all these DACs I’ve tried not sounded as good as my Marantz HD DAC1?
topping D90SE
VENUS II
topping D30pro
mojo1
mojo2
schitt bifrost 2/64
benchmark DAC3
RME ADI 2
thanks in advance.
And to learn
please be respectful of me and that I don’t know electronics and explain to me what makes a DAC sound good with todays technology
I have an older Marantz HD DAC1 and I have yet to have found a DAC that sounds better than it.
and I’ve tried many.
I’ve said this again on here before , I am a musician of over 35 years so yeah I can hear the differences in how instruments should sound.
so why have all these DACs I’ve tried not sounded as good as my Marantz HD DAC1?
topping D90SE
VENUS II
topping D30pro
mojo1
mojo2
schitt bifrost 2/64
benchmark DAC3
RME ADI 2
thanks in advance.
And just to be clear , i can name the exact diffences in sound for all of these DACs.
some are more difficult to discern than others of course.
the Denafrips Venus II for example had a very soft attack. not to much density to the instruments. very spacious sounding though. But to the point that it sounded gimmicky. As if it wasn’t natural and they added some DSP or something to make it sound that way.
The Topping D90SE sounded bright and thin. I won’t get into timbre right now since that is very subjective. But it sucked
the Schiit Bifrost 2/64 is very bright and sharp. Don’t like it and will return it
some are more difficult to discern than others of course.
the Denafrips Venus II for example had a very soft attack. not to much density to the instruments. very spacious sounding though. But to the point that it sounded gimmicky. As if it wasn’t natural and they added some DSP or something to make it sound that way.
The Topping D90SE sounded bright and thin. I won’t get into timbre right now since that is very subjective. But it sucked
the Schiit Bifrost 2/64 is very bright and sharp. Don’t like it and will return it
Would seem your definition of a scientific reference is different from most of ours? This is a paper and I am not aware of the research having been reproduced anywhere else which.
And whilst I do believe that Earl and his wife were onto something with this, he does believe that DACs and Amplifiers are a solved problem so it kind of shoots nearly all your theories on DAC woo and foo.
Hi Bill, Not sure if I should interpret that to mean that a claim that two dacs such as D30 and a similar or slightly better measuring dual dac design (using THD+N or SINAD numbers to compare) could sound different is to rejected out of hand? I mean if its a solved problem then how could there be an audible difference?
Other than being perplexed by that question, agree with you that Earl and his wife were onto something.
If you come with the result of a blind test showing that 2 DACs sound different when level matched with a voltmeter, then we can start discussing.
I wish.
"All I want for christmas is yooooooooooouu speakerthatcanaccomplish0,01%THD@115dBfrom20Hzto20kHz"
Mark, from the way you phrased your statement earlier I was sort of expecting a host of scientifically backed papers on THD+N.
It is well known that a lot of people actually prefer quite a bit of 2nd and 3rd order distortion, that does not mean it is inaudible.
Carefully managed doses of intentional distortion is not the same as THD+N because that takes into account all kinds of distortion in addition to noise.
So, nobody has heard a really clean reproduction system yet many will "testify"that it's not needed. Strange. Maybe one compared and A/B'd 0,5% vs 1% vs 3%... like mud, little more mud and a lot of mud.... conclusion mud as mud.... 🙂
//
//
I dont knnow anything. Still, sound prefferance is far from "objective" at least those test you speak of throw the same results in a blind test for different people. Potentially, you would like to compare different groups (trained ears vs reagular people) according to some ITU i don't remember the number now... It also has some recommendations about the room, the amp, the speakers, prob the impedance match, speaker positioning, reflections, etc...
To test the sound of a DAC u still have many many other variables that will affect the results. Its really not easy, and sound is known to be highly influenced by expectation. Say u where sure this DAC sounded better in some tests, then i can assure you, it will sound better to you, regardless of actual sound, in a future test. Maybe in the first tests the results were influenced with how the DAC interacted with other parts of the chain, so then one expects it to sound better to put a silly example.
Then u have those people who claim to have golden ears and distrusts blind tests, but they swear can hear differences. I felicitate them and welcome them knowledge (regardless of it being subjective, in the end, every knowledge comes from some primordial axiom that is unverifiable). But as i don't have them golden ears, the info still doesn't tell too much to me. Its like when someone tells you "this coffe is the best u can get in the city". Ok, thanks for the recommendation (i mean it), but in the end, i may love it, or absolutely dislike it. I ll have to test it myself, maybe even realise, my paladar likes any coffee the same.
As a rough approximation, one could record some tracks, impulses, etc., thru diff DAC's, and then make some comparison blind tests to random people thru a google form.
Me, i'm sure there is a correlation between THD and sound quality perceived, but i'm pretty sure too, there are much more many variables in question, transient response, the following gain stages, and many other variables that we may not even know yet.
My ears are rather normal, but the only person i ve known to subjectively test thousand dollar equipment he gets for free, swears DACS are really important when it comes to sound quality. As a curiosity he worked many years in live audio, so he is pretty deaf, still he can distinguish 0.5dB filters in a mix in the most important bandwidth (he has a mastering studio now), different compressors and related variables, transient harmonic shape, etc. He recommended us to not send close to 0dB FS to cheap DACS to improve the sound considerably (u think this is true?), still, everything could be smoke in this world until there are some proper investigations about it.
Best Regards!
To test the sound of a DAC u still have many many other variables that will affect the results. Its really not easy, and sound is known to be highly influenced by expectation. Say u where sure this DAC sounded better in some tests, then i can assure you, it will sound better to you, regardless of actual sound, in a future test. Maybe in the first tests the results were influenced with how the DAC interacted with other parts of the chain, so then one expects it to sound better to put a silly example.
Then u have those people who claim to have golden ears and distrusts blind tests, but they swear can hear differences. I felicitate them and welcome them knowledge (regardless of it being subjective, in the end, every knowledge comes from some primordial axiom that is unverifiable). But as i don't have them golden ears, the info still doesn't tell too much to me. Its like when someone tells you "this coffe is the best u can get in the city". Ok, thanks for the recommendation (i mean it), but in the end, i may love it, or absolutely dislike it. I ll have to test it myself, maybe even realise, my paladar likes any coffee the same.
As a rough approximation, one could record some tracks, impulses, etc., thru diff DAC's, and then make some comparison blind tests to random people thru a google form.
Me, i'm sure there is a correlation between THD and sound quality perceived, but i'm pretty sure too, there are much more many variables in question, transient response, the following gain stages, and many other variables that we may not even know yet.
My ears are rather normal, but the only person i ve known to subjectively test thousand dollar equipment he gets for free, swears DACS are really important when it comes to sound quality. As a curiosity he worked many years in live audio, so he is pretty deaf, still he can distinguish 0.5dB filters in a mix in the most important bandwidth (he has a mastering studio now), different compressors and related variables, transient harmonic shape, etc. He recommended us to not send close to 0dB FS to cheap DACS to improve the sound considerably (u think this is true?), still, everything could be smoke in this world until there are some proper investigations about it.
Best Regards!
Last edited:
Well the new Gustard A26 is out which uses the newest AKM chip.
it is Chinese but looks pretty good.
any initial comments on its design or design flaws?
it is Chinese but looks pretty good.
any initial comments on its design or design flaws?
So, you are claiming that circuit design and choice of components does not make for an audible difference?
And that all DACs sound exactly the same?
Have you ever actually listened to different DACs? Or are you just theorizing?
If you happen to be based in Athens, Greece you are welcome to come by my house to listen to an R2R-based DAC and several ΔΣ implementations.
I can guarantee you that it will take you no time at all to conclude that different DAC designs do in fact sound different.
What is more shocking though is realizing how different USB streamers can sound. All of them bit perfect of course. Measuring almost identically.
Do you have an ADC? You could record some tune (or tones) with same dac but using different USB streamers. It would be interesting to analyze the differences.