That's not really correct. The origin of the "placebo" in psychology is a "substance" used in treatment that has no clinical value, and therefore no impact on the condition being treated. It's therefore commonly used in a "control group" to identify what other factors might cause a change in outcome. So to be true to its origins, the placebo in itself has no effect, but there is a "real effect" in the subject through the added psychological factors.
In terms of DACs it would mean, for example, that 2 identical DACs were presented to listeners but in different kinds of presentations, as a result of which listeners reported hearing a difference in sound between them.
In principle an FFT captures the audio signal completely within the Nyquist bandwidth, at least up the the capability of the ADC (which is also a sigma-delta device). The first problem is that spectral analysis involves measuring average correlation of the ADC samples with bin frequencies (averaged over the time the FFT dataset is acquired). Then sine and cosine FFT components are converted to polar form so that its possible to plot average bin frequency magnitudes without including phase information in the plot.
Anyway, the there are at least three basic limitations to producing all the desired measurements from the FFT data: (1) phase information matters for some things (say, for disentangling AN from PN), but making phase information useful complicates how FFT measurements have to be done (which is to say they have to be done synchronously), (2) the ADC may not be any more accurate/perfect than the dac (especially since the ADC is sigma-delta based, and since it relies on its own internal dac in order to do digitization of the audio signal), and (3) the math needed to extract the correlated noise effects and the noise intermodulation side-band products from FFT data doesn't appear to exist at this time.
Last edited:
The above is a misunderstanding. Placebo effect is real. The question in drug testing is whether or not the drug is more effective than placebo. That's because placebo often has a quite real beneficial effect on patent outcomes.
That's actually true. My friend who was considering a sport car said he does not understand why people would buy ugly Porsche when beautiful Alfa Romeo has the same or even better specs in some respect. I told him that he needs to drive one to understand. The fool didn't even have a driver license and was employing a chauffeur but he had a prosperous business and wanted to be seen in a sport car, Meh. Those who can't hear differences in cables have no business in talking about sound of more advanced audio devices IMHO. There is nothing wrong with being happy with a cheap wine but to ridicule people "overspending" on the bottle is entirely different matter.
Yeah I know, but unluckilly there is a poor corelation for sorting them out SQ wize with those datas about how they finally sound and even less between each others in that chart. The illustration could be to rank some classic paintings with a RAL color chart (dunno what is the US equivalent), it is saying very few about the picture.
I do not agree with that analogy. A DAC should be transparent. If you truly hear a sound signature in a DAC, it is a poor DAC.
The problem with that statement about being a "poor DAC" is that DACs also have analog circuitry in the output.
It is possible for the DAC conversion to be state of the art but for the output section to... suck....
That's the whole point of op amp rolling... or compare Schiit with Nitsch. Using the same DAC, the latter sounds a lot better because it has better analog components and a better layout.
It is possible for the DAC conversion to be state of the art but for the output section to... suck....
That's the whole point of op amp rolling... or compare Schiit with Nitsch. Using the same DAC, the latter sounds a lot better because it has better analog components and a better layout.
They should not use an output section that sucks. Perhaps there is a reason Schiit chose that name for their company. 😀
Well, I got a Schitt entry level with DAC and the Nitsch version.
Neither sounds bad, one just sounds a lot better, but being hand made in the USA it costs a lot more....
Oh... be nice.
Neither sounds bad, one just sounds a lot better, but being hand made in the USA it costs a lot more....
Oh... be nice.
It is a myth. See a device as a sorta of filter which the enterring signal is not the same when quiting, if you prefer that analogy.
The myth begun with that story of clean digital because the purity is simple binary coding datas that is not wasted as with the LPs or tapes with time. Then people added layers after layers not understanding at the end it is as well an "analog" electro magnetic acting device as all the others; even as mechanical than LP if you think about it twice with that crystals oscillating.
It is the same cargo cult here than you could take for LP tables sorted out by their Oz weigth. It's a sorta of "tour de passe" (a shortcut) to paint a complex thing with a color of science to lipstick a pig for the picture to be understood for the most basic people. Story they feel to rule something and feel to be a man of the XXI century somewhere ! So you have few datas, looks like serious, but really is not. Let say you have the color of the car and the size of the wheel ! That's what ASR is to me when talking about DACS. I prefer their Klippel measurements, but also here it doesn't tell all the story. It can reject bad candidates, which you ears can do easily as well.
But seems now we need that reading layer from our computer between the sofa and the shop to reduce the moving effort. It's totally an hormonal grown beef symptom...
Lampucera sound nice, and is dirt cheap...
Other than that all Chinese days are cheap, except some
They might all be compromised in some ways,
Other than that all Chinese days are cheap, except some
They might all be compromised in some ways,
Having seen the link where one of these was measured, I feel bad about buying these for people. No subjective nonsense, the response curve takes a dive from a couple of hundred Hz, and hit's zero before a bookshelfs F3
I need a DAC for a TV. The digital signal presented by the TV, isn't going to justify a dac worth anything. Where is the $20 board from China that at least has a 20Hz-20kHz. Perhaps it won't be 'excellent' but I'm not sure everyone knows 100$ from 1000$ anyway. A few have even said it about themselves.
I will expand my budget a full 100% if it helps.
I doubt it's hdmi-arc and expect optical.
It's a TV, so just getting it's sound to the hifi will be a great step. However, not of it has the bass of a telephone. Though it's not my advert machine anyway.
This might readdress the inexpensive part of the topic. Though I may of weighted it quite heavily 🙂
Does you TV have an HDMI or a Coax PCM?
Do you have a surround processor?
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_120CSHDMAV/Ethereal-Helios-CS-HDMAV.html
Do you have a surround processor?
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_120CSHDMAV/Ethereal-Helios-CS-HDMAV.html
Last edited:
HDMI yes. I don't expect the volume control will effect that though. Perhaps not a real problem, but it would mean holding onto two remotes
An upgrade would probably be a second hand Rega dac R. Most people consider it an upgrade to the Rega Apollo, already sounding very good to your ear.
A perfect measuring dac might not be something you want when enjoying music . Any dac with opa1642 ( fet ) at the output stage will for most people sound better than using the more ” perfect ” bipolar opa1612 every Chinese company uses this days.
I have heard a lot of good about Gechelli dacs, where you can tweak the output stage. Haven’t listen to one though.
Ain't that true! Replaced OPA1612 once in a DAC because it had a problem (unrelated but this was only known afterwards) and I replaced its final OPA1612 for OPA1642 while only half looking at specs. I was assuming it had a damaged opamp because of static (some DACs have defective muting ICs when cables get static/ESD) as it distorted and had blackouts. It was indeed better sounding. Repeated this a few times (with care) and while nothing can be seen it sounds better in all cases till now. So it has become the standard workhorse a bit like NE5532 used to be.
Last edited:
Not for people who choose numbers in measurements.
Total harmonic distortion + noise at 1kHz (TI DS) : OPA1612 - 0.000015% vs OPA1642 - 0.00005%
Last edited:
With the cosmos ADC, hobbyists can meassure themselves. And you are correct that the dac is nonlinear. It can be measured with REW. But the nonlinearity occurs at ppm levels. Way under the noise.
And even the chinese DACs has output LP filter after the chip