Actually, cheap clocks can sound pretty good. The sound card built into my laptop is reasonably listenable. It just doesn't compare in realism at all compared with my best dac. If soundcard audio is great for someone, fine. Its not great for me.
By the way, I described the sound of laptop sound in another thread. Small details just fade away and disappear into soft, smooth noise. One would never know anything is missing. Doesn't especially sound like it.
On the other hand, my best dac reveals small nuances of sound encoded into a CD the laptop sound looses. The better dac reproduces music in a way that sounds more like real instruments, real vocals, and real concert hall acoustics sound, and it does so in a way that produces a far more convincing soundstage (stereo illusion at its best).
By the way, I described the sound of laptop sound in another thread. Small details just fade away and disappear into soft, smooth noise. One would never know anything is missing. Doesn't especially sound like it.
On the other hand, my best dac reveals small nuances of sound encoded into a CD the laptop sound looses. The better dac reproduces music in a way that sounds more like real instruments, real vocals, and real concert hall acoustics sound, and it does so in a way that produces a far more convincing soundstage (stereo illusion at its best).
Last edited:
1) Oscillators types/models, check.
2) Measurements, check.
3) Setup: please point to/quote the description of your listening test, with all the details (test type (difference? preference?), equipment used, number of subjects, controls, etc...) I must have missed these details in the close-in noise of this thread.
That's funny, you used CDs for this comparison. Do you realize that's 16bit 44.1KHz?
Not between the bits, just formatted in a way that the dac chip works best.
Why? I want to know how much information is actually encoded on a CD if we can accurately extract all of it into analog format. Many would be surprised.
EDIT: Why jump to wrong conclusions instead of just asking why?
Why? I want to know how much information is actually encoded on a CD if we can accurately extract all of it into analog format. Many would be surprised.
EDIT: Why jump to wrong conclusions instead of just asking why?
Last edited:
It gets funnier and funnier, so upconversion improves the sound. There must be a lot of information hidden from inquiring ears in that original 16bit/44.1KHz encoding.
Haha. More. I've had people ask incredulously, "This is a CD?"
EDIT: Next question, an interested inquiry, "How much does it cost?"
When they find out approximately what it would cost if it were a product they quickly loose interest. Oh, well.
Cost is what I see as the main problem with the dacs I like. If we could bring the cost down I'm pretty sure many people would want dacs of that quality.
Last edited:
Ah yes, the information between the bits.
Now, don't get any crazy ideas and question the HQPlayer cult.
Sounds like a MLM marketing pitch.
Those are casual reports from other individual members:
wlowes
mr_whocares
triodehunter
Supersurfer
and one of yours:
So: no listening test protocol, no equipment consistency or description (other than the clock), no source description, and ultimately no data to show. IMO, these are not listening test results, but opinions which should be treated accordingly. Do you want me to put together an opinion too? It would take me 10 minutes to copy/paste something from a Stereophile reviewer, I can afford that.