The theorem can be applied in the real world, and is in fact being applied all the time.
Exactly. Reproducing the actual music doesn't produce any ringing, while the "impossible" artificial signal does.
Anyway, dont you own one of these JCMcNeil? cant you simply measure, to confirm the XO remain on constantly, or not? doesnt seem like something you need Ian's expertise for ... I'm not being a dick, just seems like it would be something you could easily confirm one way or another, fairly easily.
Last edited:
Anyway; best not try to carry this conversation on here. it doesn't end well: well, it doesn't end.
There's something I can agree with. Can you point me to a thread where there's some respectful discourse aimed at better music reproduction for all of us? Without condescending links and references?
As it stands, I can buy a decent bottle of wine at Total Wine by the ratings they post much more easily than I can select the better sounding DAC by the measurements. So, we aren't done... in my book.
Yeah, I could unpack my stack and use a multimeter. Or, somebody could spend 1/50th of the time writing "they do that" or "they don't as they come but if you do this modification (check out link) they will."
I suppose that we could all go to the trouble of running such tests instead of engaging others of like mind when questions come up but there would be much less point to the existence of forums like DIYAudio, which I find I enjoy learning from.
Unless the readers of this forum were there in the same place with you when you listened, how would they know your personal impression? They don't. Now if you share measurements, that's something the forum readers can tell, i.e. what you've experienced was just a placebo effect or actual audible difference.
If that better DAC measurement is even further below audible threshold than the other DAC's measurement that's below audible threshold, how do you know if it's better sounding?
You can look at it like a paying customer "bothering" a busy vendor with a question they could answer on their own with a little work or you can look at it as an opportunity for a designer/engineer to either
1. better explain his reasons for not including that to a community of potential buyers that includes at leaat a few who seem they would appreciate that function.
2. Reinforce to the potential buyer community the existence of a feature important to some of them.
3. Show how to modify the device to include the feature, and add further value.
It's all in how you look at it.
I agree and will be happy to share any measurements as I Iearn to make them. My purpose in sharing my experience is not to say measurements don't count. ...more that we must have more to learn about measuring DACs (for instance) since experience doesn't always match what the numbers point to....
I have not measured my DIY DAC yet but am considering the best implementations of the chip (and similar output stages etc) I know of.
Another relatively good-measuring (in its price class) DAC I've A-B'ed it with is the Schiit Modi 3. Not even close, subjectively.
I don't know anyone like your imaginary stereotype. I measure and I listen, and take each for what it is worth. Some things are easy to measure, and some are hard/expensive. If I can't measure something then I will experiment to check audibility without any expectation of the outcome. Sometimes I find out something works, and other times I found out something doesn't work. If I relied on expectation as your simplified model of humans suggests then I should find everything I try works. Often it turns out exactly the opposite of expectation, if there was any at all to begin with.
Last edited:
Lucky you. I suggest you continue staying away from "audiophile" forums.
There is a difference between conscious expectation and sub-conscious expectation and confirmation bias. I would not call that a "simplified model", quite the opposite. I would say it is the "I know what I hear" crowd that has a simplified model of how human perception works.
That means there are two possibilities - either the numbers aren't adequate, or the difference in experience isn't caused by an actual physical difference in the sound wave. Both have to be taken into account and verified. Unfortunately most audiophiles start seeing red as soon as controlled double-blind ABX tests are mentioned.
Do you have any measurements that support your conjecture?
What specific percentage of audiophiles from what study?
Or is that your subjective, unverified opinion?
Last edited:
That depends on the type of experience. Subjective experience is all over the place because it's subjected to each individual. IOW, it's useless to others. You can perceive a sound difference from a same DAC just by listening at unmatched level. What usefulness does such experience provide other than marketing material for boutique DAC shills?
Subjectively AB-ing will give subjective results. If you believe such results are useful for sorting out audible sound quality of DACs, then you've got another thing coming.
I thought you were OK with statements not supported by measurements or evidence, but the answer to your question is "yes".
Which "others" do you claim to speak for? Isn't a little arrogant to vote yourself as spokeman for everyone else?
Doesn't it show more open-mindedness to realize value is in the eye of the beholder? There would be no audio reviews if everyone found the subjective experience of others as useless as you seem to.
And how do you know the criteria or format of my AB testing? Do you think its news to me that a difference in levels makes DACs sound different? Maybe your assumptions imply underestimating my intelligence.
It's your subjective opinion that subjective listening "can't" provide helpful results. It's my subjective opinion that starting with the belief that something is impossible is very limiting and restricts your range of experience unnecessarily.
Neither is more "true" than the other and I can think of a few people who would likely object to you appointing yourself as their spokesperson.