On the subject of well measuring dacs only differing slightly in sound, might it depend on the type of speakers or headphones used? Box speakers exhibit doppler distortion which may be enough added distortion to mask otherwise audible differences in upstream electronics. Its a problem large area electrostatic speakers don't have.
Similarly, good quality planar headphones distinguish small details better than cone speaker headphones.
The last couple of issues of Audioxpress have contained articles about new tech that can eliminate doppler distortion (and related distortion) in cone speakers. The articles make the point that doppler distortion can make the music listening experience much less pleasant.
Similarly, good quality planar headphones distinguish small details better than cone speaker headphones.
The last couple of issues of Audioxpress have contained articles about new tech that can eliminate doppler distortion (and related distortion) in cone speakers. The articles make the point that doppler distortion can make the music listening experience much less pleasant.
Last edited:
Well measuring and a little different are both quite vague statements... ;-D
The whole discussion is of course nonsense... and quite naive,..,
//
The whole discussion is of course nonsense... and quite naive,..,
//
It is not said that both have identical measurement, just that they both measure well. So the answer to the question from the topic is "YES". And there is no reason to speculate much.
Obviously you have no idea, just another speculation. You said it not I. If there is such evidence from any reputable reviewer then point to the review that supports your claim.
[last couple of issues of Audioxpress have contained articles about new tech that can eliminate doppler distortion]
What is new about Döppler effect in loudspeakers? Rod Elliot presented it in 2004. Twenty years ago.
What is new about Döppler effect in loudspeakers? Rod Elliot presented it in 2004. Twenty years ago.
Yes and electrostatic headphones are even better. Luckily I have headphones of all 3 types.
I relish your technical expertise and follow it with genuine interest. What I understand you are saying is that someone with big ears should not bother with Stax headphones. For those with abnormally big ears, what would you recommend instead?
Maybe use the STAX as in ear monitors, would that work?
Last edited:
Another thing to watch out for if you should use digital volume control to match the levels is its effect on intersample overs. If one DAC is at 0 dB digital attenuation and the other at 0.5 dB, you have given the second DAC a headroom of 0.5 dB, if no filtering is done before the digital volume control. Set one to -3 dB and the other to -3.5 dB and very probably, both have enough headroom - so intersample issues on both will go unnoticed.
Then again, with analogue volume control after the DAC, you are bound to get complaints about the quality of the volume control.
MarcelvdG,
All DACs does not output the same voltage at 0dB, should one not try to level match. I am not sure how one would do that. Maybe generate and utilize digital white noise. Both my DACs at 0dB has different output levels, the one is much louder than the other.
All DACs does not output the same voltage at 0dB, should one not try to level match. I am not sure how one would do that. Maybe generate and utilize digital white noise. Both my DACs at 0dB has different output levels, the one is much louder than the other.
That "measure well" isn't well-defined. Neither are the conditions under which the DACs have to sound different.
MarcelvdG
Maybe one should just ask the question bluntly, which DAC sounds best to you. Most DAC I assume, would tend to measure well beyond that of human hearing threshold.
Maybe one should just ask the question bluntly, which DAC sounds best to you. Most DAC I assume, would tend to measure well beyond that of human hearing threshold.
Well, Ken, your reply is a breadth of fresh air. While everyone seems preoccupied with maintaining the fog of war or presenting mystical reasons for "it cannot be answered", you agreed to discussing the question I asked. Thank you.
To me, this seems to be the most practical approach to this problem.
- It treats the DACs as black boxes.
- It maintains all intervening components as identical.
- It keeps an individual's ears as the final "measurement" device.
Now, if the goal is to establish whether DAC A and DAC B sound the same to a certain population of people, you would probably need to have an impartial operator conduct a blind set of experiments involving DAC A, DAC B, and DAC C (a decoy).
No one should have any interest in such a process, because what is found about the specific population or population sample might not apply to any individual inside or outside of it.
Besides, who would fund such an operation? Fundamentally, I think the commoditization of these technologies is slowly driving people crazy, because it's demoralizing to admit the product of an industrial process might be equal or superior to the product of craftsmanship.
This is true with electronics and will soon be true with many more things.
45.9% of the participants of the poll seem to think the same. But please tell what you want to hear.
I don't think the answer is yes. If they measure well enough, then they will be indistinguishable. What is good enough? No noise audible when your system is turned up as loud as you listen, flat response within .1 db up to 20 khz, THD and IMD below - 80 db. Yes really that simple.
All the worry over clocking is wasted effort. Jitter has to be huge to be heard. There probably are some devices for which that is so somewhere, but in general jitter has always been a non-issue. I've seen DACs that have noise modulation, but none that were audible with music. Soundstaging and imaging is not nearly so stringent as imagined by people. Don't know that I've seen good work on how audible linearity issues are, but with modern delta sigma DACs not an issue.
With the DACs showing a proliferation of filter choices those can be audible due to FR changes or ripple. When comparing DACs you need to match levels carefully. Check with a tone of 400 hz with a multimeter at the speaker terminals. Match within 1.2%. How to accomplish that will depend upon the particulars of the gear in use. While many DACs with volume have .5 db steps the most two will differ is .25 db and quite often they'll match closer than that on every other step. Casual sighted listening is not a credible approach no matter how well trained the listner is. The over-whelming probability with an approach that is not well controlled is you are hearing something different which is not from a difference in the signal.
All the worry over clocking is wasted effort. Jitter has to be huge to be heard. There probably are some devices for which that is so somewhere, but in general jitter has always been a non-issue. I've seen DACs that have noise modulation, but none that were audible with music. Soundstaging and imaging is not nearly so stringent as imagined by people. Don't know that I've seen good work on how audible linearity issues are, but with modern delta sigma DACs not an issue.
With the DACs showing a proliferation of filter choices those can be audible due to FR changes or ripple. When comparing DACs you need to match levels carefully. Check with a tone of 400 hz with a multimeter at the speaker terminals. Match within 1.2%. How to accomplish that will depend upon the particulars of the gear in use. While many DACs with volume have .5 db steps the most two will differ is .25 db and quite often they'll match closer than that on every other step. Casual sighted listening is not a credible approach no matter how well trained the listner is. The over-whelming probability with an approach that is not well controlled is you are hearing something different which is not from a difference in the signal.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.