Sure. So, maybe look elsewhere for some explanation. DACs sound different to me, but I'm pretty sure most of that is learned.
Listening carefully to undistorted hi-res source material containing cymbal hits can be very revealing. Cymbals can sound like bursts of HF noise, have a gritty texture, or sound pretty real, but if focusing attention on guitars, vocals, bass, etc., the exact sound of cymbals might be completely missed.
Another area where DACs often differ is in imaging. If you close your eyes and listen, with stereo it should sound like sounds are emanating from somewhere between the speakers, not from two spread apart point sources.
If a sound can be perceived as located between the speakers, there is then the question of exactly where between the speakers and and how wide is the apparent location (is the sound source spread out over a foot or two wide, or does it seem to be coming from a very exact spot, maybe an inch or two wide).
Obviously, room reflections can get in the way of trying to hear some DAC differences, so one may want to do something to control or vary that aspect of the listening environment.
I like to walk around, turn my head, get close to the speakers, walk far away down the all and around the corner, etc. The brain may pick up on a lot of unexpected differences if given the opportunity, and if attention is shifted or allowed to shift between different charactaristics of sounds.
Last edited:
See? That's what is all about: Perspective.
Wine's blind tests would get more successful identifications than DACs.
... and yet, people buy more 10 bucks wines than 200$ ones.
Successfully passing an ABX test is the sina que non condition prior to be considered ''superior''.
There is no way around it.
Unless you consider the proud-of-ownershipness, aesthetics-only and other similar factors unrelated to what the product is supposed to deliver as results.
Wine's blind tests would get more successful identifications than DACs.
... and yet, people buy more 10 bucks wines than 200$ ones.
Successfully passing an ABX test is the sina que non condition prior to be considered ''superior''.
There is no way around it.
Unless you consider the proud-of-ownershipness, aesthetics-only and other similar factors unrelated to what the product is supposed to deliver as results.
And this statement is another reason to not take your stance seriously. The OBJECTIVE research on FDA approval process has found they are, to put it mildly, problematic.
per Yale study:
This is just one of many assessments of the FDA approval mess. So not the best analogy I'm afraid. Or, perhaps, more appropriate than you intended.
Back in 2010, at the MP3/CD/HD blind test, we did use some music that was more revealing than others to find the threshold, if i remember correctly it was highly saturated electronic experimental IDM music. I have a lot of it in my collection.
From the top of my head, i think of:
Alva Noto
CoH
Senking
and pretty much anything from Raster-Noton label.
The blind testing method (and any other method for that matter) cannot be invalidated because poorly conducted or made in a corrupted way.
You're mixing topics, here.
We're talking human ears not human tendency towards greedness
True a lot of people can't tell a difference.
We find perceptual differences easy to understand when its something like vision. Maybe that's because visual acuity is easy to measure. Here in California, to get a driver's license its necessary to have at least 20/30 vision in one eye. 20/30 is a lot more blurry than 20/20, and there are some amazing people who can see 20/15 or even 20/10.
Of course, night vision is a separate attribute of vision.
Another one is color perception.
Depth perception.
And do on.
For hearing the situation is very different, audiologists know how to measure a few things, but they don't know how to measure how well brain DSP turns audible frequencies varying over time into intelligible, recognizable speech. That happens to be nearly the very same thing that makes some people better at hearing differences between compressed file formats. Some people have brain DSP that happens to work well for that, and other people don't or maybe they are good at something else instead. We don't really know.
You know what? If i were to be ''AGAINST'' myself concerning that topic, i'd play those cards:
- Noisefloor not below 40db
- Small number of participants
- Sample does not cover wider age/sex
- Lack of Shunyata cables
- B&W instead of Sonus Faber speakers
Fortunately, that self-criticism does not affect me to the point that i feel the urge to stab myself with a spoon.
Jokes aside, the weakness, i think, would be the participants samples and the equipment used. And all that will be changed for the 3rd attempt. Work-in-progress.
Been there.
Threshold of identification is around 128kbps for the MP3 (at least 2010's codec and softwares) and about 80kbps for AAC.
A study from McGill University showed that 192kbps (MP3) was their threshold, with musician/pro/sound engineer participants only.
Either case, standard is now 320kbps+ and AAC256, so not even a problem by a large margin.
...dynamic compression in recordings, on the other hand...
Interesting topic. I'm pretty new to the whole 'audiophile' thing, and I guess I'm more of an optimistic 'I want to believe' type, given that I also have spent some money on this for the last couple years; and also doing some DIY which happens to be a DAC. I don't think I can hear so much of a difference, but I'm one of those who use the word 'feel' for it; and I actually mean it too ... Luckily, for me the most important part is the music, and the better I think the sound is, the more I enjoy the music ...
I don't think I can hear so much of a difference, but I'm one of those who use the word 'feel' for it; and I actually mean it too ... Luckily, for me the most important part is the music, and the better I think the sound is, the more I enjoy the music ...
Any newcomer should really consider philately, cosplaying, taxidermy or coffee roasting before getting seriously involved in our hobby. One does not simply enter Audiophilia to have fun while listening music. It's a bond for life, filled with emotional roller-coasters, sufferings and the plague of solitude. Naah it's the greatest of hobbies, come, come here my dear young friend, just sit on that chair we'll blind you while you sip that cappuccino...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
^^^^ Nah, I'm also aware of the pitfalls (I think), and the importance of being patient, and to enjoy what you have at hand. My DAC (DDDAC with Cronus etc) is almost finished, and I will be satisfied with that for a long time. It also has a streamer built in the same case that works very well, and it's all connected to a NAS with a very simple GUI to control it all. I buy more music almost every day, which, as I mentioned, of course is the most important part of it all
Edit: I'm not new to listening to music, though, that I have done since the early 80's ...
Edit: I'm not new to listening to music, though, that I have done since the early 80's ...
That's training, is it?
I understand the idea, i really do. But ''training'' is where we must draw the line, i think.
That and exotic/esoteric/ultra-expensive gears.
I already feel i'm pushing the limits in that regards with my 3rd attempt and the RAAL 140-15D...
If audio memory is very very short then comparing parts of music based on memories of how they sound seems to me to be relying on the very thing that is falliable. Personally I find it very hard to compare previous music of a few seconds ago because my brain is FULLY taken up with the current listen.
It has been shown time and again that memory is plastic - i.e. that recalling a memory can change that memory for good.
Therefore comparing the music sample to a memory of the same sample... can it possibly work? Surely your new experience of that exact same sample re-writes the memory especially if they are very similar. All you end up comparing are memories of rationalisations you had about that sample and whether you have that same brain-chatter again on the next listen. That is not comparing the sound but comparing your thoughts which can lose focus and latch onto something else you didn't previously, even though it was apparent before too had you done so.
I would have thought how one feels overall about the audio would be a better comparison and more time to hear a variety of areas of focus - and therefore require long comparisons, of living with something for a few days.
It is only a matter of practicality and dicipline (and trust) that prevents people carrying out a ABX in a longer term test. Have to have someone install A and B and then X , on separate days without the listener looking to see what X is.
It has been shown time and again that memory is plastic - i.e. that recalling a memory can change that memory for good.
Therefore comparing the music sample to a memory of the same sample... can it possibly work? Surely your new experience of that exact same sample re-writes the memory especially if they are very similar. All you end up comparing are memories of rationalisations you had about that sample and whether you have that same brain-chatter again on the next listen. That is not comparing the sound but comparing your thoughts which can lose focus and latch onto something else you didn't previously, even though it was apparent before too had you done so.
I would have thought how one feels overall about the audio would be a better comparison and more time to hear a variety of areas of focus - and therefore require long comparisons, of living with something for a few days.
It is only a matter of practicality and dicipline (and trust) that prevents people carrying out a ABX in a longer term test. Have to have someone install A and B and then X , on separate days without the listener looking to see what X is.
Edit: I'm not new to listening to music, though, that I have done since the early 80's ...
Casually listening to music is only allowed on the moon of Audiophilia, on thursday mornings, don't you know that ?
You are allowed to enjoy music if the main purpose is to test equipment, though.
Strict rules, here. Be careful of the snake there, they've been oilier lately.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.