People do differ. Years ago, I worked at an audio store, later was owner. I could never hear amplifier differences, but one day, a young person was in our shop, and could hear AND NAME which receiver I was playing. "That's the Kenwood, now the Sony, and now the Tandberg". He was right 100% of the time, even blind and with careful level setting.
Really looking forward to see a properly conducted double blind test showing that people can discern modern well-designed DACs. Have been missing such a test for years.
Indeed, with speakers it is not easy to tell the differences between DAC's. I can tell a nuForce DAC5 and a mojo from the Gustard X20u and the Soekris DAC1541 – but between the last two it is a much much closer call. And I have good speakers.
With headphones (AKG K812), well, that's easy. The mojo is warm and detailed and lean. The DAC1541 is colder and analytic. The nuForce DAC5 sounds veiled and incoherent in comparison. BUT – and this is important – I need to compare them within a short time interval.
So there may be a truth. Unless one has top notch amps and speakers, spending too much in a DAC may not be the best thing. And do not use the preamp in that case, which makes matching of the remaining components much harder.
Roberto
I am lucky in a different way. Probably because of my formal training as a composer, I tend to concentrate on the music nearly 100% when I am listening. In fact, music acts like a magnet on me. Which also means that anything musical in the background and I have trouble listening to ppl. Which makes for weird conversations in bars.
Well, ok.
I can get to the core of the music also on relatively bad sounding systems. Even on a plane with my Flare R2A IEMs with decent foam plugs attached to my iPhone (and I fly something like 50 times a year). But I also, somewhat separately, appreciate good sound.
Sometimes the two things come together, sometimes they don't. But I always feel a bit out of place on audiophile forums (esp. SBAF) because I tell myself: why are these guys ruining their lives so much? Letting the music speak to me is more important than tuning the sound. I prefer to make an effort to let the music enter me, rather than finding flaws in the sound and this preventing the music from communicating. Which does not mean that I appreciate when the effort is reduced because the rig sounds better...
Roberto
New thread for that side-topic...
Time for a visit at the AUDIOLOGIST...(what ?!?)
Well, i'm now allowed to continue.
Time for a visit at the AUDIOLOGIST...(what ?!?)
Well, i'm now allowed to continue.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
To the thread author. I suggest that it would be recommended to say it this way - "Under the following circumstances, no audible differences were found".
Your blind test is one way closer to a potential proof, but not an absolute proof. Think of the variables.
But do not worry. Proving something is not an easy task.
Anyway, congratulations for your efforts. One should also be encouraged for practical results, because it's much harder that plain forum chit-chat.
Your blind test is one way closer to a potential proof, but not an absolute proof. Think of the variables.
But do not worry. Proving something is not an easy task.
Anyway, congratulations for your efforts. One should also be encouraged for practical results, because it's much harder that plain forum chit-chat.
mmerrill99 comes to a restaurant. and he looks at the menu and there's two types of rib-eye steak, one costs 10 dollars and the other - 1000 dollars. He asks a waiter: what's the difference? The waiter says: here, you can have a bite of each, but with your eyes closed, so you don't know which is which. mmerrill99 tries both steaks concluding that they taste the same. I am going with the 10 dollar one - he says resolutely to the waiter. But wait, says the waiter, that test of yours was flawed! First, you don't know how to compare steaks, so you need some learning first. Second, the conditions were not perfect - other people in the restaurant, noise, smells etc - all that could have affected the perception. mmerrill99 agrees - you are right, my friend, let us do all that and only then will I make a decision.
What you are describing is a preference test not an ABX tests where, to use your example, I would be given a bite of each steak & told which was $10 & which was $100, then I would be given a bite of one or other of these steaks unknown-to-me & asked to identify which one it was $10 or $100 steak. If I couldn't correctly identify which it was, the conclusion of jonbocani is that there is no discernible difference
Now if I did a blind preference test, as I suggested jonbocani should do & I selected steak A a statistically significant number of times, does this suggest that there is a discernible difference between steak A & steak B?
Of course there are many things that have to be taken into account in such a test if it's to stand up to scrutiny & be presented as some form of evidence or data point - like knowing how the sense of taste works & what factors need to be controlled so as not to bias the taste test one way or another.
But, if one is just interested in a bit of fun & not claiming anything about the validity of the test or generalizing it, then fire away
If I failed this, it woul dbe conclu
If I do a preference test on your conditions and I say that I like sample A more than sample B, can we conclude that I find them tasting different? Or would that be too unscientific?
See, even if we ask 99.999% of human beings whether there's a difference between A and B or not and they answer the same way, it would still not guarantee that the remaining 0.001% would feel the same way! Blind tests, however well thought of, prove just that - if averagely picked Joes in a typical situation see no difference, chances are, you, being an average Joe, won't see it either. JUST THAT. No blind test tells anything above that. You would do me a favor though, by pointing me to a blind test result that proves people do hear differences between properly-designed modern DACs. Haven't seen any yet.
Last edited:
The problem with using one example as an analogy is that things are never equivalent - it breaks down when details are analysed.
If you want to examine what average Joe can differentiate in normal listening then use "normal listening". As was pointed out already a number of times, ABX blind testing is far removed from normal listening.
I already gave a link to a thread where sighted & blind tests were done on DACs over a year. The first 3 such tests gave null results - the final one gave a positive difference.
False alert.
I was 0.2db OFF on the SPL-matching, everything is back to normal now. I'm probably not 0.05db precise, though, someone who is very sensitive to SPL probably can spot a difference, but that's the best SPL-matching i can get.
Anyway, no positive identification yet....
But that tells us something, they were right:
Golden ear - Wikipedia
I just witnessed a 0.2db differencial identification, by 2 individuals. Given the right music excerpt, short enough, it's probably possible to spot a difference of even less than 0.2db, as pointed out in this Wiki article.
Since a cannot get a 0.05db SPL-matching, i guess even if i stumble on a positive identification, it won't be a proof of DAC differencial...
Golden ear - Wikipedia
I just witnessed a 0.2db differencial identification, by 2 individuals. Given the right music excerpt, short enough, it's probably possible to spot a difference of even less than 0.2db, as pointed out in this Wiki article.
Since a cannot get a 0.05db SPL-matching, i guess even if i stumble on a positive identification, it won't be a proof of DAC differencial...
Oh, on a anecdotic note...
7 participants so far, i'm collecting post-test comments, mostly non-audiophile individuals so far...
It's 5 against 2, for the 19,99$, as the prefered, best sounding, between A and B.
Again: anecdotic. But fun to know nonetheless... 😉
7 participants so far, i'm collecting post-test comments, mostly non-audiophile individuals so far...
It's 5 against 2, for the 19,99$, as the prefered, best sounding, between A and B.
Again: anecdotic. But fun to know nonetheless... 😉
If you believe that there is no difference between the DACs, then wouldn't these results be the equivalent of reporting the results of seven coin tosses?Oh, on a anecdotic note...
7 participants so far, i'm collecting post-test comments, mostly non-audiophile individuals so far...
It's 5 against 2, for the 19,99$, as the prefered, best sounding, between A and B.
Again: anecdotic. But fun to know nonetheless... 😉
They can't identify, so obviously the 5 against 2 has no value.
...is ''anecdotic'' means the same in french/english ? I'm starting to doubt...
Oh, speaking of comments: also, all participants are asked, after the first A/B presentation if they hear a difference. They all said YES so far. They ALL FELT a difference (that could/may be spot).
Also, they all said it was subtle or very small kind of difference.
Then, after the test, when the results are announced, the are asked to freely comment on the experience... They all felt it was difficult and they didnt think it would be possible for them to make any better with different equipment, music, or practice.
If i include comments from the 1st and 2nd set-up, the audiophile individuals are more defensive/shocked/in denial than non-audiophile participants, who are just amused/entertained by the test.
...is ''anecdotic'' means the same in french/english ? I'm starting to doubt...
Oh, speaking of comments: also, all participants are asked, after the first A/B presentation if they hear a difference. They all said YES so far. They ALL FELT a difference (that could/may be spot).
Also, they all said it was subtle or very small kind of difference.
Then, after the test, when the results are announced, the are asked to freely comment on the experience... They all felt it was difficult and they didnt think it would be possible for them to make any better with different equipment, music, or practice.
If i include comments from the 1st and 2nd set-up, the audiophile individuals are more defensive/shocked/in denial than non-audiophile participants, who are just amused/entertained by the test.
Last edited:
Is the frequency response of all the tested DACs flat to within 0.05 dB from 20 Hz to 20 kHz?
I have no idea.
When i'm SPL-matching, it's in-room directly with the speakers with a mic on the seat. I'm using an Audio Control SPL calibrated mic and also i double-check with a Earthworks M50, both on a Audio Control Industrial SA-3051.
I'm using different tones, mostly the 1khz.
Edit:
main problem is: the DSP has 0.1db adjustement and the RTA has 0.1db resolution. Also, even at 1khz it fluctuates (room modes). But i sure cannot guarantee a 0.05db SPL-match. I might even be 0.1 or 0.15db off right now... There is also the power compression that must be taken into account... 0.05db is really not much.
FORTUNATELY, that cannot make any false ''non-identification''...ONLY false positive.... And there is NO positive identification result so far.
Last edited: