Now you exaggerate again. A lot of people that go out of their way to ask about better sounding dacs in a diy audio forum are probably here exactly because they can hear differences between dacs and they don't like the sound of crappy ones. Why else come here.
There are some who think they want lampizator type dacs. I can't help them and they don't read what I write.
More technical nonsense:
- Last time I've checked, distortions don't measure in dBFS, what would be the FS for IMD?
- What is "measured HD" and how does it relate to IMD distortions? IMD has a precise definition that seems to escape you. Now, if you claim the ability to discriminate between -120dB of IMD and -100dB of IMD (I did not say find the lower IMD, as in "preference", just sort them out) then I would ask for proof. You will say proof doesn't show anything, and the game is, once again, over. Yet another unsubstantiated claim.
- And assuming everything falls in place, and you are one of those few humans on the planet that could discriminate -120dB from -100dB IMD, why would me or anybody else care about? That ability doesn't make you a better audio designer, doesn't make you a better EE, doesn't make you smarter or otherwise better than your next Joe Sixpack. In fact, if I would have such a trait, it would make me irremediably unhappy: it would take a Boulder or a Halcro amplifier to satify my crave for hifi, and I couldn't afford that.
It's a wonder you are fooled by stereo Mark, or are you, are you one of those unfortunate people that hears two seperate sound sources?
Not at all. Dac output levels are calibrated according to dBFS. It depends on the peak level of music or the level at any point in a piece of music as to what the actual level is at that time.
Measured HD is taken with a test tone at 0dBFS, or sometimes at maybe -10dBFS and then corrected for the lower peak level.
IMD is the distortion produced with multiple tones pass through a stationary nonlinearity at the same time. With music playing IMD is most of the audible distortion that can be heard. You know all that.
I evaluate distortion by ear via listening to music. I evaluate distortion by measurement using fixed tones just like everyone else does. Problem is people listen to music not fixed tones. I want to know what the distortion sounds like to listeners and that's what I report on.
Last edited:
I had to learn to hear stereo when I wanted to learn how to mix records and use panning. With some practice I could hear it as stereo. Now its no problem to hear stereo, especially with good speakers.
- So what exactly is -120dBFS that you claim to be able to discriminate? If I want to test myself, how would I be able to reproduce your setup?
- I do not know about "with music playing IMD is most of the audible distortion that can be heard", do you? Is this documented anywhere or it comes from your personal observations?
- "Problem is people listen to music not fixed tones." So here we go, you are saying that music is more than a collection of single tones. That qualifies you directly as a Fourier denier, congratulations!
- So I still don't understand what you claim to be able to discriminate relative to IMD vs. single tone distortions (which I suppose that's what the mysterious "HD" is). Would it be difficult to put your claim in simple EE language, so that everybody with a minimum of EE education could understand, evaluate and perhaps attempt to reproduce?
- If you would like to be taken seriously, it would also help a lot if you could provide a good description of your listening test setup; not sure about other readers, but while there is perhaps a 0.0000000001% chance you would be able to discriminate distortions around the mentioned level (and that would be a remarkable thing, worth an AES full paper), chances you could discriminate -120dB (even FS, whatever that is for IMD) in the presence of -50dB distortions from your favorite speakers, or even -60dB from your favorite headphones, are a big fat zero.
No absolutely not. I've said it before and I'll say it again.
If the engineering side of the website can come together and have discussions about the technical aspects of a design. And then with those discussions dismiss some ideas as either incorrect or less well suited, then the same has to happen for subjective impressions.
If someone comes in saying it sounded like X then we have just as much right to come in and contest that subjective view and discuss it. Ie how it was formed and whether it's actually valid.
It almost sounds like you're saying let people say as much subjective stuff as they like without ever questioning it. Or more to the point you're saying those of us who find the subjective stuff rather like nonsense should just ignore it and move along? Again no.
I suppose my motivation for this is largely when it comes to wasting money. The audio industry is set up and caters directly to having people waste money on ridiculous things. Such as things that lift cables off the ground, capacitors soaked in various obscure fluids and rocks/objects to place in strategic locations either about your listening room or in proximity to your hifi gear. Now cables tend to do just fine running along the floor, capacitors perform superbly with bog standard dielectrics and your hifi really doesn't sound better with a block of cryogenically treated quartz that came to earth via a meteorite next to it.
If an idiot with more money than sense wants to spend money on a space rock for his DAC then he can do just that but most of us don't have more money than sense. These are extreme examples but it's exactly where subjectivism leads.
What I have a problem with is when people come into threads posting subjective comments with the intention of guiding/advising someone on what to buy. Almost always the thing that sounds better costs more money. It happens all the time in the loudspeaker forums. You should really buy these more expensive caps/coils/resistors because they sound better and have some fancy name attached to them. Like Transparacap. Ooo that's like transparency and capacitor in one it must sound good! Why isn't the generic polypropylene cap, built to the same specifications and tolerances, as good? They are 1/4 the price and do exactly the same job in exactly the same way. Why aren't these the ones that people are giving all the recommendations for? I thought people liked it when you paid less for something that does exactly the same job. But no wait, some people like it even more when the cap has a fancy name and some pseudoscientific claim attached to it and because it costs more it has to sound better. Lots of people try them and think they sound great, think they sound even better than the ones they used to have, and now recommend other people spend their hard earned pennies on them. Then you're also made to feel bad because you didn't splurge or because your ears aren't golden enough to be able to hear the difference.
I'm sorry but no. This is where it leads. Someone with a small amount of expendable income buys a generic TPA3116 amplifier from China and is perfectly happy with it but sees these other threads where people have taken to modifying them. The modifications make sense, remove the X7R dielectric coupling caps/output filter caps for something better. I'm not going to argue here I'd never put X7R in such a location but China does. The first solution is to go with polyester, they are small, so fit in far more easily and have a level of performance way beyond the amplifier itself. They are also inexpensive. Seems like a win thinks person A with a small amount of money. But then he reads more of the thread to the people who think it's a good idea to buy these Teflon audiospecial jobbies. The Teflon caps are outside his price range, a pain to source and a pain to fit. They are massive and bigger than the TPA3116 board itself but possibly could be done. These people say how wonderful these Teflon caps are and it was night and day between them and the Wima polyester caps they tried first time.
It would have been nice if the people who tried the Teflon caps reported back that they sounded exactly the same, or heck worse because of the added loop area created in the output filters with the high frequency switching, but they didn't. They thought it sounded better.
And here's the crux of it all. Even if it sounded worse they'd think it actually sounded better because that's how the human mind works. Now our individual without much money thinks they have to spend more than they can really afford in order to get the most out of their little amplifier, just because of some subjective nonsense posted in a thread.
Subjective nonsense has the potential to do real damage if people start believing into it and most people do end up paying quite large sums of money for things that do absolutely nothing or make things worse.
When I see an innocent newbie coming here and asking for some simple advice I actually get angry when I see the subjectivists start with their rhetoric. I'm like no. Please no. Just stop and go away. What this person needs is some solid engineering advice that's going to solve their problem in the most economical way. Most often the subjectivists have their own pet theories that they then try and push off onto the newbie too.
This is why I want subjectivists, who speak like they've found Nirvana, to scientifically prove, in some acceptable way, that they can actually hear what they say they are hearing. Specifically because of the influence they are trying to spread, either intentionally or indirectly.
It doesn't matter if you know what to listen for. No matter how disciplined you think you are your brain is influenced by things that you cannot control.
Guys, I'll be back probably in the morning. Delighted to explain how anyone can test/train hearing of distortion down around -120dBFS measured HD, listened to in the form of IMD with music, etc. Also happy to address brain influences and strategies that work to overcome them. Bye.
But no one can hear this.
The dynamic range of the human ear simply doesn't cover it. A quiet background noise level can approach around 30-40dB. So say you've got a DAC with a 120dB signal to noise ratio at full scale. We need to amplify that 120dB up over the ambient noise so that 0dBfs is like listening to a 160dB tone. Only then is the stuff down at 120dB around the same level as the noise in the room. And if you're experiencing 160dB at 0dBfs with your music then there's no way you're hearing anything down at 30-40dB. Either as part of the music or ever again!
Is this the "official" policy of the forum?
No wonder this forum is dying... This is a ridiculous statement for any DIY moderator to make and if I owned the forum I would sack you on the spot.
Incase you dont know.... We, the vast majority of DIY audio guys, dont own the expensive digital measuring equipment/lab or have the expertise to interpret the data even if we had access to the equipment.
Your "policy" bars DIY member from making any posts or statements unless they can prove they have test and measurement equipment/expertise that meets with your personal approval... So do you own the forum?
Personally I find subjective reports very helpful indeed, especially when they are accompanied by a room/system description to put the listener's opinion into some sort of context.
Also part of the DIY spirit is building up a network of fellow DIY'ers with similar musical tastes / equipment preferences and establishing references.... There are some guys on this forum that I have learned to trust their subjective opinions and have made purchasing or avoiding purchasing based on their opinions.
No wonder this forum is dying... This is a ridiculous statement for any DIY moderator to make and if I owned the forum I would sack you on the spot.
Incase you dont know.... We, the vast majority of DIY audio guys, dont own the expensive digital measuring equipment/lab or have the expertise to interpret the data even if we had access to the equipment.
Your "policy" bars DIY member from making any posts or statements unless they can prove they have test and measurement equipment/expertise that meets with your personal approval... So do you own the forum?
Personally I find subjective reports very helpful indeed, especially when they are accompanied by a room/system description to put the listener's opinion into some sort of context.
Also part of the DIY spirit is building up a network of fellow DIY'ers with similar musical tastes / equipment preferences and establishing references.... There are some guys on this forum that I have learned to trust their subjective opinions and have made purchasing or avoiding purchasing based on their opinions.
5th Element is not a moderator. Please check your facts before posting.- Status
- Not open for further replies.