@ScottJ - see Mark's post - he is absolutely correct - I'm pretty sure too that the sharpness is distortion that many forgive just like you did - as something to get used to - you will never get used to this distortion - it stops people's interest in sitting down to listen as they find it is not relaxing anymore
Sorry, guess I forgot to pepper that with enough IMHO's. Yes, you are correct, the matter has not been formally studied, that I am aware of anyway. While we are waiting for that to happen, I would recommend acquiring a very well implemented Sabre dac capable of DSD512 playback and HQplayer (or maybe even better, T&A DAC8 DSD and HQplayer, except perhaps DAC8 is getting a little long in the tooth). You can be enjoying well reproduced music while the rest of us are over here arguing.
EDIT: Unfortunately, I don't know of a Sabre dac I would recommend for that. I am working on one now while waiting for AK4499 though. I am finding distortion associated with the LDO regulators commonly used for AVCC in PRO series dacs. Some things can be done to reduce the distortion, but still not quite as good as a good opamp buffer like ESS recommended way back in one of their few public documents: http://www.esstech.com/files/4514/4095/4306/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf
A few things they recommend in the document can be audibly improved upon somewhat, but the basic opamp AVCC regulator idea is a good one, when it can meet AVCC current drive requirements that is.
All the above, IMHO, of course.
Last edited:
It includes both psychological and physiological aspects of sound perception so it does run on both sides of the fence.....does it not?
I use a computer as a source and it does exactly what is says on the tin and delivers bits to the minidsp. No mess, no fuss and can search around 10k albums without waddling across the room to my CD racks. Boringly efficient.
Vinyl is more fun, but many steps back in fidelity.
Have you done it before?
Right, you still have some questions to answer such as when and where you've observed people who prefer the boosted low frequency.
I do apologise, I didn't realise you were referring to distortion. So, according to Mark and Merrill, you meant to say "with some DACs distortion seems to have become excessive" Does that mean they used not to have so much distortion, or have you words and meaning become distorted?
I've heard voices that I respect for their known public work and results, which raised some legitimate questions about the Meyer and Moran experiment (in particular about the material used for testing) although even those don't invalidate the results, from any practical perspective (since HD material was almost non existent at the time, virtually all SACD material was up sampled from the original master recordings (sometimes tapes) so the CD vs. SACD comparison was, from any practical perspective, fair.
However you, Jakob(x), are the last entitled to criticize Meyer and Moran (or anybody else's work, for that matter), since you never produced any form of testing results that would show you are qualified for criticizing other people work. Until you decide to show some results, you are really just another (to me, subjectively annoying) Internet voice with an agenda and an axe to grind.
In your position, I would feel very uncomfortable to watch my shills, of the mmerrill99 kind, perpetrating tons of BS, staying mum about, while fighting those attempting (even if occasionally naive) to run some foobar tests, but hey, that's the good ol' syn08 without any agenda to promote.
And that's about it, this useless debate stops here, any further comments are directed to /dev/null. Now, Jakob(x) has the last word.
You will still believe what you already believe whether I am sure or not, won't you?
It's a branch of psychology about how auditory perception works - such as how amplitude is internally perceived as loudness, thresholds of hearing, masking, missing fundamental, etc.
You've compared your CD playback to the same CD ripped to disk?
OK, that's one vote - really need to set up a poll on this to get more votes.
The sound waves don't really exist, I mean, they travel...and they don't expand but propagate. The "possible echoes to the recorded sound" is the masking, right? At the original concert in the original hall I'd probably hear no masking.
All the problems related to reflections/standing waves/reverberation are related to the listening room which is not the concert hall but...
That is uncalled for. I obviously have no control over what other people say. I try to say IMHO often enough to make clear what is opinion, and mmerrill99 should too, IMHO.
It depends where you get your definitions, is Wikipedia any good? PMA was probably right:
"The term "psychoacoustics" also arises in discussions about cognitive psychology and the effects that personal expectations, prejudices, and predispositions may have on listeners' relative evaluations and comparisons of sonic aesthetics and acuity and on listeners' varying determinations about the relative qualities of various musical instruments and performers. The expression that one "hears what one wants (or expects) to hear" may pertain in such discussions."
Visual bias controlled and level matched listening results and measurements showing the variation within audible range.
Nope. I ditched the CD player years ago. It was 25 years old and showing its age. I see no need to take a backwards step. I just find nothing lacking in current playback. Maybe one day the DACs will become the limiting factor in playback, but I'm not there yet.
In This case.....perception must have a fairly high percentage of agreement between (healthy) individuals.....no?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.