(UPDATES BELOW)
That blind test was long due, it's now done.
Started with a 30$ unit (Fiio) against a 3000$ one (Forssell) and once SPL-matched (massive gain difference), no one could tell the difference in a ABX test.
Then, we switched to a different set-up, using a pair of B&W CM9 speakers and the Forssell against a Eximus DP1 (3500$ or so). Same result: impossible to spot them in a ABX.
We were only 4 participants, but regardless it didn't feel like day & night difference to start with... ''Eyes opened'' we FELT differences, but couldn't prove it in the ABX.
Cables, amplifiers, Lossy v.s. Lossless/HD, EQ'd mid drivers, DAC... Nope. Nothing is passing a ABX blind test.
I'm pretty sure, now, that the human auditory capacities are very, very, overestimated.
The good news is: we can probably save a LOT of money.
Thank you Jon, that was very informative. I've been looking for a realistic and factual answer when it comes to DACs and you've seemed to hit the nail on the head with a comprehensive and realistic approach.
I love music and play music files through iTunes on a MacBook Pro, after some research I found that the DACs built into new generation laptops are very very good and there is no point investing in dedicated external DACs that make no audible difference. I find that I don't really need any kind of preamp, I can hookup my computer directly to active speakers and get great results. I'm thinking of using a DSP box that let's me set crossover so that I can throw an active subwoofer in the mix for a 2.1 system. I am of the opinion that volume adjustment from the source (Computer) will effect the volume of the entire 2.1 system.
Your input will be appreciated.
Last edited:
The sword cuts both ways. As I've said again and again, you have only taken one side, which is to castigate null (or seemingly null) DBTs and entirely ignored audio "tests" which have ostensibly come to non null results. Nor taken any angle on the propagation of impressions, oftentimes that contradict physical fundamentals, that are taken as fact rather than highly grain of salt opinion.
That's a giant bias in one direction. Not some sort of balanced approach. You can believe all you want, but it's not in line with an effort towards greater objectivity, as you've hinted is your goal.
It's bad enough getting people to separate what is probably made up (sincere or otherwise) from what might actually be happening. If you need further proof, have a gander at the number of opamp or capacitor rolling posts versus any DBT, poorly done or otherwise.
Last edited:
Here is a breath of (very well informed) sanity regarding digital audio, now some years old, but as accurate and relevant as ever: 24/192 Music Downloads are Very Silly Indeed
Californium 252 costs about $30,000,000 USD per gram. Can't afford it? Too bad, you are sentenced to listen to bad capacitors for the rest of your life. We all know that the more money you spend on capacitors, the better your music will sound.
-Gnobuddy
How silly. Why swap capacitors, when everyone knows that the best capacitors are made with dodo feathers soaked in mermaid oil, sandwiched between metal plates made from Californium 252?
Californium 252 costs about $30,000,000 USD per gram. Can't afford it? Too bad, you are sentenced to listen to bad capacitors for the rest of your life. We all know that the more money you spend on capacitors, the better your music will sound.
-Gnobuddy
You should read the whole thread. The conclusions that Jon made have been thoroughly trashed.
dave
I've not level matched DAC to make judgement but did think the old TDA1543 AH-Lite with whatever op amp and tantalum (?) output caps displayed a noticeably different timbre on the flute than another DAC using a CD of drums and bamboo flute. Those (raspy) flute overtones closed mic-ed are something else compared to a lot of harmonically rather bland stuff. If a DAC ~flat to 20KHz is rolled off to = the NOS example, will they sound exactly the same when level matched? At what point does one worry about jitter and noise ?
Compression drivers like say a DE250, drop quickly after ~17KHz IIRC
Compression drivers like say a DE250, drop quickly after ~17KHz IIRC
Last edited:
Level matching is just blocking out an important variable.
Important because even quite large level differences can be undetected (i.e. not identified as level differences) by unexperienced listeners and small level differences are usually (even by experienced listeners) percieved as sound differences.
At the end it means, if you perceive a sound quality difference you can be sure that it is not due to a level difference.
I don't have the AH-lite anymore but if do a comparison, then will probably use a CD test tone and True-RTA to level match and mark the level on the amp's volume control (know that's not the best) - I normally evaluate with my Klipschorns as they are handiest. I tend to like DAC on the soft side - passive with transformer out - my Ross Martin unit is a bit hard with a Crown XLS. Although all this stuff is supposed to be ~ the same, I find (believe) some DAC sound better than others with certain amplifiers when mixing and matching.
Any sensible person learns fairly quickly, in life, to verify what someone says anecdotally as their listening impressions.
Now if someone uses the terms "scientific test", "gold standard", science, science, science, many people are fooled by such apparent expertise
I'm simply poking through this 'scientifically persuasive veneer' to reveal its flaws
I don't see my role as any sort of 'saviour of newbies' - that particular self-righteousness is for others - I never claimed it
However, if you randomly change the volume control & the same audible characteristics & differences remain, it tends to verify that the difference is not due to some volume differenceLevel matching is just blocking out an important variable.
Important because even quite large level differences can be undetected (i.e. not identified as level differences) by unexperienced listeners and small level differences are usually (even by experienced listeners) percieved as sound differences.
At the end it means, if you perceive a sound quality difference you can be sure that it is not due to a level difference.
Just jumped into this thread.
You take conclusion that there is not hearable difference between the DAC's...
But a DAC does nothing more then converting a digital source to an analog output that goes to the AMP's. I mentioned in the start(page 6) that the source is a computer/MAC with toslink SPDIF connected to a "nanoDigi miniDSP".
If the digital source isn't optimal (a toslink output and the processing of the signal by the nanoDigi miniDSP clearly isn't optimal); then it doesn't matter what DAC and AMP you put after that in the chain; it will all sound not good/equally bad. Ever thought of removing the SPDIF part completely and starting with a high end USB I2S source and a proper FIFO reclocker after it to feed the DAC? In my opinion the test is worthless if the source is always the same weak SPDIF input. If the digital input isn't good then the DAC couldn't make it good !
And then the end of the chain; the ICEpower amp's are low-end amplifiers. In my opinion those amp's aren't even close to good enough (99 dollar costing amp's, together with a >3000 dollar DAC?) to make the difference hearable.
I must admit that I didn't read all the 178 pages, but in my opinion your whole way of testing is wrong and that makes your conclusions worthless.
When you do a proper testing between DAC's; you start with really top high end, top of the line sources and amp's. Then you're sure that those aren't the bottleneck of your audio chain. But you did the opposite, you use a low end digital source, and a low end amplifier, and then you expect to hear differences when you change the middle part of it ?? (the DAC) I really don't get it, and you seem to be so sure about your conclusions? I understand that you and the listeners couldn't hear the differences; because your complete setup is low-end(besides the speakers) I wouldn't expect different with that setup.
You take conclusion that there is not hearable difference between the DAC's...
But a DAC does nothing more then converting a digital source to an analog output that goes to the AMP's. I mentioned in the start(page 6) that the source is a computer/MAC with toslink SPDIF connected to a "nanoDigi miniDSP".
If the digital source isn't optimal (a toslink output and the processing of the signal by the nanoDigi miniDSP clearly isn't optimal); then it doesn't matter what DAC and AMP you put after that in the chain; it will all sound not good/equally bad. Ever thought of removing the SPDIF part completely and starting with a high end USB I2S source and a proper FIFO reclocker after it to feed the DAC? In my opinion the test is worthless if the source is always the same weak SPDIF input. If the digital input isn't good then the DAC couldn't make it good !
And then the end of the chain; the ICEpower amp's are low-end amplifiers. In my opinion those amp's aren't even close to good enough (99 dollar costing amp's, together with a >3000 dollar DAC?) to make the difference hearable.
I must admit that I didn't read all the 178 pages, but in my opinion your whole way of testing is wrong and that makes your conclusions worthless.
When you do a proper testing between DAC's; you start with really top high end, top of the line sources and amp's. Then you're sure that those aren't the bottleneck of your audio chain. But you did the opposite, you use a low end digital source, and a low end amplifier, and then you expect to hear differences when you change the middle part of it ?? (the DAC) I really don't get it, and you seem to be so sure about your conclusions? I understand that you and the listeners couldn't hear the differences; because your complete setup is low-end(besides the speakers) I wouldn't expect different with that setup.
when doing comparisons it's not the price of the electronics used in the test that matters. You can buy any high end snake oil nonsense but unless it's proven by means of measurements to be sufficiently transparent, the price doesn't matter. Hence the conlcusion about the test being flawed by not using high end components is in itself flawed. High End = Expensive <> Accurate.
Where did I say that the price of the components is the most important?? Where am I talking about buying any high end snake oil nonsense items to the setup? I'm saying that a DAC test should be done with a proper setup where you're 100% sure that the bottleneck isn't one of the other components. With this setup the opposite is done! The digital start is flawed (high jitter motherboard toslink output with bad power regulation in combination with a high jitter DSP output), and the output is not even close as good as it could be(measured, based on facts; there are WAY better amps). So how could you test the middle part(DAC) on that basis? Impossible.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
So you are saying the same thing one hears from people selling high end gear. You can't hear the difference between these items until you've spent another boatload of cash on the other items in the chain. The end point is never ending upgrades and the guy doing the selling is laughing all the way.......
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.