Bits are bits and are perfectly conveyed to the dac from the digital source via optical or coax or usb. That’s what any digital engineer would probably say. I used to be one and that is what I would have said and I still do say it. So why do they all sound different? A raspberry pi driving a Bryston DAC sounds different to a Innuos driving the same DAC. I’ve listened to both on a pair of kef ref 5’s and a MF nuvista 800 and there really is a difference but why? Bits are bits. Change the the USB cable from a cheap one to a chord signature and the pi sounds different as does the Innuos but why. Bits are bits.
The Bryston has galvanic isolation so it can’t be ground induced noise, can it? It has extensive de jittering so it can’t be timing, can it? It’s digital so no lost data. So what is it? Who knows. All I do know is I will spend money on hifi if I think it sounds good to me and not because someone says it sounds better. And what is “better” anyway?
To say there is no difference between a pi and some dedicated dac less streamer when I can clearly hear a difference leaves me wondering why we all seem to have different experiences of digital sources when they should all sound the same. Bits are bits, right?
And the real kicker, swap a AQ vodka optical cable end to end and, to me, it sounds different!
The Bryston has galvanic isolation so it can’t be ground induced noise, can it? It has extensive de jittering so it can’t be timing, can it? It’s digital so no lost data. So what is it? Who knows. All I do know is I will spend money on hifi if I think it sounds good to me and not because someone says it sounds better. And what is “better” anyway?
To say there is no difference between a pi and some dedicated dac less streamer when I can clearly hear a difference leaves me wondering why we all seem to have different experiences of digital sources when they should all sound the same. Bits are bits, right?
And the real kicker, swap a AQ vodka optical cable end to end and, to me, it sounds different!
kemills1 said:
As as ex-engineer, I am sure would realise that given the facts you list above, the common component in each case likely to be making a difference is you, not the equipment. Try googling suggestion bias.
After all, bits are bits.
bits might be bits but they don't all sound the same not even close.
https://youtu.be/xaZa_HvxdX8
https://youtu.be/xaZa_HvxdX8
rainsoothe
Well-known member
I wrote the nonsense after a frustrating evening trying to understand why I could hear differences between different digital sources and I did consider what I was hearing was down to, as you say, “suggestion bias” but I’m sure there is more to it than that. I do wonder if the digital data has been taylored in some way in the digital domain by a DSP.
woodbino
Well-known member
Of course it sounds different. It always will.
Listening and hearing involves a lot of post processing, and that happens in thee brain. Your mood, expectations, what your wife said to you in bed last night, this will all change the sound.
90% of what you all say and describe about the sound quality on these forums is based on these variables, not the electronics in front of you.
It's all good though!
Listening and hearing involves a lot of post processing, and that happens in thee brain. Your mood, expectations, what your wife said to you in bed last night, this will all change the sound.
90% of what you all say and describe about the sound quality on these forums is based on these variables, not the electronics in front of you.
It's all good though!
kemills1 said:
If you want to know what you heard, never believe your ears, but go onto a Hifi Forum and ask someone who wasn't there, to tell you. Simples. *wink*
+1CnoEvil said:
This is good advice and will save you loads of wasted evenings mucking around.
More time to use your equipment for its intended use....
Listening/enjoying not analysing music.
Andrewjvt said:
I'm the Danny Dyer of the HiFi forum.
(Don't worry if this doesn't make sense, as it's a rather obscure reference to a very recent clip (with Piers Morgan) that went viral...where he made a comment that seemed to unite both sides of THE current polarizing debate.)
I think we’re all on the same page here. My frustration was borne as an observer watching a fellow enthusiast trying different combinations of kit to achieve something not really knowing what that something was. For me, I’m happy with my system and just want to keep it simple and listen to music. It seems to me these days that you need to be a computer expert to play a record.
Kubs
Well-known member
Electro
Well-known member
woodbino said:
If this is true it is very worrying indeed, how on earth am I surposed to tell what is real in my life, or if indeed the whole world is purely in my imagination.
Do I exist or am I a figment of my own imagination, but if I don't exist how am I imagining myself ----------- *help*
Gray said:
I’m beginning to think none of these streamers send bit perfect data to the dac. And the servers for the streamers don’t send bit perfect data either. I wonder if anyone has ever captured digital data from various streamers and done a bit wise comparison of the data stream. I can’t help but think the analogue output has been manipulated at every stage of getting the music to your amplifier.
jjbomber
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
Cr-Apple? Actives? Brexit? For goodnes sake, put us out of our misery!!
I know his daughter and son-in-law are called Jack and Dani. Cockney slang never got it so right!
kemills1 said:
Been tested and proved many, many times. Of course this doesn't stop you having a lousy setup, badly made or faulty streamer which screws up your data.
Otherwise, the same bits that started out their journey at whatever digital source you use will be the ones coming out of your streamer.
Kubs
Well-known member
He was giving his views on Brexit with particular attention on David Cameron.jjbomber said:
Back to streamers again - I've discovered something brilliant (I'm sure some of you are already doing this) .... Streaming Radio Paradise in FLAC format through my Chromecast Audio, using my MF DAC. All controlled from my phone using the RP app .... The quality is surprisingly good!
Strictly Stereo
Well-known member
Gray said:
That line "a bit perfect file is all the DAC needs" is either a gross over-simplification or just plain wrong. DACs do not deal with files. DACs deal with streams of bits, either PCM or DSD. Streamers like the Neo MiND or a suitably configured Raspberry Pi take files and turn them into streams of bits. With a PCM or DSD stream, the sample rate is encoded in the data rate, rather than the bits themselves. Timing errors in the output have measurable effects. Many modern DACs attempt to fix or avoid such errors in the source, but DACs themselves can also introduce errors.
The debate really is about the audibility of these errors. Current research shows that these errors are below the threshold of human hearing, but successive studies have shown that we are more sensitive to such errors than first thought. Maybe future studies will prove that there is an audible difference or that the difference is entirely psychological. In the meantime, why not have a listen to the available options and make up your own mind?
I have not heard the Neo MiND and I have no idea which particular combination of Pi, HAT and software you are running, but I would encourage you to compare them for yourself. I am sure that your local Moon dealer would be happy to offer you a demonstration. If you cannot hear a difference and you have no other reason to switch, then I would recommend that you hang on to your money.
Strictly Stereo said:
You seem to be mixing up all sorts here.
All serial protocols are 'a stream of bits'. Your internet connection is 'a stream of bits'. S/PDIF isn't just 16 bit samples sent one bit at a time, there is framing and control information embedded in the data as well.
Transferring a file via a serial protocol is no different. For transferring a complete file there would be indexing and (probably) error correction layered on top, but the nuts and bolts of the data transfer would be the same. Arguably this is what S/PDIF is doing already but it uses you as the indexer.
The sample clock is something else, and for convenience sake it is superimposed on the data pulses using manchester bi phase mark encoding. No self respecting DAC should slave itself to the inbound clock - the S/PDIF standard itself has problems, and for maximum fidelity a low jitter clock should be mounted on the circuit board next to the D2A chip, not in a different box connected by a serial link using a flawed standard.
Frankly, no decent DAC should use S/PDIF. If Sony and Philips had cheap computing power and the USB standard avaialble when they designed the CD, then S/PDIF would never have seen the light of day.
Strictly Stereo
Well-known member
andyjm said:
Perhaps, but you seem to have understood it well enough. Hopefully other people will too.
davidf
Well-known member
It’s all a Matrix Electro.Electro said:
Someone tried to tell me once that there was no spoon - he backtracked when I cracked him on the forehead with it, Basil Fawlty style.
Strictly Stereo said:
I'm currently using the (highly adequate) O-DAC as an external DAC for the Pi.
I note what you've said about listening. However, I suspect that, if you and I were to compare my DAC fed by the Neo MIND then Pi, you might be surprised by the lack of any difference, whereas I wouldn't.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram