How does DAC affect the sound quality.

[Thompsonuxb]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac... 

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

 

[NSA_watch_my_toilet]

I agree with Vladimir. If the sound was not given a distinctive character with cheap tricks, then a DAC should sound very close to his brothers.

If you understand french, you can look at the vids of Jipihorn on youtube. You have some complete themes around that.

 

[Ajani]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac...

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

So because you like how it sounds, then it's accurate? The argument is not about whether it sounds good, but whether it is accurate or coloured. Obviously many audiophiles like products that sound coloured, but that doesn't make those products accurate.

Also, no one is disputing your right to buy whatever product you like.

 

[Ajani]

I agree with Vladimir. If the sound was not given a distinctive character with cheap tricks, then a DAC should sound very close to his brothers.

That was the point of one of my threads. You would expect the differences to be fairly subtle, unless you are talking about coloured sound/parlour tricks.

 

[SonofSun]

Designed poorly means with non-flat FR and/or with audible distortion. Foul play is using tricks like louder output to simulate better sound. But really in most cases you don't need any change, just talk it up, price it high, and leave the rest to people's imagination.

Few years back I knew DACs were the next big audio foo thing and I wasn't dissapointed. People are actually hearing differences in DACs and every year a more expensive ones come out as reasonably priced. It really is a tragic spectacle, but funny in a way.

This industry really is free money. People will believe in absolutely any BS story and pay any price. Actually, the higher the price, more beliavable the story is. £1,400 Chord Hugo DAC. You've got to laugh.

Couldn't agree more, I sold my Rega Dac as I couldn't hear even the slightes difference between it and the Sonos dac.

Of course with amps no longer having tone controls people are buying expensive dacs to tailor the sound, I just think it is a huge con... or maybe my hearing is shot?

you can still buy amps with tone control's marantz pm5005 , pm6005 , pm7005 , pm8005 *smile*

Of course you are right, I was making the point that tone controls are not that fashionable or even deemed to be heresy.

I think tone controls can perform a good function in getting the right sound. Bring them back I say.

 

[NSA_watch_my_toilet]

Brands like McIntosh, Accuphase, Nad, Luxman and Yamaha always have. I like to use mine on critical records to "tame" the flaws.

 

[tonky]

The effect of tone controls on many modern amps is very subtle (in mho). Two I have heard Marantz 8005 and Cambridge 840A v2. - the sound was only subtly changed and sounded better (both amps) with tone defeat. In a balanced system it's hardly worth the effort I think. - but it's there for those who want to tailor a "poor" recording I suppose - but if it's poor it will still be poor. (maybe slightly "less poor")

As an aside - I heard the rega dac with my cambridge 840A amp . The change in sound was obvious - made a huge difference in tonal balance. - but did i enjoy the "new" tonal balance - was it better. If it was I wasn't prepared to pay 500£ on it.

tonky

 

[ChrisIRL]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result.

If the listener is being gouged for £hundreds (or even £thousands) for a £10 'tweak' in the opamps used? Yes, it matters.

But who else is going to perform these tweaks for you. Let's face it, the diy customisation route is not an option for most. I'm well against the prices being charged for a lot of hifi items. If I liked how something sounded however and it was at a price I was willing to pay I don't care if the manufacturer changed one thing or 100 things. I couldn't change it or even know what to tell someone who could what changes I wanted.

 

[Vladimir]

If you expect to hear a difference most of the times you will, even if it isn't there. This flaw of our auditory nerve system is an actual advantage from evolutionary perspective. There is no penalty for hearing a predator that isn't there. There is a big penalty for not hearing one that is.

No, on two counts.

Expectation bias isn't a product of the 'auditory nerve system'; it's a cognitive bias.

And as for the evolutionary argument, expectation bias works in both directions: it can make us think we hear something that isn't actually there, and it can make us fail to hear something that actually is there.

I appreciate the correction. I'm designing flyers on something completely unrelated and may not get my points across well here. I'm sure you understand what I actually meant in the post, even though you're not a fan of evo reductionism.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Designed poorly means with non-flat FR and/or with audible distortion. Foul play is using tricks like louder output to simulate better sound. But really in most cases you don't need any change, just talk it up, price it high, and leave the rest to people's imagination.

Few years back I knew DACs were the next big audio foo thing and I wasn't dissapointed. People are actually hearing differences in DACs and every year a more expensive ones come out as reasonably priced. It really is a tragic spectacle, but funny in a way.

This industry really is free money. People will believe in absolutely any BS story and pay any price. Actually, the higher the price, more beliavable the story is. £1,400 Chord Hugo DAC. You've got to laugh.

Couldn't agree more, I sold my Rega Dac as I couldn't hear even the slightes difference between it and the Sonos dac.

Of course with amps no longer having tone controls people are buying expensive dacs to tailor the sound, I just think it is a huge con... or maybe my hearing is shot?

you can still buy amps with tone control's marantz pm5005 , pm6005 , pm7005 , pm8005 *smile*

Of course you are right, I was making the point that tone controls are not that fashionable or even deemed to be heresy.

I think tone controls can perform a good function in getting the right sound. Bring them back I say.

I think the tone controls are good in some ways like the left / right as I use it to setup my speakers for placement just turn it all the way say to the left so you hear no sound out of one speaker so you just have the one going so you get your toe in right so the sound hits you in your listening position out of one speaker then do the same the other side

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac...

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

So because you like how it sounds, then it's accurate? The argument is not about whether it sounds good, but whether it is accurate or coloured. Obviously many audiophiles like products that sound coloured, but that doesn't make those products accurate.

Also, no one is disputing your right to buy whatever product you like. 

Accuracy as nothing to do with anything like how these things measure.

And these 'Audiophiles' like what sounds good and brings them close to the music I would have thought which is no bad thing.

I really wish you'd stop using that word like an insult too.

 

[matt49]

I appreciate the correction. I'm designing flyers on something completely unrelated and may not get my points across well here. I'm sure you understand what I actually meant in the post, even though you're not a fan of evo reductionism.

Sure. No doubt there's an evolutionary basis for these cognitive biases; we just don't know what it is (yet).

 

[Ajani]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac...

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

So because you like how it sounds, then it's accurate? The argument is not about whether it sounds good, but whether it is accurate or coloured. Obviously many audiophiles like products that sound coloured, but that doesn't make those products accurate.

Also, no one is disputing your right to buy whatever product you like.

Accuracy as nothing to do with anything like how these things measure.

And that is where our debate ends. If you think accuracy has nothing to do with measurements, then there is nothing to discuss.

 

[tonky]

My hi-fi (naim unitilite - lo-fi?) and thoroughly enjoying it at moderate volumes. While I was listening I was attacked by a fox which had sneaked in via an open upstairs bedroom window. I now understand the interrelationship between listening to music, predatory selection and evo reductionism. I managed to chase the fox out! . I had a lucky escape! It would be nice to escape one or two of these threads too!! Perhaps I should get back to interior designing.

tonky

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac...

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

So because you like how it sounds, then it's accurate? The argument is not about whether it sounds good, but whether it is accurate or coloured. Obviously many audiophiles like products that sound coloured, but that doesn't make those products accurate.

Also, no one is disputing your right to buy whatever product you like.?

Accuracy as nothing to do with anything like how these things measure.

And that is where our debate ends. If you think accuracy has nothing to do with measurements, then there is nothing to discuss. 

What I've said is accuracy and measurements have no relevance in this.

As has been said we can enjoy music via a single speaker transistor radio or remember those one ear headphones or via so many mediums that do not require them to be accurate or measure well.

If we move up the scale a pair of expensive speakers that measure 'flat' performance will be butchered by folk sticking a sock or a pair of tights in the port or placing them inbetween a sideboard and a sofa.

That's why to me your argument makes no sense - if it works it works if not try something else with what you've got.

 

[Ajani]

Then again if the manufacturer employs tricks such as imbalanced FR or adding distortion does it really matter if the listener likes that sound as a result. The dac they like is the only device that creates the sound that is appealing to them regardless of how it does it.

For the individual listener it probably doesn't matter (unless they could simulate the effect for far less money). The bigger issue is more the spreading of misinformation. So listeners and reviewers give the impression that XYZ ultra expensive DAC is a substantial improvement over cheaper options. When it's really just a case of colouring the sound to create a different, rather than improved sound.

Again with the 'colouring' - it's a nonsense argument, I'm sorry.

It's on a nonsense argument in your application of it. You clearly didn't get what I was saying.

If DAC A gives you more detail, better definition - clarity than DAC B it's not colouring.

Its more information from the source due to better engineering superior math in its design, getting closer to the 100% of the source material as opposed to the 97% of the lesser player or standalone DAC.

No one disagrees with any of that. The problem is that all that would show up in the measurements. There are ultra-expensive DACs with measurements that support that they are indeed better engineered than more affordable ones. However, there are also very expensive DACs that measure terribly, but get raved about - these are the ones I refer to as coloured. An example being this $9,600 Audio Note combo:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-cdt-oneii-cd-transport-dac...

You see right their Ajani is why it's a nonsense.

How a thing measures is meaningless. If during the R&D it's found route A sounds better than route B - real world but 'measures' worse who cares?

The holy grail is the best sound reproduction. All other considerations expendable (Alien - anybody get that.... )

A man can charge you what he wants but if it sounds better who's going to quibble cause it measure worse?

You pays your money and you takes what you get....

So because you like how it sounds, then it's accurate? The argument is not about whether it sounds good, but whether it is accurate or coloured. Obviously many audiophiles like products that sound coloured, but that doesn't make those products accurate.

Also, no one is disputing your right to buy whatever product you like.

Accuracy as nothing to do with anything like how these things measure.

And that is where our debate ends. If you think accuracy has nothing to do with measurements, then there is nothing to discuss.

What I've said is accuracy and measurements have no relevance in this.

As has been said we can enjoy music via a single speaker transistor radio or remember those one ear headphones or via so many mediums that do not require them to be accurate or measure well.

If we move up the scale a pair of expensive speakers that measure 'flat' performance will be butchered by folk sticking a sock or a pair of tights in the port or placing them inbetween a sideboard and a sofa.

That's why to me your argument makes no sense - if it works it works if not try something else with what you've got.

EDIT: I have no idea what you are disagreeing with or how if fits into my argument (or more likely what you think my argument is). Anyway, there was a whole thread on colouration, where my opinion was stated.