The DAC scam

[Friesiansam]

It's all relative my dear chap!

View attachment 8613

Have you tested this fruity theory?

 

[Jasonovich]

Have you tested this fruity theory?

No, don't want people to think I'm bananas. They may be right though 😆

 

[manicm]

That's not really a particularly interesting observation. The subjective listening thing is pushed so much by hifi magazines like what HiFi and many YouTube reviewers. But subjective listening tests are flawed - that's been proven by science.

It's not actually. And AB testing is a very flawed methodology.

 

[RTHerringbone]

Nobody is saying anyone is wrong to love the sound of something. Where did you get that idea? These strawman arguments are quite tedious. The religion comparison is another one

I think you're just tinkering with semantics to be honest. If we look at the enjoyment of music as a leisurely pursuit rather than a theoretical debate, indulge this strawman:

You listen to the same track through two different components and prefer #1. You're then shown that #2 "measures significantly better". What does that do to your enjoyment levels? Does it matter?

 

[Al ears]

This is exactly how I feel about HiFi.

This is precisely how everyone should feel about hifi.
Which is why I always have difficulty in answering questions especially when it comes to speakers as, ultimately, these will make or break a decent set-up regardless of measurement of any source.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

I think you're just tinkering with semantics to be honest. If we look at the enjoyment of music as a leisurely pursuit rather than a theoretical debate, indulge this strawman:

You listen to the same track through two different components and prefer #1. You're then shown that #2 "measures significantly better". What does that do to your enjoyment levels? Does it matter?

It doesn't matter. But subjective listening is flawed. Comparing the two subjectively was a bad idea.

 

[RTHerringbone]

Comparing the two subjectively was a bad idea.

Why? You found one that you preferred the sound of.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

Why? You found one that you preferred the sound of.

No. Think about it this way:

You subjectively compared two DACs they both measure great with distortions inaudible. You prefer one in your subjective listening test and buy it.

What you weren't away of was the listening test was not volume matched to within 0.1db of each other. One was slightly louder than the other. You preferred the one that had slightly punchier bass and a bit more detail maybe. It was the louder one.

Can you see why subjective listening comparisons are flawed now?

 

[RTHerringbone]

Sounds a bit straw-manny to me.

In the scenario every conceivable care was taken to ensure that both presentations were matched by the meticulous and independent store assistant / boffin in a white coat, but you still preferred the component that measured less well. Then what?

 

[manicm]

No. Think about it this way:

You subjectively compared two DACs they both measure great with distortions inaudible. You prefer one in your subjective listening test and buy it.

What you weren't away of was the listening test was not volume matched to within 0.1db of each other. One was slightly louder than the other. You preferred the one that had slightly punchier bass and a bit more detail maybe. It was the louder one.

Can you see why subjective listening comparisons are flawed now?

Volume matching like AB testing may be just a tad bit overrated. If one component sounds good at a comfortable level, and another needs more volume to sound good, then?

There's also the possibility of gross overcomplication, as with the intriguing new budget priced Schiit preamplifier. I'm stating this because of ASRs Icon conclusion:

It has active and passive modes. It seems to me the ultra high tech components such as these are targeting the ultra audiophile market - and this has nothing to do with cost - but the ultra audiophile who makes tweaks on the fly according to the source and recording. And this is not a universally attractive feature for those who want a more leisurely approach to hi-fi, even if they spend thousands.

And this kind of hyper configurability may also indicate compromises on the part of the manufacturer. For example NADs hybrid digital amplifiers offer switchable A to D analogue and phono inputs. But Linn are so confident in their technology that they don't offer the choice. A turntable into any modern Linn system will be digitised, and owners with LP12s say their players have never sounded better.

I come back to my analogy - I get highly pissed off when I'm ordering a dish at a restaurant and I'm supposed to add salt or spices to taste. That's a chef who's not confident in his or her skills.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

Volume matching like AB testing may be just a tad bit overrated. If one component sounds good at a comfortable level, and another needs more volume to sound good, then?

Volume matching is not overrated. It's been shown in scientific tests that humans will tend to prefer the louder one, and that the differences should be no more than 0.1db to avoid this. And the thing is that required voltage measurement of the analogue outputs to get that level of accuracy. And who does that?

Just because something is hard to do does not make it "overrated".

 

[manicm]

Volume matching is not overrated. It's been shown in scientific tests that humans will tend to prefer the louder one, and that the differences should be no more than 0.1db to avoid this. And the thing is that required voltage measurement of the analogue outputs to get that level of accuracy. And who does that?

Just because something is hard to do does not make it "overrated".

I don't buy that, because a. It's not really scientific. B. people are only really going to listen or audition at levels that are comfortable for them.

 

[RJW232]

Volume matching like AB testing may be just a tad bit overrated. If one component sounds good at a comfortable level, and another needs more volume to sound good, then?

AB testing itself is already overrated. In the best (or worst) case we hear differences between A and B, but it's not possible to hear which one is actually the best. You need much more time to analyze the sound and switching between multiple options is not the way to do that. I think we all have experienced sensational sound at demo's and after listening for a while it get less sensational but just awful. The best way to test equipment is just listen to it for a few days. Make notes what you specifally liked or disliked and try something else. Or not, if you like it, why should you try out somehting else?

 

[manicm]

Volume matching is not overrated. It's been shown in scientific tests that humans will tend to prefer the louder one, and that the differences should be no more than 0.1db to avoid this. And the thing is that required voltage measurement of the analogue outputs to get that level of accuracy. And who does that?

Just because something is hard to do does not make it "overrated".

It's all about manufacturer choices. I'll guarantee you volume matching would not mean much when comparing a real, well designed Class A amplifier to an AB one, because at lower volumes I know which one will be superior.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

It's all about manufacturer choices. I'll guarantee you volume matching would not mean much when comparing a real, well designed Class A amplifier to an AB one, because at lower volumes I know which one will be superior.

I believe this is a DAC thread mate.

And volume matching is very important anyway.

 

[Al ears]

I believe this is a DAC thread mate.

And volume matching is very important anyway.

Very important when comparing two pieces of equipment like DACs, absolutely useless when attempting to build a system.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

I don't buy that, because a. It's not really scientific. B. people are only really going to listen or audition at levels that are comfortable for them.

What's not really scientific? What's the volume people listen at got to do with anything?

 

[ToppingSMSL]

AB testing itself is already overrated. In the best (or worst) case we hear differences between A and B, but it's not possible to hear which one is actually the best. You need much more time to analyze the sound and switching between multiple options is not the way to do that. I think we all have experienced sensational sound at demo's and after listening for a while it get less sensational but just awful. The best way to test equipment is just listen to it for a few days. Make notes what you specifally liked or disliked and try something else. Or not, if you like it, why should you try out somehting else?

Nah. You're going to be listening to the speakers mainly as they have the biggest affect on frequency response by far. Instantaneous switching is the best method - that's been proven by experiment. Our memory for sounds just isn't that good.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

Very important when comparing two pieces of equipment like DACs, absolutely useless when attempting to build a system.

You haven't backed up your statement with evidence. We're talking about selecting a DAC in this thread. DACs are not system dependent as they all sound the same barring some filter differences in the very high frequencies where there's not much music anyway. And that's what this thread is about - you arent going to actually hear differences between DACs - you'll maybe hear differences due to slightly different volume levels, the way you're focusing on the music, etc etc. That's not actually differences with the sound coming out of the DACs though.

 

[ToppingSMSL]

It's not actually. And AB testing is a very flawed methodology.

********. And no evidence provided....