|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 9:04:32 GMT
I was thinking about ways that DACs can/could sound different - that is ways that do at least have some back up beyond pure speculation Jitter - you probably struggle to find a DAC, even going back to the 1970s that has audible jitter - although we should consider that imelemntation in the system could add more. It takes a lot of jitter before you can hear it - you can try this online if you want. But since jitter sounds like tape wow and no-one would think that a good thing I think we can reject it as a reason Distortion - high levels of 2nd and 3rd harmonic (i,e over 1 pecent) could change the sound although it would be subtle. Most DACs don't come anywhere close but there are a few that have a spread of high distortion up to the 9th harmonic. It's postulated that even low level high harmonic distortion is audible, so this is certainly a possibility. I think it would probably not sound good to most people but there's always exceptions. Noise - some DACs are very noisy usually due to some weird implementation like using output transformers. It's suggested that large amounts of uncorrelated noise can add a sense of air and space. So this is certainly a possibility Frequency Response - by far the easiest way to change the sound of any bit of kit is to deviate the FR from flat. Tonality is directly resolved from the FR. Most DACs tend to be flat all the way to at least 18Khz which isn't going to be audible unless you are very young and playing appropriate music or effects recording that has content that will show it up. But again there's a few DACs that roll off within the audible range even for us codgers so again a likely possibility. Most of the DACs from usual Chinee suspects tend to have effectively no jitter, no distortion (at any frequency) no noise and a flat FR so it's unsurprising that they all sound the same. They will sound like the recording you are playing since they offer no way to alter it. I'm unconvinced by speculation that the conversion process (multibit, D-S, ladder/R-2R) makes a difference but maybe some evidence for this will one day emerge in a controlled listening test, but I'd bet against it. Also unconvinced by arguments regarding filters, the effects are so slight and at such a high frequency it seems unlikely to cause the differences some perceive. I know I cannot differentiate (blind) between the six different filters on either of my DACs. Non over sampling can/does sound different but then this is covered under noise and distortion. Anyway just some thoughts. I have been thinking about this post a wee bit, and something came to mind. Based on the ASR measurement table, 18 out of the top 20 DACS all use the same chips. Either ESS or AKM, majority ESS. Looking at the guts of them all, they all seem to follow extremely similar ethos of design and very similar layouts etc. Therefore, I think if you put all of those 18 DACs into a blind test, no one would be able to hear a difference between any of them. I absolutely believe that because it makes sense. However, If I were to take a Mark Levinson, a Berkeley or even a Parasound HD1600 and compare that to any one of those DACs in the top 20, I think there would be a much higher chance of their being an audible difference. I can see on ASR that DACs of that type have "worse" measurements than any of those top 20 DACS, and i can see from the build that they are VERY differently made. I think that due to the differences in construction, DAC topology, output stage, PSU type, PCB inductance, good/bad layout, Clock types and quality....literally all of those types of things, I think it does make a difference to what you hear, and i have DACs here now that exhibit exactly that. I prefer something different to the "lab grown" sound that the ESS DACS (I have tried) seem to produce in my system. Whenever I have used a DAC with "less than ESS" specs, I appear to have enjoyed it more, and it's not bias or anything else like that, it's subliminal or subconscious. If I am enjoying it, I doesn't matter what the measurements say, and I don't think there is anything wrong in saying DACs sound different or if you didn't like a dac, if that's what you heard or that's what your experience was. Regardless of what Amir's uber expensive measurement machine says...I have enjoyed some dacs more than others. There must be a reason for that, especially when I have heard a fair few of those top 20 and haven't kept any of them. Suggestions that anything outside of the audible range doesn't matter is also not something I agree with. Throughout everything we have done with phonostages, there have been multiple occasions where something that "*shouldn't* matter, has mattered. There have been things that have baffled us and defied explanation. I am sure there is one, but we haven't found it. Sometimes I think we are looking in the wrong place or measuring the wrong things, or even not measuring something we should be. This is the benefit of being on the inside of some of this design and research stuff...you realise that what you think you know is not always what you need to know. For instance, you never see any measurements for RFI leakage from the device itself. You may suggest that the DAC would show any RFI interference on the measurements, and that's true...but what if that RFI is spewing into another device and not the DAC itself? You wouldn't see that on the DAC measurements because it's not being measured as part of the system, it's being measured in isolation, which isn't how it's used. Some cartridges have a quoted lifespan of 2000hrs, but it wont last 2000hrs if the vinyl it plays is in terrible condition. One measurement/spec did not tell the whole story, and nor do ASR's. The measurements do sometimes show differences that could be potentially audible, that's what my post was about. It's unlikely that there is something occurring that could not be measured, except of course for our own unconscious bias. This is why blind testing invariably shows no difference when there's no measured difference. RFI output isn't measured because there just isn't any. You need massive amounts of RFI to make audible differences. That's just not happening with any hifi component. I see all over forums the idea that there is RFI getting into everything and affecting performance. It's bollocks. But it is used as a reason to sell products that solve a problem that doesn't exist. If it existed it would be easy to show with measurements. But the people claiming it's a problem and selling things to fix it never do that. Even though it would increase their sales exponentially because all the people like me who demand a bit of evidence before we buy (and there's a lot of us) would go out and buy them. Not hard to guess why they don't do it. take a look at this bollocks for example pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/ultimately-just-a-couple-of-guys-bitching.277910/ |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 28, 2023 9:47:04 GMT
I have been thinking about this post a wee bit, and something came to mind. Based on the ASR measurement table, 18 out of the top 20 DACS all use the same chips. Either ESS or AKM, majority ESS. Looking at the guts of them all, they all seem to follow extremely similar ethos of design and very similar layouts etc. Therefore, I think if you put all of those 18 DACs into a blind test, no one would be able to hear a difference between any of them. I absolutely believe that because it makes sense. However, If I were to take a Mark Levinson, a Berkeley or even a Parasound HD1600 and compare that to any one of those DACs in the top 20, I think there would be a much higher chance of their being an audible difference. I can see on ASR that DACs of that type have "worse" measurements than any of those top 20 DACS, and i can see from the build that they are VERY differently made. I think that due to the differences in construction, DAC topology, output stage, PSU type, PCB inductance, good/bad layout, Clock types and quality....literally all of those types of things, I think it does make a difference to what you hear, and i have DACs here now that exhibit exactly that. I prefer something different to the "lab grown" sound that the ESS DACS (I have tried) seem to produce in my system. Whenever I have used a DAC with "less than ESS" specs, I appear to have enjoyed it more, and it's not bias or anything else like that, it's subliminal or subconscious. If I am enjoying it, I doesn't matter what the measurements say, and I don't think there is anything wrong in saying DACs sound different or if you didn't like a dac, if that's what you heard or that's what your experience was. Regardless of what Amir's uber expensive measurement machine says...I have enjoyed some dacs more than others. There must be a reason for that, especially when I have heard a fair few of those top 20 and haven't kept any of them. Suggestions that anything outside of the audible range doesn't matter is also not something I agree with. Throughout everything we have done with phonostages, there have been multiple occasions where something that "*shouldn't* matter, has mattered. There have been things that have baffled us and defied explanation. I am sure there is one, but we haven't found it. Sometimes I think we are looking in the wrong place or measuring the wrong things, or even not measuring something we should be. This is the benefit of being on the inside of some of this design and research stuff...you realise that what you think you know is not always what you need to know. For instance, you never see any measurements for RFI leakage from the device itself. You may suggest that the DAC would show any RFI interference on the measurements, and that's true...but what if that RFI is spewing into another device and not the DAC itself? You wouldn't see that on the DAC measurements because it's not being measured as part of the system, it's being measured in isolation, which isn't how it's used. Some cartridges have a quoted lifespan of 2000hrs, but it wont last 2000hrs if the vinyl it plays is in terrible condition. One measurement/spec did not tell the whole story, and nor do ASR's. The measurements do sometimes show differences that could be potentially audible, that's what my post was about. It's unlikely that there is something occurring that could not be measured, except of course for our own unconscious bias. This is why blind testing invariably shows no difference when there's no measured difference. RFI output isn't measured because there just isn't any. You need massive amounts of RFI to make audible differences. That's just not happening with any hifi component. I see all over forums the idea that there is RFI getting into everything and affecting performance. It's bollocks. But it is used as a reason to sell products that solve a problem that doesn't exist. If it existed it would be easy to show with measurements. But the people claiming it's a problem and selling things to fix it never do that. Even though it would increase their sales exponentially because all the people like me who demand a bit of evidence before we buy (and there's a lot of us) would go out and buy them. Not hard to guess why they don't do it. take a look at this bollocks for example pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/ultimately-just-a-couple-of-guys-bitching.277910/Oh, i agree you were giving reasons for differences, but it got the brain going regarding the asr dac list and why the top 20 may sound the same....because they ae basically the same lol RE: Blind Testing What happens if you do a blind test and you already believe there is no difference between components? Blind testing is flawed as long as there is personal bias of belief. Then you have all the psychology factors as to WHY people are less likely to hear a difference when they are blind tested. I recently saw a video of a bloke blind tasting food and he swore blind the Tofu he was eating was chicken...it wasn't, but maybe it was the same because he couldn't see it and in reality there is absolutely no difference? |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 10:35:41 GMT
yes - you could deliberately fail a blind test if you wanted to, just don't pay any attention to the sound and guess randomly.
However if we are testing for audible differences that cannot be measured, it is the only way to see if those differences are real.
You have to test someone who says 'There are definitely differences between these two devices - I can hear them, they are subtle but obvious to me, and anyone who can't hear them is either deaf, not discriminating enough, lying, or does not have enough listening experience.'
Loads of such people about on the forums.
Then you blind test them. No danger they are going to fail the test deliberately.
There's no point doing the test with someone who says they don't hear any difference sighted. It's not going to get any easier for them when they don't know which device they are listening to.
|
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Nov 28, 2023 10:40:56 GMT
Aye Lad thrash me whippets
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624 
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Nov 28, 2023 10:45:25 GMT
You have to test someone who says 'There are definitely differences between these two devices - I can hear them, they are subtle but obvious to me, and anyone who can't hear them is either deaf, not discriminating enough, lying, or does not have enough listening experience.' Loads of such people about on the forums. And until forums implement such listening tests prior to membership approval, different people with differing views, are going to frequent the forums. How can it be allowed  |
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Nov 28, 2023 10:46:06 GMT
Many years ago I was involved with the HFC blind testing panels, people were imaginging there were differences when we changed NOTHING and other could clear NOT hear quite marked differences when items were changed.
Human nature is a fickle thing
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 28, 2023 10:51:33 GMT
Many years ago I was involved with the HFC blind testing panels, people were imaginging there were differences when we chnaged NOTHING and other could clear NOT hear quite marked differences when items were changed. Human nature is a fickle thing Exactly that Tony. Blind testing is bullshit because humans are involved. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 10:56:41 GMT
You have to test someone who says 'There are definitely differences between these two devices - I can hear them, they are subtle but obvious to me, and anyone who can't hear them is either deaf, not discriminating enough, lying, or does not have enough listening experience.' Loads of such people about on the forums. And until forums implement such listening tests prior to membership approval, different people with differing views, are going to frequent the forums. How can it be allowed I think you're missing the point. I mean it doesn't matter to me, I have plenty of money to waste on this stuff if I want to. No mortgage, no debts, no dependants, I don't care. Not everyone is in the boat, so shouldn't we at least try to insert a bit of rigour into what we do and what we say and what advice we give when people ask for it? |
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Nov 28, 2023 11:05:38 GMT
And until forums implement such listening tests prior to membership approval, different people with differing views, are going to frequent the forums. How can it be allowed I think you're missing the point. I mean it doesn't matter to me, I have plenty of money to waste on this stuff if I want to. No mortgage, no debts, no dependants, I don't care. Not everyone is in the boat, so shouldn't we at least try to insert a bit of rigour into what we do and what we say and what advice we give when people ask for it? Okay, if you say so. You do repeat a lot that it really doesn't matter to you . . . Ultimately hifi is not a science test of super critical evaluation, to most people anyway. An enthusiasm towards the hobby is the pursuit of bringing you closer to the music, usually emotionally. Okay granted, some just want to listen for pure accuracy, they're part of it too. What is dangerous is imposing views too skewed either way, either towards the end that refuses to believe anything people are hearing is possible when the measurements say otherwise, or indeed the end that flys completely in the face of all scientific logic and relies purely on subjective opinion without any concern for factors rooted in science. As ever it's a balancing act of synergy, I'm not talking components here, I'm talking about approach. Also - I think you're doing a bit of a discredit to most peoples intelligence by assuming they can't make up their own minds ultimately as to whether they take a subjective opinion with a pinch of salt or not. Ultimately it's up to them isn't it. The tools to research both sides are there, all they have to do is look. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 28, 2023 11:08:28 GMT
yes - you could deliberately fail a blind test if you wanted to, just don't pay any attention to the sound and guess randomly. However if we are testing for audible differences that cannot be measured, it is the only way to see if those differences are real. You have to test someone who says 'There are definitely differences between these two devices - I can hear them, they are subtle but obvious to me, and anyone who can't hear them is either deaf, not discriminating enough, lying, or does not have enough listening experience.' Loads of such people about on the forums. Then you blind test them. No danger they are going to fail the test deliberately. There's no point doing the test with someone who says they don't hear any difference sighted. It's not going to get any easier for them when they don't know which device they are listening to. I am not talking about deliberately failing. I am talking about a predisposition to thinking all DACs sound the same if they measure the same. If a person with that belief was put in a AB blind test, is the test then to be accepted with 100% immunity to question? I don't think it is. They *may* hear a difference, but overrule it with their "knowledge" (bias) that there cant be one because the measurement do not show any difference, and their brain is lying to them because humans are unreliable. I also believe that putting a room full of people who have a predisposition to think EVERYTHING sounds different will be completely unreliable too. The point is you cannot have a completely accurate blind test because of the human factor. Blind testing is not the fail safe the ASR crowd peddle it as. In fact, it's highly unscientific to declare that when a group of listeners couldn't determine a difference between two samples that it must mean there wasn't one. That is only ONE out of numerous possibilities, but because it fits the narrative of the measurement brigade it is used as a stick to beat people with. Those same unreliable ears, pseudo acoustics and mind tricks you talk about are no different to the ones being used in blind tests, but yet become ultra reliable and "evidence" when it you don't know what's being played? It's hypocritical bollocks. That fella eating Tofu was told it was chicken...he believed it was chicken....Should we now accept Tofu tastes no different to Chicken because thats the result of that test? Absolutely not, because it's not even close to scientific, yet blind tests are the only way to know if things sound different...yeah, pull the other one. BTW, this conversation is based on what i have read over on ASR, which isnt necessarily what macca is saying in entirety. |
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Nov 28, 2023 11:43:04 GMT
It doesn't matter how perfect the test procedure or envirnoment is, they is always the that uncertancy prinicple that will be nagging away at the participants.
You now have a 21st century new psychological impairment to take into account FOMO
Fear Of Missing Out.
Its a powerful tool and effects many individuals from all walks of life, I myself to suffer from FOMO, only it's not audio thankfully have mastered that particular bent (lol) my downfall is test equipment and new mamnufucturing toy's, its a very slippery slope and I'm to far down the slide to be redeemed..................................
|
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Nov 28, 2023 11:52:01 GMT
Think of the men and women you lead into this sensless cause of ASR festering psychological head melting circular intransigence or irresitable force meets imoveable object.
This (Mass) debate has been going on for eon's so why procrate it?
Maybe it's just
|
|
|
|
Post by rexton on Nov 28, 2023 11:52:02 GMT
Lots of great posts. Imagine if everything we debated could be easily explained. What would we have To talk about?
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 11:54:09 GMT
yes - you could deliberately fail a blind test if you wanted to, just don't pay any attention to the sound and guess randomly. However if we are testing for audible differences that cannot be measured, it is the only way to see if those differences are real. You have to test someone who says 'There are definitely differences between these two devices - I can hear them, they are subtle but obvious to me, and anyone who can't hear them is either deaf, not discriminating enough, lying, or does not have enough listening experience.' Loads of such people about on the forums. Then you blind test them. No danger they are going to fail the test deliberately. There's no point doing the test with someone who says they don't hear any difference sighted. It's not going to get any easier for them when they don't know which device they are listening to. I am not talking about deliberately failing. I am talking about a predisposition to thinking all DACs sound the same if they measure the same. If a person with that belief was put in a AB blind test, is the test then to be accepted with 100% immunity to question? I don't think it is. They *may* hear a difference, but overrule it with their "knowledge" (bias) that there cant be one because the measurement do not show any difference, and their brain is lying to them because humans are unreliable. I also believe that putting a room full of people who have a predisposition to think EVERYTHING sounds different will be completely unreliable too. The point is you cannot have a completely accurate blind test because of the human factor. Blind testing is not the fail safe the ASR crowd peddle it as. In fact, it's highly unscientific to declare that when a group of listeners couldn't determine a difference between two samples that it must mean there wasn't one. That is only ONE out of numerous possibilities, but because it fits the narrative of the measurement brigade it is used as a stick to beat people with. Those same unreliable ears, pseudo acoustics and mind tricks you talk about are no different to the ones being used in blind tests, but yet become ultra reliable and "evidence" when it you don't know what's being played? It's hypocritical bollocks. That fella eating Tofu was told it was chicken...he believed it was chicken....Should we now accept Tofu tastes no different to Chicken because thats the result of that test? Absolutely not, because it's not even close to scientific, yet blind tests are the only way to know if things sound different...yeah, pull the other one. BTW, this conversation is based on what i have read over on ASR, which isnt necessarily what macca is saying in entirety. Well ASR is a big forum and you're inevitably going to get dogmatists who don't really understand what they are talking about, same as on subjective forums. You are absolutely correct in that a blind test of one individual will only show that they can - or can't tell a difference, it cannot be automatically expanded to everyone on the planet. Anyone with any real knowledge understands this. of course you can test a large sample of people in which case you move towards some statistical certainty. But it is still possible there will be outliers, and the best you could say there is that 'Most people cannot really tell the difference between chicken and tofu (or whatever). There are things we cna state for certain, one is that people can be pre-disposed even when there is a difference. For example when testing loudspeaker preference it was found that listeners sometimes preferred one speaker sighted, and a different one when blind tested. And that they preferred the less accurate speaker when sighted, and the more accurate speaker when blind. This confirms what was already known as fact - that is that our perception is not solely based on the sound waves hitting our ears, but on a whole host of other factors too. And this is the problem with drawing absolute conclusions from 'just listening'. I hear a difference between my two CD transports. Is that real or just in my head? I don't know. Until I blind test myself (which I probably won't) either is possible, but I appreciate that given how a CD transport works the 'in my head' possibility is quite high. Therefore I would never state as a fact that they have a different sound even though it is a fact that they sound different to me. It's these absolute statements which are what really need to be avoided whether it is here or ASR or anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Nov 28, 2023 11:54:18 GMT
Lots of great posts. Imagine if everything we debated could be easily explained. What would we have To talk about? Plenty of more worthy subjects other and ABX testing, its like saying that Jazz is just musical wanking for the aloof? |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 28, 2023 12:00:49 GMT
I am not talking about deliberately failing. I am talking about a predisposition to thinking all DACs sound the same if they measure the same. If a person with that belief was put in a AB blind test, is the test then to be accepted with 100% immunity to question? I don't think it is. They *may* hear a difference, but overrule it with their "knowledge" (bias) that there cant be one because the measurement do not show any difference, and their brain is lying to them because humans are unreliable. I also believe that putting a room full of people who have a predisposition to think EVERYTHING sounds different will be completely unreliable too. The point is you cannot have a completely accurate blind test because of the human factor. Blind testing is not the fail safe the ASR crowd peddle it as. In fact, it's highly unscientific to declare that when a group of listeners couldn't determine a difference between two samples that it must mean there wasn't one. That is only ONE out of numerous possibilities, but because it fits the narrative of the measurement brigade it is used as a stick to beat people with. Those same unreliable ears, pseudo acoustics and mind tricks you talk about are no different to the ones being used in blind tests, but yet become ultra reliable and "evidence" when it you don't know what's being played? It's hypocritical bollocks. That fella eating Tofu was told it was chicken...he believed it was chicken....Should we now accept Tofu tastes no different to Chicken because thats the result of that test? Absolutely not, because it's not even close to scientific, yet blind tests are the only way to know if things sound different...yeah, pull the other one. BTW, this conversation is based on what i have read over on ASR, which isnt necessarily what macca is saying in entirety. Well ASR is a big forum and you're inevitably going to get dogmatists who don't really understand what they are talking about, same as on subjective forums. You are absolutely correct in that a blind test of one individual will only show that they can - or can't tell a difference, it cannot be automatically expanded to everyone on the planet. Anyone with any real knowledge understands this. of course you can test a large sample of people in which case you move towards some statistical certainty. But it is still possible there will be outliers, and the best you could say there is that 'Most people cannot really tell the difference between chicken and tofu (or whatever). There are things we cna state for certain, one is that people can be pre-disposed even when there is a difference. For example when testing loudspeaker preference it was found that listeners sometimes preferred one speaker sighted, and a different one when blind tested. And that they preferred the less accurate speaker when sighted, and the more accurate speaker when blind. This confirms what was already known as fact - that is that our perception is not solely based on the sound waves hitting our ears, but on a whole host of other factors too. And this is the problem with drawing absolute conclusions from 'just listening'. I hear a difference between my two CD transports. Is that real or just in my head? I don't know. Until I blind test myself (which I probably won't) either is possible, but I appreciate that given how a CD transport works the 'in my head' possibility is quite high. Therefore I would never state as a fact that they have a different sound even though it is a fact that they sound different to me. It's these absolute statements which are what really need to be avoided whether it is here or ASR or anywhere. Yeah, spot on....we are not fans of absolutes here. In fact, I was quite shocked at the sheer amount of blanket statements that seemed to feed others to pile in with more of the same. I haven't been on there for a while ... May be a longer absence this time lol I think the allowance of people to express themselves is very important, but if it's obvious bollocks, it must be challenged, I get that. I also think that generally, advice offered here is usually very measured and often quite sensible. There also has to be a degree of understanding that there is absolutely no way everyone is either A) hearing the same thing, or B) listening for the same thing. Difficult balance to strike. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 12:07:55 GMT
I think you're missing the point. I mean it doesn't matter to me, I have plenty of money to waste on this stuff if I want to. No mortgage, no debts, no dependants, I don't care. Not everyone is in the boat, so shouldn't we at least try to insert a bit of rigour into what we do and what we say and what advice we give when people ask for it? Okay, if you say so. You do repeat a lot that it really doesn't matter to you . . . Ultimately hifi is not a science test of super critical evaluation, to most people anyway. An enthusiasm towards the hobby is the pursuit of bringing you closer to the music, usually emotionally. Okay granted, some just want to listen for pure accuracy, they're part of it too. What is dangerous is imposing views too skewed either way, either towards the end that refuses to believe anything people are hearing is possible when the measurements say otherwise, or indeed the end that flys completely in the face of all scientific logic and relies purely on subjective opinion without any concern for factors rooted in science. As ever it's a balancing act of synergy, I'm not talking components here, I'm talking about approach. Also - I think you're doing a bit of a discredit to most peoples intelligence by assuming they can't make up their own minds ultimately as to whether they take a subjective opinion with a pinch of salt or not. Ultimately it's up to them isn't it. The tools to research both sides are there, all they have to do is look. let's not go over the top here. No-one is 'imposing' their views. You can only impose a view with violence or the threat of it. What we have here is a discussion not an imposition. I appreciate some people can be fragile and do not like the idea that others do not agree with them. Personally I find disagreement interesting provided both sides are making a calm and reasoned argument. We can learn, we can be provoked into thinking and maybe re-considering some things. It does not have to be combative or have an emotional element to it. Ultimately we listen to music and do things with our systems for fun so there is no need that I see for anyone to get wound up if we sometimes decided to dig a little deeper into what might really make a difference and what is just a waste of time and money. We should really all be secure enough about ourselves to be able to do that. And if we ultimately still disagree, well so be it. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 28, 2023 12:34:08 GMT
Well ASR is a big forum and you're inevitably going to get dogmatists who don't really understand what they are talking about, same as on subjective forums. You are absolutely correct in that a blind test of one individual will only show that they can - or can't tell a difference, it cannot be automatically expanded to everyone on the planet. Anyone with any real knowledge understands this. of course you can test a large sample of people in which case you move towards some statistical certainty. But it is still possible there will be outliers, and the best you could say there is that 'Most people cannot really tell the difference between chicken and tofu (or whatever). There are things we cna state for certain, one is that people can be pre-disposed even when there is a difference. For example when testing loudspeaker preference it was found that listeners sometimes preferred one speaker sighted, and a different one when blind tested. And that they preferred the less accurate speaker when sighted, and the more accurate speaker when blind. This confirms what was already known as fact - that is that our perception is not solely based on the sound waves hitting our ears, but on a whole host of other factors too. And this is the problem with drawing absolute conclusions from 'just listening'. I hear a difference between my two CD transports. Is that real or just in my head? I don't know. Until I blind test myself (which I probably won't) either is possible, but I appreciate that given how a CD transport works the 'in my head' possibility is quite high. Therefore I would never state as a fact that they have a different sound even though it is a fact that they sound different to me. It's these absolute statements which are what really need to be avoided whether it is here or ASR or anywhere. Yeah, spot on....we are not fans of absolutes here. In fact, I was quite shocked at the sheer amount of blanket statements that seemed to feed others to pile in with more of the same. I haven't been on there for a while ... May be a longer absence this time lol I think the allowance of people to express themselves is very important, but if it's obvious bollocks, it must be challenged, I get that. I also think that generally, advice offered here is usually very measured and often quite sensible. There also has to be a degree of understanding that there is absolutely no way everyone is either A) hearing the same thing, or B) listening for the same thing. Difficult balance to strike. I think the problems arise when two different approaches get conflated. I prefer an evidence-led approach - that is if I want to state something as fact I need to back that up with testing or measurement - the ASR approach. But I am also fine with giving my subjective impression. Even if there's nothing to back it up it is still a fact that it was my subjective impression. - ostensibly the approach on forums like this. Where the problems start is if I try to back up my subjective impression with some technical explanation that I have no evidence for. e.g 'This DAC sounds different to that one because this is R-2R and that one is D-S' And then that rightly gets some push back and then arguments start. There's nothing wrong with being subjective as long as it is kept subjective and people don't write technical cheques they can't cash. That doesn't mean we can't speculate about what may be the technical reason for a perceived difference, but speculating and stating as fact are two very different things. Even with speculation you then have the problem that you then get into a technical discussion with 'graphs and stuff' and some members then start complain that they don't want to see all that. in short either keep it subjective or keep it technical but don't try to mix the two. It doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Nov 28, 2023 13:03:42 GMT
There also has to be a degree of understanding that there is absolutely no way everyone is either A) hearing the same thing, or B) listening for the same thing.
Well said, a very critical point that I'm sure doesn't get the thought it should.
|
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Nov 28, 2023 14:37:07 GMT
I like trying cheap changes to my system and in some cases I hear differences and in some cases I hear no difference what I do then is report what I have done and heard and always add this is my ears with my system and my music . All I hope is that others will try it for themselves and add their thoughts good or bad . None of us can probably agree on music choice and having done a few shows now I know for certain that no one hears what I hear . So if we can not agree on what music we like then agreeing what equipment makes the best sound is just not ever likely . I did hear a system by someone who used all the ASR testing as his gospel and bought the best measured items he could . He thought it sounded wonderful I thought it sounded clinical and lifeless would never say this to him just said it was not the sound I strived for but could see why he liked it . We all have to have the courage to let our own ears be the judge and if we like our own system enjoy it and love and not get too upset when others can find faults . This forum throws up equipment I have never heard and has people who have the skills to offer insight in to current DIY items that are better than the current hi-end not units .
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,624
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Nov 29, 2023 7:56:12 GMT
Okay, if you say so. You do repeat a lot that it really doesn't matter to you . . . Ultimately hifi is not a science test of super critical evaluation, to most people anyway. An enthusiasm towards the hobby is the pursuit of bringing you closer to the music, usually emotionally. Okay granted, some just want to listen for pure accuracy, they're part of it too. What is dangerous is imposing views too skewed either way, either towards the end that refuses to believe anything people are hearing is possible when the measurements say otherwise, or indeed the end that flys completely in the face of all scientific logic and relies purely on subjective opinion without any concern for factors rooted in science. As ever it's a balancing act of synergy, I'm not talking components here, I'm talking about approach. Also - I think you're doing a bit of a discredit to most peoples intelligence by assuming they can't make up their own minds ultimately as to whether they take a subjective opinion with a pinch of salt or not. Ultimately it's up to them isn't it. The tools to research both sides are there, all they have to do is look. let's not go over the top here. No-one is 'imposing' their views. You can only impose a view with violence or the threat of it. What we have here is a discussion not an imposition. I appreciate some people can be fragile and do not like the idea that others do not agree with them. Personally I find disagreement interesting provided both sides are making a calm and reasoned argument. We can learn, we can be provoked into thinking and maybe re-considering some things. It does not have to be combative or have an emotional element to it. Ultimately we listen to music and do things with our systems for fun so there is no need that I see for anyone to get wound up if we sometimes decided to dig a little deeper into what might really make a difference and what is just a waste of time and money. We should really all be secure enough about ourselves to be able to do that. And if we ultimately still disagree, well so be it. Yes I agree, a healthy debate is great and does give the opportunity for others to give their views too. I wasn't implying anyone was imposing their vews, just reiterating THAT is the point where it requires some pull back. To be honest with the amount of measurements I'm doing of late with the speakers and amount of time spent learning about digital filter designs, (and witnessing their clear affect on response for myself) I'm probably migrating a little further into the evidence-led camp . . . . yes, please pick yourself up from that chair you just fell off . . . I know that's not the same as measuring DAC's but it's giving me some good insight into a more scientificly based approach. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 5, 2023 16:27:40 GMT
Hmmm, something is missing 🤔  |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 5, 2023 17:03:32 GMT
Where's your TT mate?
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 5, 2023 17:12:27 GMT
Temporarily out of the system. No cartridge at the moment and awaiting a new tonearm. Thought I'd remove some wires etc and see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by robbiegong on Dec 5, 2023 21:54:52 GMT
Temporarily out of the system. No cartridge at the moment and awaiting a new tonearm. Thought I'd remove some wires etc and see what happens. Come on, spill da beans  what's occurring ?  |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 5, 2023 22:16:40 GMT
Temporarily out of the system. No cartridge at the moment and awaiting a new tonearm. Thought I'd remove some wires etc and see what happens. Come on, spill da beans what's occurring ? Haha, nothing Rob. As I said, my Kontrapunkt B has dug it's last grove, which means I need a new cart, or a new tip. Having a new tonearm made as the one I had here was destined for a new owner anyway and was only supposed to be here temporarily, but circumstances led to a longer than planned stay. Vinyl is now on hiatus until the new year, so I thought I'd optimise the system for digital and see how that goes. The layout of the system was always done to optimise vinyl, so I thought with the new DACs arrival imminent, it may be nice to give it the best chance of impressing me. Moved stuff around, used shorter mains cables, rerouted other cables etc...lets see what happens. .. |
|
|
|
Post by electronumpty on Dec 5, 2023 23:33:53 GMT
On the path to minimalism now Oli, down the slippery slope to Feng Shui. Mark my words, one day you'll wake up with just an Alexa box for tunes....
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,411
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 6, 2023 6:36:33 GMT
On the path to minimalism now Oli, down the slippery slope to Feng Shui. Mark my words, one day you'll wake up with just an Alexa box for tunes.... An Alexa?......Now that's not a bad idea 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by misterc on Dec 6, 2023 11:01:44 GMT
Still waiting for the Remi Oli?
|
|
|
|
Post by robbiegong on Dec 6, 2023 11:03:13 GMT
Come on, spill da beans what's occurring ? Haha, nothing Rob. As I said, my Kontrapunkt B has dug it's last grove, which means I need a new cart, or a new tip. Having a new tonearm made as the one I had here was destined for a new owner anyway and was only supposed to be here temporarily, but circumstances led to a longer than planned stay. Vinyl is now on hiatus until the new year, so I thought I'd optimise the system for digital and see how that goes. The layout of the system was always done to optimise vinyl, so I thought with the new DACs arrival imminent, it may be nice to give it the best chance of impressing me. Moved stuff around, used shorter mains cables, rerouted other cables etc...lets see what happens. .. good work Olster and phew! for a minute i thought you'd taken leave of your senses....... |
|
what's occurring ? 
