xdd
Active Member
"Best sounding" is a myth if 'best' is independent of the listener. As Mike Moffat has said 'God could appear to me tomorrow and tell me how to build the perfect DAC. There would still be those who don't like it'.
"Best sounding" is a myth if 'best' is independent of the listener. As Mike Moffat has said 'God could appear to me tomorrow and tell me how to build the perfect DAC. There would still be those who don't like it'.
THF2
Where we are going, there are no roads
I don’t know but I would like to think the following applies to me as most of this is truly over my head:
anyway I purchased a DACmagic 100 for $200.
Having never had a separate DAC before, I plugged it in, it sounded better than before and I was content.
Maybe I am over simplifying things but, I for one do not want to go down that rabbit hole of “analysis paralysis” and simply want to enjoy my music.
anyway I purchased a DACmagic 100 for $200.
Having never had a separate DAC before, I plugged it in, it sounded better than before and I was content.
Maybe I am over simplifying things but, I for one do not want to go down that rabbit hole of “analysis paralysis” and simply want to enjoy my music.
Attachments
No one was reported to have changed their choice after “the reveal”, though a few seemed surprised by their blind choices. To me the big learning was that experts could admit they simply disagreed and that one design was not “the best”, with no attempt to mitigate the results. Usually the “experts” step out alone and declare truth, then explain why others were unable to detect the exact same “truth.”
I could post a link to the article if that is OK, some forums do not like that. They make a big deal of the cost differences and some people liking the cheaper ones better, but all three are between $2,200 and $2,600, so I consider them roughly the same in price. As previously stated I am a $100 DAC guy, also a $12 red wine guy. But the experts are interesting to follow.
Last edited:
Weejub
New Member
The first thing I thought of when we got into this was the Freakanomics story of when Steven Levitt swapped around the wine at the annual Harvard wine testing to prove a point LOL.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/freakonomics-radio-do-more-expensive-wines-taste-better/
That said, I am still enjoying the Chord a lot.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/freakonomics-radio-do-more-expensive-wines-taste-better/
That said, I am still enjoying the Chord a lot.
xdd
Active Member
I'd be interested, I've posted various links to other sites before and not been censored so far. I'm also a $100 DAC guy, the difference being that the $100 is for components for me, not finished boxes. I don't think I've even come close to that figure in component cost so far in my designs, given that I build out of Taobao parts which are often recycled. My aim is to get the $2k sound but only spend under 5% of that.
They conveniently forgot to make a determination those people could actually reliably detect the differences and identify which model was playing. In other words it was a BS test conducted for marketing and PR purposes.
The audio infrastructure has people who are obsessed with "repeatable detection." I find it interesting that the food industry is not. If someone gives you a recipe for chili that requires three tablespoons of chili powder have you aver asked for proof that they can detect the absence of chili powder? The "Schiit Study" claims to show that different people liked different stuff. I don't think it needs a statistical study. If they claimed that "everyone liked model A best" it would be valid to ask for numbers. If the study claimed that "adding a $5,000 cable to your already fine sounding amp makes a detectable difference" I would certainly want to see very good statistics. But all they claim is that different people like different stuff, and they bend over backwards to sell you other, much cheaper stuff. My DAC costs 1/20th of the three that were tested. I'm mildly interested in whether the high price ones sound better. If I ever get a chance to listen to one I will not do a rigorous blind test. If I cannot sit down in a chair and immediately hear the difference between a $2200 DAC and my $100 DAC I will stick with the $100 DAC. If it requires a rigorous blind test for me to decide then the $100 DAC has already won.
Mart Mccall
Well-Known Member
I use a Topping E30, I also have a considerably more expensive Soncoz unit, there's no difference I can hear between them, sound quality is outstanding with either.
I've also tried an R-2R DAC from Soekris (with SMPS replaced with a linear supply), This was - at best - marginally different, although the comparison was sighted.
It was not different enough to make it worthwhile to me to explore further. I'm in the fortunate position where I could drop a couple of grand on a DAC without worrying, if I felt it was worthwhile.
Tests were done with good quality equipment (Krell, Focal JM Lab, Pass) which for those who rate sound quality by price would be a system costing in the region of $20,000 if the units were still made today.
Short answer - most of what is said about the differences between DACs is...suspect.
I've also tried an R-2R DAC from Soekris (with SMPS replaced with a linear supply), This was - at best - marginally different, although the comparison was sighted.
It was not different enough to make it worthwhile to me to explore further. I'm in the fortunate position where I could drop a couple of grand on a DAC without worrying, if I felt it was worthwhile.
Tests were done with good quality equipment (Krell, Focal JM Lab, Pass) which for those who rate sound quality by price would be a system costing in the region of $20,000 if the units were still made today.
Short answer - most of what is said about the differences between DACs is...suspect.
Yep. I have read that one and I agree. I also note that all the tested amps were modern and good. (The cheapest amp was a $220 Pioneer, they should have included a $40 boombox) I actually have a vintage Magnavox tube amp in the hands of a technician right now. I got it free when I bought some other stuff. It said, "Restore me!" I have no idea if it will sound different than my modern solid state amp. I will sit down with a glass of red wine and compare them when it comes back to me.
I did notice a difference when I installed a $40 sound card in an old PC, relative to whatever was built into the PC. And, with a different PC I noticed a difference when I installed a DAC. Both times I was replacing the chip on the motherboard that probably cost $2. Both times I refused to do blind testing. I cheerfully accept the criticism that "I haven't proven anything."
@Mart Mccall - I am glad you bought a very expensive DAC, it means I do not have to. In a different post I describe my (stupidly expensive) restoration of a late 1950's tube amp that I got "free." We are brothers with different passions. I only argue one of your points - your last point. I believe that experts can probably hear differences. I am not arguing that these differences matter, only that they can be heard. I base this on my experience with ukuleles. I build them and I have heard literally thousands of them. I laid my favorite ukulele on a table once and left the room. My friend was playing his own, near identical, uke. Unknown to me he laid his uke down and started playing my uke. I noticed this by the sound coming down a long hallway! I was very surprised, This has led me to believe people who spend hours obsessing. if they think they hear differences I can believe it. The amp article mentioned above does a good job showing that differences between decent amplifiers cannot be detected. I would read a similar article about DACs with great interest. But I'll give the experts the benefit of the doubt until they are proven wrong. I wish the amplifier test had included a stupidly cheap Wal-Mart amp. In a DAC test I would hope they test from $K all the way down to the built in chips that are "free" on the mother board of a PC.
Such claim is worthless without an experiment that establishes that people can actually recognize the differences, because if they can’t then their preference is not based on anything and not better than random.
Yes they can. It takes training/practice to refine it. I taught a course on Aural Recognition (Critical Listening) to over 2500 students. You would be surprised how many people cannot pick up on the small details, but through training many of those people can be “fixed”, that said there are also people that never can do it.
I found that listening to friends' high end stuff was initially great but somehow the dynamism had been lost and was a long way from the analogue vinyl sound - I now stick to the humble £20 4 xTda1543 Muse fed with a reasonable low noise psu which, whilst not as good as analogue, is not a bad compromise.
Actually I plan to waste hours experimenting but it will not be blind. I started listening to Rock music on a tiny "Six Transistor" AM radio with a 3" speaker. My dad's car had a 6x9. I have some 1950's or 1960's Magnavox speakers - 15, 8 and 5", from a large vented cabinet. I plan to build a small enclosure to hold a 3" speaker, a large rectangular enclosure to simulate a dashboard and mount a 6x9" paper speaker in it, also a large mono enclosure for the Magnavox speakers. I have several CDs that are mono, from the original mixes. I will listen to some songs on 3", 6x9", large mono cabinet, ,then single Klipsch Heresy speaker, all in mono. Then I will listen to those songs in mono on a stereo system. But I won't spend even five minutes blind testing any of them. If anyone wants to bring over a multi-thousand dollar DAC I will compare it to my $100 DAC and serve beer or wine. But not blind. I might spill.
who makes a DAC 2 gens advanced at the Schiit price point?
thanks for the reply. I have been looking at Topping
I think it has been mentioned already, subjectivity, and listening, and to the point you are quoting (and I am not disagreeing with it). I preferred (in my system and space) a Schitt Modi 2u over my SMSL-M8a which by all “accounts” should be “better”
