General debate thread about audio measurements

[garbulky]

Not everyone on the forum has the same opinion about this. But I suspect most of us here would be more receptive to a claim to hear differences in tone among reasonably engineered solid-state DACs if one could do it without seeing which DAC one is listening to. (Yes, I've fooled myself before, too.)

Very true. If that could be shown double blind and level matched the credibility would be higher. It would be hard to argue against.

If you're talking about differences in timbre between solid-state and tube gear, that's real. The tube gear will have substantial even-order harmonic distortion that some folks prefer. Those folks do not care about accurate sound reproduction, however.

[/quote]
I take it you haven't talked to many tube enthusiasts then! There are kinds. Some people like a lot of tubey color. While others want it because it sounds like the real thing and are all about the accuracy. Just because you have higher THD doesn't mean much if it sounds more close to real versus a solid state. Then we have the argument about - is it more accurate if it doesn't sound as real? Of which there are two sides of course. One of perception and the other of measurements.

Having had a few tube units in my system, I am sort of split about tubes. In the end I prefer the tone and speed of the solid state amps I've heard.

 

[Dialectic]

Clever!...but, at best, this response exhibits part of the problem of the whole objectivist vs the subjectivist 'debate'; at worst, it might indicate a preconceived bias?

You tell me which it is. Since you're able to differentiate...how would you characterize the sonic differences between, say, Schiit gear and pick a favorite 'Top' performing DAC?

For starters, I'd be able to pick out the Schiit DAC that makes audible noise in response to CPU activity as a result of its incompetent USB implementation.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I take it you haven't talked to many tube enthusiasts then! There are kinds. Some people like a lot of tubey color. While others want it because it sounds like the real thing and are all about the accuracy.

Adding to the harmonics will change instrumental timbre because timbre is the distribution and magnitude of harmonics.
It may sound nicer to some people or even more "real" but it will not be the timbre of the instruments that were recorded since it is not accurate. It is the equipment adding to the harmonic content of the signal.

 

[GearMe]

For starters, I'd be able to pick out the Schiit DAC that makes audible noise in response to CPU activity as a result of its incompetent USB implementation.

"I'd be able to"...so you haven't listened to and compared them?

 

[GearMe]

No. I won't waste my time, and I won't spend money to subsidize bad engineering and obnoxious marketing.

Chuckle...opinions then (about sound signature differences) without any real capability of backing them up?

 

[Dialectic]

Chuckle...opinions then (about sound signature differences) without any real capability of backing them up?

If you've seen the measurements, and you know that it's incompetently engineered, you don't need to listen to it.

Do you have to test-drive a Toyota Prius to know that it won't accelerate as well as a Tesla?

 

[GearMe]

If you've seen the measurements, and you know that it's incompetently engineered, you don't need to listen to it.

I see...all of the Schiit products?

Do you have to test-drive a Toyota Prius to know that it won't accelerate as well as a Tesla?

Nope...apples and oranges

 

[Cosmik]

For starters, I'd be able to pick out the Schiit DAC that makes audible noise in response to CPU activity as a result of its incompetent USB implementation.

I'd do it by smell: the smoke.

 

[GearMe]

I'd do it by smell: the smoke.

Ahhhh...also clever!

So you've heard them and have first hand experience with their reliability as well?

 

[amirm]

Amir, you should try to qualify the differences yourself as otherwise you're just another internet talking head with an audio analyzer like Nwavguy, Atomicbob, Jude, or randos on reddit just telling people to buy what they like themselves, what makes them the most money, or their own incompetent gear that clips itself during normal use.

You started with the goal of my reviews but then ended here which is not correct. My job is to explain based on measurements and professional experience whether a piece of equipment is competently designed or not. And in many cases whether the anomalies seen in measurements are audible concerns or not.

In the case of headphone amplifiers, I provide in each review an AB, level matched test. So far, I have not observed much of the characteristics people say these products have. I even included my son in the testing and he could not detect any differences of that sort either (he is in his 20s).

You should assume all subjective information in uncontrolled tests including both yours , and mine are faulty and cannot be replicated. Or be shown to be durable at all. This is the position of audio science, not me, not the people in this forum. The entire scientific audio community adheres to this because it has been shown to be abundantly true.

The tutorial for my measurements at the start of every review by the way talks about audibility of distortions. Please read it now if you have not before: https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/understanding-audio-measurements.2351/

We know a ton about what is or is not audible in music and to humans. If it were not, we could not reduce the file size of an MP3 to 9% of its original size yet have it fool 99% of the listening public. Can you throw out 91% of the words in your post and have it still read the same? You can't. Yet we are able to do that in audio because our hearing is not perfect at all. And after extensive testing over decades we know what is, or is not audible. The claim that we don't is simply not correct.

 

[Dialectic]

So you've heard them and have first hand experience with their reliability as well?

One needn't have firsthand experience to know about a subject.

 

[Purité Audio]

Some of the Schiit products Amair has measured have performed quite badly, that I feel is inexcusable when it is perfectly possible to design and market well designed products.
Whether their poor measurements actually translate into an audible difference is another question.
We would have to perform some level matched and unsighted comparisons, personally I would always choose the well designed product even if they sounded identical.
Keith

 

[GearMe]

One needn't have first-hand experience to know about a subject.

The subject being discussed is how they sound (like Schiit)...no?


BTW...you never did answer whether or not it was all Schiit products that you don't have to listen to but, instead, just know they sound bad

 

[Blumlein 88]

The subject being discussed is how they sound (like Schiit)...no?


BTW...you never did answer whether or not it was all Schiit products that you don't have to listen to but, instead, just know they sound bad

Ones which have been measured and shown to perform much worse than other products. Much worse than other cheaper products. Which means this part of your post really isn't valid. just know they sound bad We know they have poor performance from measurements. Maybe not all of them, but a goodly number of their products. After learning that why would anyone give them the benefit of doubt even if they sometimes get it right?

You'll have to explain to me why you'd support a poorly performing piece of gear vs one that performs well. If it made no audible difference and was cheaper that would be one thing. If it has niceties and features not commonly found maybe that is something. But when it costs the same or more, performs worse, and is hair shirted in most cases, exactly at what point does a consumer say, "oh, they are bad mouthing that gear, that is the gear I want to own and no good reason not to get it". That frankly sounds retarded.

PS- in case you haven't noticed, the hear it with your own ears method isn't considered a reliable arbiter by most on this forum. Using that as some sort of criticism is not the devastating comeback you seem to think it is. Schiit gear has earned the opinion that until proven otherwise it likely is poorly designed.

 

[garbulky]

It's not arbitrary.

From Amir: What I measure is different in that I test how well a DAC tracks input digital values relative to output. When that deviation is > 0.1 dB, I stop and use the value just before that. The 0.1 db is my threshold (there is no industry standard here). If I use a different threshold, I can get higher or lower resolution. So best to use my linearity numbers within the scope of reviews I do here.

, the reasoning and logic behind it have been explained many times. We get that you don't think these measurements are reasonable, you have said so a number of times, but you also state your understanding is limited. Its not misleading.
[/quote]

At the end of the day you just seem to want to find a reason to defend poorer technically performing kit. Schitt apologist.

The information is presented. You can choose your own interpretation, but don't expect Amir to defend kit whose technical performance is obviously deficient.

What really bemused me about this is that these dac measurements show that some cheap or modestly priced dacs perform technically immaculatly. Why is anyone therefore interested in very expensive dacs that don't?

You may be better off reading a newspaper that coincides with you your political views.[/QUOTE]

Adding to the harmonics will change instrumental timbre because timbre is the distribution and magnitude of harmonics.
It may sound nicer to some people or even more "real" but it will not be the timbre of the instruments that were recorded since it is not accurate. It is the equipment adding to the harmonic content of the signal.

Solid state has harmonics either and the two harmonics are not picked up by the ear in the same way. One is harsher than the other. So in this case, I would say it's hard to equate the two harmonics in terms of actual impact to the signal if you take how we perceive into account.

 

[Beherit]

Some of the Schiit products Amair has measured have performed quite badly, that I feel is inexcusable when it is perfectly possible to design and market well designed products.
Whether their poor measurements actually translate into an audible difference is another question.
We would have to perform some level matched and unsighted comparisons, personally I would always choose the well designed product even if they sounded identical.
Keith

Yes but others, such as the Modi 2U and the Yggdrasil measure quite okay.

Ones which have been measured and shown to perform much worse than other products. Much worse than other cheaper products. Which means this part of your post really isn't valid. just know they sound bad We know they have poor performance from measurements. Maybe not all of them, but a goodly number of their products. After learning that why would anyone give them the benefit of doubt even if they sometimes get it right?

You'll have to explain to me why you'd support a poorly performing piece of gear vs one that performs well. If it made no audible difference and was cheaper that would be one thing. If it has niceties and features not commonly found maybe that is something. But when it costs the same or more, performs worse, and is hair shirted in most cases, exactly at what point does a consumer say, "oh, they are bad mouthing that gear, that is the gear I want to own and no good reason not to get it". That frankly sounds retarded.

PS- in case you haven't noticed, the hear it with your own ears method isn't considered a reliable arbiter by most on this forum. Using that as some sort of criticism is not the devastating comeback you seem to think it is. Schiit gear has earned the opinion that until proven otherwise it likely is poorly designed.

The measurements are telling you nothing about how they actually sound. Most of the Topping line is perceivably just as bad as the worst Schiit digital products. You have no idea why some of these products are okay and others are bad. They clearly are not bad due to measurements, all of which measure within some general band of acceptable, especially when compared to older CD players and digital interfaces, that also sound more normal if less detailed. Pretty much all of the gear debated or that Amir has reviewed is totally euphonic with major usability issues except for the Korg recorder and the RME Pro/DAC, which are both okay.

If you don't know why the Bifrost Multi-bit is bad and your setup (or attention) won't throw the gear's aural deficiencies in your face instantly, faster than any measurement rig, which won't tell you why it sounds that way, why are you even arguing?

You started with the goal of my reviews but then ended here which is not correct. My job is to explain based on measurements and professional experience whether a piece of equipment is competently designed or not. And in many cases whether the anomalies seen in measurements are audible concerns or not.

In the case of headphone amplifiers, I provide in each review an AB, level matched test. So far, I have not observed much of the characteristics people say these products have. I even included my son in the testing and he could not detect any differences of that sort either (he is in his 20s).

You should assume all subjective information in uncontrolled tests including both yours , and mine are faulty and cannot be replicated. Or be shown to be durable at all. This is the position of audio science, not me, not the people in this forum. The entire scientific audio community adheres to this because it has been shown to be abundantly true.

The tutorial for my measurements at the start of every review by the way talks about audibility of distortions. Please read it now if you have not before: https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/understanding-audio-measurements.2351/

We know a ton about what is or is not audible in music and to humans. If it were not, we could not reduce the file size of an MP3 to 9% of its original size yet have it fool 99% of the listening public. Can you throw out 91% of the words in your post and have it still read the same? You can't. Yet we are able to do that in audio because our hearing is not perfect at all. And after extensive testing over decades we know what is, or is not audible. The claim that we don't is simply not correct.

Extensive testing on inattentive people tells us nothing. MP3s in truly high-fidelity systems, which few consumers have, fool nobody. Most people don't pay attention to music just like they don't to movies. Most people aren't proficiently literate according to the federal governments own standards.

From Amir: What I measure is different in that I test how well a DAC tracks input digital values relative to output. When that deviation is > 0.1 dB, I stop and use the value just before that. The 0.1 db is my threshold (there is no industry standard here). If I use a different threshold, I can get higher or lower resolution. So best to use my linearity numbers within the scope of reviews I do here.

, the reasoning and logic behind it have been explained many times. We get that you don't think these measurements are reasonable, you have said so a number of times, but you also state your understanding is limited. Its not misleading.

At the end of the day you just seem to want to find a reason to defend poorer technically performing kit. Schitt apologist.

The information is presented. You can choose your own interpretation, but don't expect Amir to defend kit whose technical performance is obviously deficient.

What really bemused me about this is that these dac measurements show that some cheap or modestly priced dacs perform technically immaculatly. Why is anyone therefore interested in very expensive dacs that don't?

You may be better off reading a newspaper that coincides with you your political views.[/QUOTE]

Solid state has harmonics either and the two harmonics are not picked up by the ear in the same way. One is harsher than the other. So in this case, I would say it's hard to equate the two harmonics in terms of actual impact to the signal if you take how we perceive into account.[/QUOTE]
If people can't hear the different between various class AB solid state topologies and circuitry, then why are they even reviewing DACs? They sound massively different and outside of the chip, effect the sound the most in competent (or semi-competent) designs. If people don't care or can't hear it, then that's fair but don't pretend that they all sound the same. The current-feedback TI/BB opamps used in the Grace gear sound doesn't sound remotely like the newer Sound Plus ones used in the RME or Chris Muth's THAT buffers with OPA134. What we have here is the same as color blind people deluded that the Crayola 64-pack of crayons is placebo and really just the same as the 8-pack.

 

[GearMe]

You don't read very carefully. I said DACs, not products. Amir tested a Schiit passive volume control that is okay.

And with that, I am pressing the 'Ignore' button. Enjoy your weekend.

Well that hurts! Taking your ball and going home I see.

So...your out to the conversation is that I don't read carefully? Clearly, we were talking about DACs not Schiit's Sys product.


Beyond that, you made a declarative statement that you didn't need to listen to them to know that they sound bad...I didn't. This is a highly assumptive, ill-informed declaration given your admitted total lack of experience with their products.

Here's the thing, I'm not a Schiit apologist. I own a variety of gear from a variety of manufacturers including DS and Multi-bit DACs as well as SS and OTL amps. The DS and the Multibit DACs (iFi, Sony, Meridian, M-Audio, Fiio, and yes, Schiit) are all reliable and sound fine...imo. Yes, even the 'Schiity Sounding' ones (Modi & Bifrost). Frankly, my iFi Audio gear gets the most listening time.

FWIW, I have experienced none of the issues that people in this forum have complained about regarding Schiit products -- just incredibly lucky, I guess!

BTW - I've never been able to understand when people just rail on a brand without having any first hand experience as foundation for forming their opinions/recommendations; shows a lack of perspective/good judgement in my view and potentially influences other people to make less than well-informed buying decisions...not helpful to anyone!

Regardless, Amir's (and other people's) measurements are useful as data points to consider in a purchasing decision, a topic for discussion/debate, and, apparently for some people, the Holy Grail for which to evaluate audio gear.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yes but others, such as the Modi 2U and the Yggdrasil measure quite okay.


The measurements are telling you nothing about how they actually sound. Most of the Topping line is perceivably just as bad as the worst Schiit digital products. You have no idea why some of these products are okay and others are bad. They clearly are not bad due to measurements, all of which measure within some general band of acceptable, especially when compared to older CD players and digital interfaces, that also sound more normal if less detailed. Pretty much all of the gear debated or that Amir has reviewed is totally euphonic with major usability issues except for the Korg recorder and the RME Pro/DAC, which are both okay.

If you don't know why the Bifrost Multi-bit is bad and your setup (or attention) won't throw the gear's aural deficiencies in your face instantly, faster than any measurement rig, which won't tell you why it sounds that way, why are you even arguing?

And you base your opinions upon what?

The gear that Schiit makes and measures okay can be bettered for less money. Bettered in accuracy and fidelity which is my objective. I believe I said Schiit gear was suspect until proven otherwise. So they make some okay performing gear at too high a price. I'll still skip it thank you. RME looks like more for your money.

The Topping gear must be pulling off some special magic to outperform Schiit so much and sound just as bad. Of course that is accepting your opinion on that which I have no reason to accept. It certainly does not make any sense unless you can explain yourself more fully.

 

[Blumlein 88]

BTW - I've never been able to understand when people just rail on a brand without having any first hand experience as foundation for forming their opinions/recommendations; shows a lack of perspective/good judgement in my view and potentially influences other people to make less than well-informed buying decisions...not helpful to anyone!

Regardless, Amir's (and other people's) measurements are useful as data points to consider in a purchasing decision, a topic for discussion/debate, and, apparently for some people, the Holy Grail for which to evaluate audio gear.

So using measurements, that also agree with other people's measurements to show rather deficient performance, and potentially influencing people who have no experience leads to less than well informed buying decisions? Some curious logic there. Informing people with genuine information will lead others to make less than well informed buying decisions.

And if you haven't figured out that measurements and proper listening tests get primacy on this forum you've not paid attention very well.

 

[amirm]

MP3s in truly high-fidelity systems, which few consumers have, fool nobody.

Oh, it absolutely does. Now, if you are doing that sighted and you know which is MP3 and which is not, then sure. Your bias will tell your brain it is worse, the actual perception be damned. Make the test blind and you will be lost in the woods even though MP3 is not a great lossy compression system.