I struggle for words.
i was looking for a way to get objective data to confirm my subjective impression when switching dacs on my iem
the chain is simple Pc->DAC->iem(through bal cable)The issue still remains though, too many unknowns. How is the IEM fixed to the laptop?
when i switch dac i hear a difference but when i switched the filters on dawn 4.4 and heard no difference (graph above of different filter show a difference in the high frequencies my untrained ears cannot catch, unlike the difference in bass level between the 2 dacs that my ear can hear)The main reason for the difference in sound is the used reconstruction filter and probably also the output R of the headphone section of the DAC-amp combo.
From what I can see the difference should be audible which your attempt did show... mission accomplished.
Without a shadow of a doubt the ifi would be the most 'truthful' to the recorded music .... but .. you may well have a preference for one of them (in combination with the IEM)
you are right i am not ready to publish in a scientific journal the answer to the question i asked is that there are too many combinations when combining dac+iem, i was hoping for a simple answer to help us choose a dac for a given iemThis is precisely why people who perform experiments have control samples.
Simply remeasuring 5 times with one DAC does not count as a control sample. You would have to redo the entire procedure for the first unit again. i.e. If you disconnect DAC A and connect DAC B, go out for a coffee and return to measure DAC B, you will have to redo the whole procedure when measuring DAC A again. Observe the variation between the 2 sets of DAC A measurements, record that as natural random variance. Then if DAC B measurements lie within the variation range, it does not count as a real difference.
The coffee part is half joking, sometimes stuff like that do make a difference. Like maybe when you open the door the airflow shakes your IEM slightly.
What thulle asked was how was the iem connected to the ADC (soundcard)the chain is simple Pc->DAC->iem(through bal cable)
We don't know that. That's why there was he question: how did you hook up the ADC/micriphone.isn't the variable only the dongle DAC being changed?
yes i did put the eartip on the mic hole on the laptop (seal comes from the silicon eartip elasticity), redid the sampling 3 times to make sure it was not changing when i reapply the eartip on the mic holeWe don't know that. That's why there was he question: how did you hook up the ADC/micriphone.
If he just put the EMI against the microphone by hand, then only the fact that he can't precisely match them up at the exact position could explain all the differences.
That's not good enough. You need more hands to do this properlyyes i did put the eartip on the mic hole on the laptop (seal comes from the silicon eartip elasticity), redid the sampling 3 times to make sure it was not changing when i reapply the eartip on the mic hole
+1That's not good enough. You need more hands to do this properly
The IEM needs to be at exactly the same spot for both DAC measurements. Removing it to switch the DAC and then placing it back is not precise enough.
That's exactly why I suggested to run a long test (2 mins) but now I get why that would be difficult as he is pressing the IEM against an internal mic.One additional thought... Noise is randomness. (Pink noise is filtered randomness.) That makes it hard to get precise measurements, or to get the same-exact results twice.
That IMD will be dwarfed by the peaks in the noise so won't be visible.The reconstruction filter may introduce a ton of IMD.
That may not be the case with these filterless NOS DACs.And while you're at it, use REW for measurements. Much better than noise!
Pink noise is perfectly OK for moving mic method MMM on room measurements.One additional thought... Noise is randomness. (Pink noise is filtered randomness.) That makes it hard to get precise measurements, or to get the same-exact results twice.
From my experience doing MMM measurements in room, after a few seconds and some 30 samples the curve is quite static and not changing anymore. I doubt that adding hundreds of samples during 2 minutes would change the curve much.That's exactly why I suggested to run a long test (2 mins) but now I get why that would be difficult as he is pressing the IEM against an internal mic.
This can easily 'modulate' bass response.
Why would that be? You’ll should still see the droop. And probably it is not really filter less. Probably some emulation, and some are really strangely implemented.That may not be the case with these filterless NOS DACs.
It may depend on the speed of the sweep and the sampling frequency.
There is no room involved thoughFrom my experience doing MMM measurements in room,