DACs - Should I care?

[PENG]

Anecdotal to be sure. I didn't go looking for issues with the AV8801, they found me

Keep the fans on, my dealer told me he that 10% of his units he sold had trigger failures.

One day, I noticed excessive hiss coming from the speakers that went away when wiggling the power cord. During the first repair, they replaced the power receptacle.

There have been a couple of reports (on AVS) of trigger failures with the AV7702.

- Rich

I use it to trigger the MM8003 for the surround channels and the Anthem is auto. I wonder if your A51 draws more than the 8801 can handle. I do intend to keep the fans on all the time but I am too lazy to use the trigger for them.

 

[RichB]

I use it to trigger the MM8003 for the surround channels and the Anthem is auto. I wonder if your A51 draws more than the 8801 can handle. I do intend to keep the fans on all the time but I am too lazy to use the trigger for them.

I doubt the A51 has anything to do with it.
I sold the A51 and moved to an A21 + A31 for better thermal handling, etc.
I use the HA-1 -> A21 for two channel and for multi-channel mains.
The BDP-105D + A31 for center and surrounds and the HA-1 is in bypass mode for FR/FL.

- Rich

 

[RichB]

Here is a good article on AVR/DACs:

I doubt the A51 has anything to do with it.

http://hometheaterhifi.com/technical-articles-and-editorials/technical-articles-and-editorials/options-by-supplier-and-price/page-2-understanding-dac-specifications.html

They definitely can perform differently and the measurements like 1kHz tones and A-weighted measurement are not telling the whole story.

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

And here is a great piece on DAC from a trusted source - The Audio Critic.

"The old regulars know exactly my position regarding the stupidity of ascribing a “character” to the sound of an utterly neutral signal path. Oohing and aahing over the vast improvement in soundstaging, front-to-back depth, bass delineation, or treble sweetness obtainable with this or that electronic component may sell high-end magazines but is totally unscientific and delusional. What the Benchmark DAC1 HDR adds to or subtracts from its input signal is borderline unmeasurable, so the sonic character of its output is obviously the sonic character of its input. It’s as simple as that. It has no sound of its own. Furthermore, its measurements could be 20 or 30 dB worse and it would still sound the same. I have convinced myself of that over and over again in double-blind listening comparisons of all sorts of electronic components at matched levels."

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=40&blogId=1

 

[Irvrobinson]

And here is a great piece on DAC from a trusted source - The Audio Critic.

"The old regulars know exactly my position regarding the stupidity of ascribing a “character” to the sound of an utterly neutral signal path. Oohing and aahing over the vast improvement in soundstaging, front-to-back depth, bass delineation, or treble sweetness obtainable with this or that electronic component may sell high-end magazines but is totally unscientific and delusional. What the Benchmark DAC1 HDR adds to or subtracts from its input signal is borderline unmeasurable, so the sonic character of its output is obviously the sonic character of its input. It’s as simple as that. It has no sound of its own. Furthermore, its measurements could be 20 or 30 dB worse and it would still sound the same. I have convinced myself of that over and over again in double-blind listening comparisons of all sorts of electronic components at matched levels."

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=40&blogId=1

While I agree that the HDR (which I use as a preamp-DAC) seems to have no sonic character at all, I still have issues with this passage. As I've posted before, I contend that DBTs for audio tests are misleading. Human audio memory sucks and, IMO, and masks subtle differences in DBTs. I think anyone who has participated in audio DBTs, or SBTs for that matter, knows this is true. Audio DBTs are about guessing when there are only subtle differences between components being compared. Second, measurements that are 30db worse than the HDR's might very well have audible ramifications; that's pretty much the difference between good analog and Red Book CD digital. Aczel might be correct, but his assertion is just that, a biased assertion.

Anyway, why are you still saluting Aczel? He swore up and down that the Orion was so much better than *any* box speaker that only foolish buyers continued to buy "monkey coffins". You know that isn't correct. If he's obviously wrong about speakers, why do you trust him about electronics?

 

[Nestor]

While I agree that the HDR (which I use as a preamp-DAC) seems to have no sonic character at all, I still have issues with this passage. As I've posted before, I contend that DBTs for audio tests are misleading. Human audio memory sucks and, IMO, and masks subtle differences in DBTs. I think anyone who has participated in audio DBTs, or SBTs for that matter, knows this is true. Audio DBTs are about guessing when there are only subtle differences between components being compared. Second, measurements that are 30db worse than the HDR's might very well have audible ramifications; that's pretty much the difference between good analog and Red Book CD digital. Aczel might be correct, but his assertion is just that, a biased assertion.

Anyway, why are you still saluting Aczel? He swore up and down that the Orion was so much better than *any* box speaker that only foolish buyers continued to buy "monkey coffins". You know that isn't correct. If he's obviously wrong about speakers, why do you trust him about electronics?

You contend that audio memory "sucks" yet you still rely on that same poor memory to claim there are sonic differences.

Second, "might" isn't "is".

Third, ad hominems make for a poor argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Irvrobinson]

You contend that audio memory "sucks" yet you still rely on that same poor memory to claim there are sonic differences.

I didn't claim there were sonic differences between properly designed and operating DACs, I'm just voicing the opinion that audio DBTs seem unlikely to prove there aren't. As for the ad hominem attack, are you referring to what I said about Aczel? The man who created white hat and black hat lists? I actually agree with his lists, but one who so openly throws stones shouldn't be insulted by a few thrown back now and then. Have you read what he wrote about the Orions? Have you heard them?

 

[Nestor]

I didn't claim there were sonic differences between properly designed and operating DACs, I'm just voicing the opinion that audio DBTs seem unlikely to prove there aren't. As for the ad hominem attack, are you referring to what I said about Aczel? The man who created white hat and black hat lists? I actually agree with his lists, but one who so openly throws stones shouldn't be insulted by a few thrown back now and then. Have you read what he wrote about the Orions? Have you heard them?

"Seem unlikely to prove there aren't."

This is known as "trying to prove a negative", and nothing more than FUD by ABX critics who have repeatedly failed to discredit ABX testing.

I've never read Aczel's comments about the Orion, nor do I care to. I point out the ad hominems because they contribute nothing towards the merits of what he says about DACs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Irvrobinson]

"Seem unlikely to prove there aren't."

This is known as "trying to prove a negative", and nothing more than FUD by ABX critics who have repeatedly failed to discredit ABX testing.

I've never read Aczel's comments about the Orion, nor do I care to. I point out the ad hominems because they contribute nothing towards the merits of what he says about DACs.

I feel like I'm playing Twister in this thread with you, Nestor. I'm just expressing an experienced opinion. I get it that you don't agree, but twisting my opinion into consciously spreading FUD for the purpose of asserting that there are audible differences between electronics is just silly. And what people espouse on one subject does affect their credibility on other subjects.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Anyway, why are you still saluting Aczel? He swore up and down that the Orion was so much better than *any* box speaker that only foolish buyers continued to buy "monkey coffins". You know that isn't correct. If he's obviously wrong about speakers, why do you trust him about electronics?

Wrong? Just because you don't AGREE with others' SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS does NOT make them WRONG.

He believes the Orion sound better than any box speakers. Many Orion owners agree with him. Owners of Revel Salon speakers might disagree with him.

Basically, what Peter Aczel said was that based on DBTs, people involved could not tell the difference between DAC. He was just stating the findings from those DBTs.

And whatever speakers he likes best is his own personal preference, not a DBT finding or fact.

 

[RichB]

Wrong? Just because you don't AGREE with other's SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS does NOT make them WRONG.

Basically, what Peter Aczel said was that based on DBTs, people involved could not tell the difference between DAC. He was just stating findings from those DBTs.

And whatever speakers he likes best is his own personal preference, not a DBT finding or fact.

Which indicates that those people on that day, with that equipment, in that room could not tell the difference.

I guarantee that I could provide a setup with two of the same stand-along DACs running on the same PC simultaneously streaming the same source (J River Zones) and folks could tell the difference.

I cannot tell you why they sound different and to some, that makes it invalid. To me, that makes it true but a mystery.
Personally, I am not overly concerned with DBT's. SBT's are good enough.

Also, I believe in long term listening is valuable. I have detected hookup problems, failing drivers, power issues many times while listening in the background and noticing something did not sound right. Regular folks can do this without convening a panel of experts

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Which indicates that those people on that day, with that equipment, in that room could not tell the difference.

So if a drug were not made by the SAME pharmacist, given by the SAME nurse at the SAME hospital on the SAME day as the double-blinded trial, then the drug just won't work?

It's one thing to ask 100 people which sound they PREFERRED. But if 100 people could not even tell a significant audible difference, then it's probably a solid study if the study were designed and implemented well.

 

[RichB]

So if a drug were not made by the SAME pharmacist, given by the SAME nurse at the SAME hospital on the SAME day as the double-blinded trial, then the drug just won't work?

It's one thing to ask 100 people what they PREFERRED. But if 100 people could not even tell a significant difference, then it's probably a solid study.

The drug analogy while familiar to you is not entirely applicable.
It is not that they do not have value but that they are not definitive.

If you could guarantee no allergic reactions, you'd really be somewhere

- Rich

 

[Irvrobinson]

So if a drug were not made by the SAME pharmacist, given by the SAME nurse at the SAME hospital on the SAME day as the double-blinded trial, then the drug just won't work?

It's one thing to ask 100 people which sound they PREFERRED. But if 100 people could not even tell a significant audible difference, then it's probably a solid study if the study were designed and implemented well.

We've already discussed this, and you conceded that the drug testing case was different than listening tests. I also stated that I would not want drugs that weren't subjected to DBTs. Frankly, I think the problem the audio industry has is that there isn't a compelling test, IMO, for subtle audible differences. Probably because human hearing is such a subjective, fool-able, sense. And on the other side of the aisle is the complete BS of the audiophile press. (Note the recent Stereophile review of the Revel Rhthym2 subwoofer. Completely useless flowery prose with no meaningful measurements.) Neither alternative is very satisfying.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you could guarantee no allergic reactions, you'd really be somewhere

- Rich

Drug reactions are actually a pretty good analogy. See, even Placebos can induce drug reactions; it's all in their heads.

Just like people hearing things that are all in their heads.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...there isn't a compelling test, IMO, for subtle audible differences...

But why worry about the differences if they are only SUBTLE?

I would agree with anyone who tells me he could hear a "subtle" difference.

I'm only interested in SIGNIFICANT differences.

It's like I don't care if an antihypertensive drug lowers the systolic BP by only 1 - 3 mmHg. I only care if it could lower the SBP by 10 mmHg or more.

Subtle differences could be attributed to human error. Bottom line is, they are probably INSIGNIFICANT.

 

[Irvrobinson]

But why worry about the differences if they are only SUBTLE?

Because they affect perceived satisfaction. I agree with your assessment about a minor lowering of BP; I don't even know it's occurring unless I measure it. Audio is about perception, drugs are about physical responses.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Because they affect perceived satisfaction. I agree with your assessment about a minor lowering of BP; I don't even know it's occurring unless I measure it. Audio is about perception, drugs are about physical responses.

I would understand 100% with anyone who says he got more satisfaction from one component over another. The heart wants what the heart wants; it doesn't matter what it is.

Perceived Satisfaction and Subtle Differences are in the realm of Personal Preference IMO.

I don't see how anyone can dispute personal satisfaction.

 

[RichB]

But why worry about the differences if they are only SUBTLE?

I would agree with anyone who tells me he could hear a "subtle" difference.

I'm only interested in SIGNIFICANT differences.

It's like I don't care if an antihypertensive drug lowers the systolic BP by only 1 - 3 mmHg. I only care if it could lower the SBP by 10 mmHg or more.

Subtle differences could be attributed to human error. Bottom line is, they are probably INSIGNIFICANT.

What is minor to one person may be significant to another.
I am worried about significant different and really worried about SIGNIFICANT differences.

Hearing is all in your head

A true DBT for Audio zealot should not trust Audioholic subjective statements. They are completely unsubstantiated sighted tests.

- Rich

 

[RichB]

Drug reactions are actually a pretty good analogy. See, even Placebos can induce drug reactions; it's all in their heads.

Just like people hearing things that are all in their heads.

There are people who refuse to hear difference and slight those who do because it does not comport with their own bias.
Some have spent a great deal of money on equipment and must reject all such thinking - Stop me before I buy again

- Rich