Tom's Hardware Blind DAC Test

[k6davis]

+1

 

Well said. I agree with one possible caveat. I'm not sure that insecurity lies at the root of this behaviour. Arrogance and intolerance are, IMO, probably stronger influences.

 

Secure people are rarely arrogant or intolerant, in my opinion.

 

They meet differences of opinIon with respect and humility, even when the "facts" (which are generally in dispute and frequently change as new science emerges) are on their side.

[sandyk]

If you look at SRC Comparisons you'll see that the sample rate convertor of SF9 is so crappy that it can be called broken.

 

For rightful comparison one should at least use something of the calibre of iZotope, and then of course set the filter parameters correctly.

 

 

Previously I have used Barry's 16/44.1 .wav files from the Formats Comparison page before they were Zipped, and the differences were still quite obvious to me , just as many others have reported.

I already mentioned that on this occasion I generated the 16/44.1 version using SF9 due to a problem with the downloaded Zip.

[REShaman]

Secure people are rarely arrogant or intolerant, in my opinion.

 

They meet differences of opinIon with respect and humility, even when the "facts" (which are generally in dispute and frequently change as new science emerges) are on their side.

 

Your comments and perspectives, in my opinion, are fair and reasonable. Insecurity, arrogance and intolerance are typically corollaries of the same complex of behaviors.

 

One could also understand what drives the behaviors of fanatics. There's a scene in the film Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, that may be apt:

 

George Smiley: [on Karla] He's a fanatic. And the fanatic is always concealing a secret doubt.

 

These skirmishes of reactivity that devolve into circular diatribes which seemingly recur in thread after thread do not deepen our rapport with each other, advance our understanding and broaden the exchange of different models of our experience.

 

Of course information is imparted and exchanged. Not denying that. But within a certain context, some of us are focusing on the dynamics of the interactions of some with the many and how, what, when (the why only energizes the spin) this persistent dynamic gets energized. One need only pay attention to the dynamics of relationship issues and certain behaviors which energize power struggles, such as withdrawal, contempt/sarcasm, defensiveness, criticism. Power struggles as a dynamic don't self heal unless both sides make it their intention to disengage, not indulge, notice the trigger, discuss needs rather than argue positions.

 

Barry Diament and many others offer self-aware perspectives about those dynamics that cause what so many of us eschew and are characterized by some as being arrogant. I do not think they are being clueless. Rather intentional. Or wounded. And would rather justify their reactivity under the guise of judging others as ignorant etc. but in my model of the World that is not the complex equivalence of self worth, self confidence, self interest in exploring possibilities. Instead, it feels, sounds, tastes, looks like fanaticism or some other behavior from the realm of Force as opposed to Power. Information is resource. Resource is power. There is always choice through personal responsibility for what one gives and receives.

 

Exploring these recurrent issues at CA on a common ground. All are invited. I do not need to be right. Just need to be heard.

 

Enjoy the music,

Richard

[sandyk]

Previously I have used Barry's 16/44.1 .wav files from the Formats Comparison page before they were Zipped, and the differences were still quite obvious to me , just as many others have reported.

 

Just a few minutes ago I managed to DL successfully this time, the 16/44.1 version from Barry Diament's Formats Comparison page. I compared it with the saved 24/192 .wav file from the DVD using cPlay ,and playing from System Memory. The unzipped 16/44.1 version was also saved to the same Corsair Voyager which uses an external Linear low noise +5V PSU.The differences were far from subtle, and the 24/192 version was vastly superior.

[4est]

I am really not so sure what all of the kerfuffle is about? So some (untrained in audio) IT guys cannot hear the difference between DACs or hi rez.

 

That seems pretty common in these parts...

[crisnee]

Just a few minutes ago I managed to DL successfully this time, the 16/44.1 version from Barry Diament's Formats Comparison page. I compared it with the saved 24/192 .wav file from the DVD using cPlay ,and playing from System Memory. The unzipped 16/44.1 version was also saved to the same Corsair Voyager which uses an external Linear low noise +5V PSU.The differences were far from subtle, and the 24/192 version was vastly superior.

 

I wish I would just one time hear vastly superior sound when I try out something that's supposed to give me a superior or vastly superior sonic experience. Oh well, I guess I must be one of those IT guys from W. Mich.

 

Chris

[sandyk]

I wish I would just one time hear vastly superior sound when I try out something that's supposed to give me a superior or vastly superior sonic experience. Oh well, I guess I must be one of those IT guys from W. Mich.

 

Chris

 

Have you actually tried listening to Barry's 24/192 material using a good DAC ?

Due to no compression or limiting of any kind, as well as using only 2 high quality microphones without any mixing or editing , the tracks have a great depth of image, with a beautiful purity to the sound.

[4est]

I take it you are in IT and I offended you. I am sorry, it was not directed at you. I also never said "vastly superior". I said difference. However, is it really so difficult to imagine that one that is familiar with computers only has half of the "equation", and that there is still the analog aspect. Being involved in computers does not make one automatically uber qualified for computer audio. No more so than I, as a woodworker, am qualified as an arborist.

 

I wish I would just one time hear vastly superior sound when I try out something that's supposed to give me a superior or vastly superior sonic experience. Oh well, I guess I must be one of those IT guys from W. Mich.

 

Chris

[paul1970]

Engineers are not 'in IT'.

[sandyk]

Fred

 

This time you don't have a clue what you are talking about. I can demonstrate my ability to hear these things under blind conditions, just as Martin Colloms and his panel did with my previous reports where 6 separate blind A/B/A/ 3 minute sessions were involved. In another reply you posted photos of your various projects. About the only other thing most experienced and qualified EEs may not be able to do is say they played guitar for so many years. My Sydney EE friend has also designed preamps, power amps and DACs, as well as remote input and volume controls with fine resolution.

Isn't that what they taught you the basics about at Uni so many years ago ?

I only wish that we weren't on different continents so I could demonstrate these things directly to you. If you are in the slightest bit interested , I would be happy to forward copies of the emails from my EE friend in confidence,

not that I would expect such a proud and stubborn old EE to accept the possibility, that at least on this occasion he may be wrong. (smile)

 

Regards

Alex

[mayhem13]

I am really not so sure what all of the kerfuffle is about? So some (untrained in audio) IT guys cannot hear the difference between DACs or hi rez.

 

That seems pretty common in these parts...

 

You did say it so no reason to beg pardon in asking.......

 

What is considered suitable 'audio' training?

[4est]

Excuse my over simplification, but does not Tom's hardware review computer stuff mainly? Across the top of their site it reads as such: graphics, cpus, w8, mobos ect. How does that make them an authority on audio?

[firedog]

If you read the article, the writer is an audiophile and owns the $2000 DAC talked about in the article. He expected the DAC to sound better, found it didn't in his test.

 

It was a small test. Take it for what it's worth. It's one test. It may well be that most people can't hear the difference.

 

I would find it interesting someday if we could get a bunch of people together like Barry D, Sandyk, et al, and have them do a similar test. I think they probably could pick out the expensive DAC from the $2 one. Then what would everyone say?

[mayhem13]

 

 

I would find it interesting someday if we could get a bunch of people together like Barry D, Sandyk, et al, and have them do a similar test. I think they probably could pick out the expensive DAC from the $2 one. Then what would everyone say?

 

As I mentioned earlier, I believe the purpose of the testing and article was simply to reveal that with today's advances in computer technology, it doesn't need to cost a lot to get great sound from a computer. The differences in the gear used revealed very very small to no audible changes at all.

 

So in lies the arguement that myself, Dennis and others who might share our objective position when we challenge some claims that suggest stark, easily recognizable differences between equipment, file types and other suggestive points of interest within the signal chain. Would it be so hard for audiophiles to concede that these signal differences are in fact very small signal differences that border on audibility?..........

 

Look at the general parameters of the test. A group of level matched gear using clinically revealing headphones in a very quite environment.........and it was extremely difficult to impossible to tell the difference between a $2k piece of gear and a $2 chip. It's not that there were NO differences between them that's so revealing, but the clinical level of work needed to expose a difference at all. Think about that for a moment.

[mayhem13]

Excuse my over simplification, but does not Tom's hardware review computer stuff mainly? Across the top of their site it reads as such: graphics, cpus, w8, mobos ect. How does that make them an authority on audio?

 

Again.....what constitutes an authority on audio?

 

This and my previous question are not rhetorical. I would really be interested in your reply. It might help myself and others like me to better understand your viewpoint which might result in less controversial posting between us. Please share.

[4est]

I am not exactly sure, but it is unlikely to be found on a computer hardware site. I do find it amusing that many are fixated on expectation bias, and this thread seems indicative of that.

 

My viewpoint is simple, I like to play around with audio gear to get the best sound I can get using whatever mean is at my disposal. I honestly do not care what others do or don't hear. I am a team player in life, but my stereo is a solo act and just for me...

Again.....what constitutes an authority on audio?

[The Computer Audiophile]

The sophomoric behavior just won't stop. Thus, the thread is now closed.