Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro MQA

[opus101]

Looks once again that you've missed the point. See if you're any wiser after reading this article on Goodhart's Law : https://adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/what-goodharts-law-can-teach-you-about-performance-data/

[asdf1000]

3 minutes ago, opus101 said:

Looks once again that you've missed the point. See if you're any wiser after reading this article on Goodhart's Law : https://adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/what-goodharts-law-can-teach-you-about-performance-data/

 

Yep since lower distortion measurements (all types) are both a measure and a target, then lower distortions are “no longer a reliable measure of performance“

 

Makes sense.

 

[Josh Mound]

14 minutes ago, asdf1000 said:

 

No caveats?

 

So nobody should target lower distortion measurements then?

 

 

 

To be honest, I think that’s a paradox of the forum in question. The mantra there is that all “properly engineered” DACs sound alike, and the common refrain in threads is not to bother spending more than whatever the latest budget Topping DAC costs unless you want other features, etc., because the difference won’t be audible. Given that, it’s not clear why they keep measuring DACs. 

 

(Going back to my previous post, it’s stuff like this that gives me...pause.)

[opus101]

1 minute ago, JoshM said:

 

To be honest, I think that’s a paradox of the forum in question. The mantra there is that all “properly engineered” DACs sound alike, and the common refrain in threads is not to bother spending more than whatever the latest budget Topping DAC costs unless you want other features, etc., because the difference won’t be audible. Given that, it’s not clear why they keep measuring DACs. 

 

If you ask them for a falsifiable definition of 'properly engineered' you'll never get one. Sometimes 'competently' is used instead of 'properly' but the intent is the same. A more nuanced mantra is 'All competently engineered DACs sound identical under level matched, double blind conditions'.

[Josh Mound]

7 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

If you ask them for a falsifiable definition of 'properly engineered' you'll never get one. Sometimes 'competently' is used instead of 'properly' but the intent is the same. A more nuanced mantra is 'All competently engineered DACs sound identical under level matched, double blind conditions'.

 

Moreover, when someone demonstrates they can hear differences under those stringent conditions, it’s offhandedly dismissed as flawed or otherwise impossible. It’s circular reasoning. 

[emcdade]

On 9/2/2019 at 11:36 AM, Miska said:

 

To some extent that was discussed, but then I got fed up and ignored the whole site. They think that as it is now is all that matters, except that nobody can hear it, so it doesn't matter. So I'm not sure what they are trying to achieve.

 

You really summed up the irony of the entire mindset over there in one comment, haha.

 

I think what they're trying to achieve now though is the takedown of any product more expensive than a $50 DAC that doesn't rank as high on their THD+N chart.  

 

 

[pkane2001]

12 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

If you ask them for a falsifiable definition of 'properly engineered' you'll never get one. Sometimes 'competently' is used instead of 'properly' but the intent is the same. A more nuanced mantra is 'All competently engineered DACs sound identical under level matched, double blind conditions'.

 

I think this is just a counterpoint to 'everything matters to sound quality' that you can find on many other fora. If one can imagine it affecting SQ, then it must be true.

 

Personally, I lean in the direction of 'show me' instead of accepting claims on faith. If you don't lean in this direction, perhaps ASR isn't for you. While I also like the banter and the back-and-forth there, the primary draw for me are the measurements and the discussions about measurements.

[opus101]

10 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I think this is just a counterpoint to 'everything matters to sound quality' that you can find on many other fora. If one can imagine it affecting SQ, then it must be true.

 

 

Personally I prefer a slightly more nuanced version - 'everything matters but to differing degrees, including infinitesimally small'. I would agree that many 'subjectivist' mindsets don't seem to have the concept 'low-hanging fruit'.

 

I also prefer 'show' to 'tell' but for me, ASR leans too far in the direction of the latter. The corollary of 'show' to me is observe and observations have quality. Numbers don't.

 

Incidentally @JoshM I think the reason they keep on measuring DACs is because its popular. Going back a couple of years, ASR didn't seem to me to be adding many new members. After Amir got his brand new AP it really picked up and now has become a honeypot for numbers guys.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, opus101 said:

 

Personally I prefer a slightly more nuanced version - 'everything matters but to differing degrees, including infinitesimally small'. I would agree that many 'subjectivist' mindsets don't seem to have the concept 'low-hanging fruit'.

 

I also prefer 'show' to 'tell' but for me, ASR leans too far in the direction of the latter. The corollary of 'show' to me is observe and observations have quality. Numbers don't.

 

I think that's the point I was making: ASR leans to one extreme, many other places to the other. I like that there is at least some balance in the universe. It would be very boring if one extreme or the other was all there was. There is room for qualitative and quantitative observation, but not in the way most audiophiles do it.

 

[57gold]

Kind of odd that no one who has heard one of these good measuring DACs (Matrix, Topping...) has posted their opinion of how they sound versus some of CA's standbys like a Mytek, Exasound, Schitt, Ayre, Chord, Auralic...maybe they are scarce?

 

 

[opus101]

Not really that odd - good numbers on a DAC attracts customers who tend towards the view that a DAC with outstanding measurements is essentially transparent. Hence nothing to talk about.

[asdf1000]

2 hours ago, JoshM said:

Given that, it’s not clear why they keep measuring DACs. 

 

Verify performance claims made by a manufacturer?

 

That doesn’t even need to be related to sound quality at all....

 

It is actually possible to treat these two things completely separate...

 

[Judelow]

hi all,

I am not expert enough to go into technical details.

But what I can say is that I have heard the mentioned product : x sabre pro mqa. It just sounds amazing. It was in my shortlist with Chord Qutest, I could not decide which one to buy. Finally I ended up with the smallest because I dont have so much space in my rack, and my wife preferred the look of the Chord. In my mind, I have a little regret...

 

I dont know about the measruement they do and how relevant this is for listening. But why not a well measured DAC couldnot sound amazingly good? reading the previous it seems the opposite!

[emcdade]

On 9/2/2019 at 11:49 AM, pkane2001 said:

 

Yes, there’s some very strong skepticism on that site to anything that’s not obviously true or can’t be easily demonstrated with a controlled test. Sometimes it’s over the top, just like some sites with the purely subjective approach that go to the extreme in the opposite direction.

 

As I understand it, you’d want to see  much wider bandwidth measurements up to, say, megahertz range. That might be useful and can be interesting, but hardly negates the poor measurement results in the audible range, as is, for example, the case with TotalDac. Would you agree?

Could you point me to a subjectivist forum that has the same angry vibes as ASR but in reverse?  I've never encountered one, so it would be quite the site to see.  

 

Thanks for any link you could provide.

[pkane2001]

Just now, emcdade said:

Could you point me to a subjectivist forum that has the same angry vibes as ASR but in reverse?  I've never encountered one, so it would be quite the site to see.  

 

Thanks for any link you could provide.

 

I could find you a good number on this site if you want. But I'd rather not go down this path.

[emcdade]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I could find you a good number on this site if you want. But I'd rather not go down this path.

Not even a single website or link then.  It seems like you're trying to create some kind of false equivalence out of thin air.

 

Like, is there a website that posts threads about how bad Benchmark audio products sound despite state of the art measurements?  I would consider that an "extreme subjectivist" type of view.

[pkane2001]

Just now, emcdade said:

Not even a single website or link then.  It seems like you're trying to create some kind of false equivalence out of thin air.

 

Like, is there a website that posts threads about how bad Benchmark audio products sound despite state of the art measurements?  I would consider that an "extreme subjectivist" type of view.

 

Google is your friend. Feel free to use it.

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Google is your friend. Feel free to use it.

Those making assertions should at least be willing to back them up if asked.

[pkane2001]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Those making assertions should at least be willing to back them up if asked.

 

Just like you backed up your personal allegations against an owner of another forum yesterday? Thanks, leave me out of it. This thread has been dead for months, why resurrect it?

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Just like you backed up your personal allegations against an owner of another forum yesterday? Thanks, leave me out of it. This thread has been dead for months, why resurrect it?

 

 

Two wrongs make a right?

 

Mine were based on personal information, about a specific person. Your claims are based on something we have no idea about. You made them up for all we know. You can't even say a single public forum where this behavior takes place?

[mansr]

21 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Those making assertions should at least be willing to back them up if asked.

You've just got to connect the dots.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

You've just got to connect the dots.

I need to be pointed to at least two dots to connect them.

 

Perhaps the objectivists are turning subjective when it fits their narratives. 

[pkane2001]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Two wrongs make a right?

 

Mine were based on personal information, about a specific person. Your claims are based on something we have no idea about. You made them up for all we know. You can't even say a single public forum where this behavior takes place?

 

I have personal, first-hand information about forums that are run by extreme subjectivists, where you get banned for mentioning measurements or blind tests. As I said, I'd rather not go down the path of naming them. It was not a pleasant experience but I'm not a vindictive type of person.

[The Computer Audiophile]

 

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I have personal, first-hand information about forums that are run by extreme subjectivists, where you get banned for mentioning measurements or blind tests. As I said, I'd rather not go down the path of naming them. It was not a pleasant experience but I'm not a vindictive type of person.

 

Nobody is asking you to do that. Here is the ask ->

 

52 minutes ago, emcdade said:

Could you point me to a subjectivist forum that has the same angry vibes as ASR but in reverse?  I've never encountered one, so it would be quite the site to see.  

 

Thanks for any link you could provide.

[pkane2001]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

Nobody is asking you to do that. Here is the ask ->

 

 

I guess you didn't see where I said "I don't want to go down this path"? Are you going to keep insisting that I do something I said I'm not willing to do?