Differences in sound: DAC vs. DAC + Pre-amplifier

[DuckToller]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

Note that he is talking about distortion figures, not 10 , but  >100 times less than you have stated .

Bonjour Alex,
please allow me to ask, if you believe these figures (0,002%THD) are audible for common audiophiles (60+ years), the majority of whom may not have been able to meet the requirements for the job as Naval Sonar operators even at young age and therefore had to forego the special training associated with it?
Stay safe and sound, DT

[DuckToller]

4 hours ago, sandyk said:

You don't need special training to hear distortion, unlike the Sonar requirements.

Quite a few DIY Audio members were able to hear clear differences between the different states of the attached amplifier with front end modifications. The measurements were posted in a DIY Audio thread by a member from Melbourne. See also :

https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/134221-silicon-chip-200watt-ld-amplifier-2.html # 13 and 15

They were also able to hear clear differences with Front End balancing as in the attached link to a DIY Audio thread where Nelson Pass was also a participant.

https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/133018-current-mirror-discussion-15.html

Alex,
I may qualify your answer sadly as smoke and mirrors rather than a substantial response.
Reading the old DIY threads in consideration of my question was simply a waste of time.
My full answer to your post  will arrive tomorrow in the objective-Fi section, as I do not want to derail this thread further.
Stay safe & sound, DT

[DuckToller]

Following the discussion between @barrows and @Audiophile Neuroscience about dac +pre amp vs Dac direct to amplification in this thread, I am wondering what triggers the strong reaction towards knowledge and experience of audio engineering?

I've got the impression the discussion is about "who has the valid ideas" and information (validated by observation) about uncolored, realistic, unaltered SOUND (not information). From the outsides it looks like two schools of thoughts have found a place to battle it out, while, on reflection, both may have it merits, depending on your own personal preference.

Personally, I support ratio, which leaves me on the side of signal processing and supporting barrows "opinion" about the result he prefers being uncolored, notwithstanding the fact (based on observation) that other systems may sound better to my ears for whatever reasons.

However, through the magnifying lens, it is just about the question who owns the key to audiophile nirvana, defined by the pure (absolute) sound. There is perhaps a strong denial of reason, if acknowledgement of that reason would close the access to that precious key?

Given the fact, that different people have different preferences, one may refer to a philosophy of having the signal path as short as possible (aka straight wire with gain), knowing that only a minimum of alteration of the signal will occur by adding/discounting information on the way to the transducers, as a preference, while others don't refer to the signal process but to the perceived sound quality as the most important indicator of an audiophile system, which in practice shouldn't be denied, but not evidently depends on reasons like unaltered signal processing.
 

In my understanding, it is nearly impossible to converge these schools, neither part time nor permanently, because ignoring the math in signal processing can't be generally accepted by audio engineering principles,  while the idea of unaltered, pure, absolute signal (in that case equals Sound) can't be given away by the opponents as, objectively, they don't want to book the 2nd class entry to audiophile heaven by an altered signal and sound with coloration.

I personally do not regard that result as 2nd class at all, especially when they are completely happy with the premium results they hear, however, the strong reaction of moderate and educated people let me consider that there is more to that discussion than the perceived best sound quality.
 

The core of the discussion, imho, is not about objectivist and subjectivist, even not as Chris has put it about saving/stopping/deluding people from their hobby of "spending their own money having fun".

Thinking about that latest discourse it feels like the people spending money can't have fun if other people spending money have fun with results that differ from their own objective/ perception/ experience.

In real life, the price of a 21k Bricasti DAC - for example - would cover for the vast majority of the forum members all of their expenses for their audio system, which in turn means that the discussion we have seen is on a very elevated battleground.

Though it is exemplary about the inconvenience of the "everything matters" community about the "straight wire with gain" hood claims, they have the ultimate, unaltered or the equivalent in most minimized, uncolored signal processing. 

Giving that part of audiophile nirvana away, could be counted as opening the pathway for even more ignorant and incompetent objective assessments from the nay-Sayers outside their own galaxy. I wonder what is the real reason to defend that golden vlies in such an irrational way?

Why they just can't stand it, and feel the need to fight it with both, considerate academic language & constant snark bickering from the sidekicks?
 

AN for example does have a really wonderful system (and even a nice pool outside!), thus it seems to be of great importance to him to be very referential in his opinion, that barrows reason is nothing more than a claim and scientifically disputable because it suffers evidence that he would acknowledge.
While anyone can perceive his well educated school of thought for making a point in this debate, I look at this and wonder what is the trigger when both members are as close with their technical preferences as it could get given they haven't got the same parents, education,  and profession. I wonder if this is related to some cultural differences sharing the same language but different cultural influences ? (i.e. here )
 

I remember reports from RMAF 2019 that the SONORE room had been one of the best (judgement by Jud / Purple Warrior) with an exquisite choice of equipment:

From what I've seen in this forum, I'd assume AN may have not a lot to criticize about that selection, except of lacking a pre-amp that would make the system sound the way he prefers. 😉
 

When we see so much converging aspects in our hobby, then what is the underlying reason for disregarding the philosophy behind the above system configuration so vehemently, in a forum section where disagreement usually is sourced out to the objective forum?
 

I am very curious to find out about that, because in my personal opinion , these triggers look to me like another core problem to forum civility.

Cheers, Tom

[DuckToller]

7 minutes ago, audiobomber said:

I am now running my subs through a miniDSP 2x4, which allows me to implement a more versatile crossover and DSP with auto filters via REW

Bonjour, Audiobomber.
Short question about miniDSP, do I assume correctly, that the signal for your Subs and your speakers will run through ADC-DAC conversion at 24/96 during the DSP? Please feel free to correct me about my assumption
I do have a 2x4miniDSP somewhere in the closet and may start testing during the confinement  period...
Cheers, DT