"enjoyment" as factor in evaluating equipment

[mike1127]

I've been trying a lot of DACs and headphones recently, so I've been trying to evaluate their sound (subjectively) as part of deciding what to keep permanently. I keep in mind that I want synergistic components. In other words, it's not enough to say a DAC has a particular sound signature. How I hear that signature is affected by my choice of amp and headphone as well, and I want components that play well together.

 

So I'll set up some combination of DAC, amp, and headphone, and listen to a few tracks that I've picked to be most revealing of qualities I like in sound. I'm listening closely to factors like transient speed and definition, or microdynamic resolution. 

 

But listening closely to details can miss something bigger: How much am I enjoying the music? The problem is that enjoyment is one of the most subjective factors and can be affected by non-sonic factors. I have some chronic pain so the most common issue is that I'm physically uncomfortable, or the headphones feel uncomfortable, or something like that. Then my enjoyment plummets.

 

And yet, I do believe it's important to listen for enjoyment. Ultimately, once I pick something and start to live with it, I'm not listening closely to details, but just letting the sound wash over me, and equipment varies in the experience of enjoyment it creates.

 

Right now, to try to approximate this, I do two things. First, I pick some music that I haven't heard in a while. (The "test tracks" get boring musically pretty quickly.) Then I lift my awareness from focusing directly on the music and wait for impressions to come to me. After I get through this period of evaluating equipment, in the long run, I'll see if this technique is helpful.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Enjoyment is what it’s all about, unless your a measurement device 🙂

[firedog]

Put something on that's causes "foot tapping" and see if it does. IMO, when you get a combo that sounds right - you should know it pretty much right away.

[mike1127]

7 minutes ago, firedog said:

Put something on that's causes "foot tapping" and see if it does. IMO, when you get a combo that sounds right - you should know it pretty much right away.

For me, if I know something causes "foot tapping," that's great, but when I start to use that as a test track, it loses its novelty and gets boring. So it's tricky.. I have to find something new to listen to, and then when switching to another configuration, find yet another new track, which is not the same as the first track. I mean, not always, but this is the general strategy I use. It takes some experimentation and a lot of listening to get a feel for the details of the sonic signature as well as how those details contribute to an overall sense of musical enjoyment.

 

Now, if something is vastly superior to something else, it doesn't take much time to notice that. That's obvious. But most good audio stuff got good because someone experimented with a lot of small changes and navigated toward their sonic goal.

[GregWormald]

I 

On 5/10/2024 at 2:52 PM, mike1127 said:

But listening closely to details can miss something bigger: How much am I enjoying the music? The problem is that enjoyment is one of the most subjective factors and can be affected by non-sonic factors. I have some chronic pain so the most common issue is that I'm physically uncomfortable, or the headphones feel uncomfortable, or something like that. Then my enjoyment plummets.

Have you considered that the reverse is also possible, I.e.—less enjoyable sound leaves you free to pay attention to aches and pains?

[audiobomber]

A-B testing is insufficient for evaluating audio gear. I need to hear it with  a variety of music, familiar and unfamiliar, well recorded and poorly recorded, for an extended period, i.e. several days at least, preferably a couple of weeks.

 

I listen for errors; loose bass, harsh treble, soundstage, etc. but also PRaT and musical involvement, which are key. I need it all, or the component has to go.

[JoeWhip]

I listen for a few things but the overall experience has to be enjoyable. 

[FIndingit]

Foot tapping + tears = Good enough

[mike1127]

On 5/19/2024 at 1:37 AM, GregWormald said:

I 

Have you considered that the reverse is also possible, I.e.—less enjoyable sound leaves you free to pay attention to aches and pains?

I find that really captivating sound, especially something that's startling and new, takes all attention away from pain. Recently I've been going through some component upgrades and I've tested some equipment that had a very attention-grabbing sound. For instance, the Denafrips Terminator 1 DAC. But in all cases, the equipment proved to have flaws by being overly aggressive on transients or otherwise exaggerating aspects of the music. I'm trying to go back to finding something that's a good all-around performer and focuses on musicality. Right now I'm giving the DS DAC Mk. 1 a try and like it. I need to just stop thinking about sound so much and settle in and listen to my favorite music. In that situation, I can't ignore pain as well, so I need to do something to relax and relieve pain before I can really get deeply into the music. That's my personal experience... that's true even of live orchestral music, probably the most captivating sound there is. 

[mike1127]

On 5/19/2024 at 6:05 AM, audiobomber said:

A-B testing is insufficient for evaluating audio gear. I need to hear it with  a variety of music, familiar and unfamiliar, well recorded and poorly recorded, for an extended period, i.e. several days at least, preferably a couple of weeks.

 

I listen for errors; loose bass, harsh treble, soundstage, etc. but also PRaT and musical involvement, which are key. I need it all, or the component has to go.

Yes, I find that long-term listening can reveal things in the character that are annoyingly monotonous or monotonously annoying. I know one genius who can pick out those things in a very short time... he designs and modifies equipment and picks up on small changes as he works. But I can't do that very quickly at all. I recently listened to a Denafrips Terminator 1 DAC. I went to the local seller's house with my headphones and headphone amp and listened for an hour. Sounded great! I bought in on the spot. I got it home and over the next day realized it had a monotonously overly aggressive character on transients. Oops. Will have to resell.

[dericchan1]

I am going through similar process of comparing and evaluating different equipment in my main setup these days. 3 dacs, 2 preamps (Nope, none of them are going anywhere)

 

I measure enjoyment by how hard I tap my toes in my listening sessions!!! 😅

 

 

[GregWormald]

On 5/21/2024 at 1:11 PM, mike1127 said:

I recently listened to a Denafrips Terminator 1 DAC. I went to the local seller's house with my headphones and headphone amp and listened for an hour. Sounded great! I bought in on the spot. I got it home and over the next day realized it had a monotonously overly aggressive character on transients. Oops. Will have to resell.

In my experience that is a very unusual finding for Denafrips DACs. Did you get the same results on every decoding format?

[mike1127]

5 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

In my experience that is a very unusual finding for Denafrips DACs. Did you get the same results on every decoding format?

Thanks for your feedback. I'd like to make this DAC work if I can. I only tried 44.1/16, as that is most of my collection. 

 

An important aspect of quality for me is how well the DAC/other device renders the leading edge of piano notes. I use a few audiophile piano recordings to be sure there is no trouble in the recording. With the Denafrips Terminator 1, the piano edges were exaggerated and aggressive. As there is a correlation between frequency response and transient response, it's not surprising that I also heard a ton of energy in some treble region, perhaps the presence or sibilance regions. The extra energy was not harsh but just became monotonous after a while. 

 

I now have a Gustard U18 DDC and a Transparent HDMI cable, so I could try the Denafrips with its I2S input. I could also try other decoding formats.

[mike1127]

22 hours ago, GregWormald said:

In my experience that is a very unusual finding for Denafrips DACs. Did you get the same results on every decoding format?

I talked to the previous owner and it turns out he replaced the power supply before selling it and it had only a few hours on it. I think I'll need to burn it in before a final judgment.

[GregWormald]

2 hours ago, mike1127 said:

I talked to the previous owner and it turns out he replaced the power supply before selling it and it had only a few hours on it. I think I'll need to burn it in before a final judgment.

I do hope the power supply was replaced by an authorised person, who investigated why it needed replacing.

 

My Pontus II did take a fair while, about 200 hours I think, to settle down. I much prefer the non-oversampling decoding rather than either of the oversampling modes.

 

As far as burning-in is concerned I was told that running the DAC without the amplifier or speaker chain being active was the fastest way.

 

Do you know what firmware version the DAC is running? IIRC there have been a couple of upgrades, and I know each iteration has its fans, who dislike the others.

[mike1127]

3 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

 

 

 

As far as burning-in is concerned I was told that running the DAC without the amplifier or speaker chain being active was the fastest way.

 

Interesting. The connection from the DAC output to the amp should probably still be there so current flows through the output stage of the DAC, even if the amp is off.

 

 

3 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

Do you know what firmware version the DAC is running? IIRC there have been a couple of upgrades, and I know each iteration has its fans, who dislike the others.

Haven't tried to figure that out. 

[Archimago]

Of course, enjoyment is the #1 factor one should buy a product! Nobody should stop anyone from enjoying or buying what they want. (So long as it's all legal... 😁)