Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: [TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's? (Read 2206 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
For example there are 8 channel 24/192 DACs that have 105 dB dynamic range and are used on the outputs of the DSPs in AVRs.  Less than $3.  Each DAC costs about 3/8 of a dollar or $0.375.

And IMO they sound like $0.375... I have heard some of those "105dB dynamic range" DAC's in AVR's that use "one chip to rule them all" for DAC and ADC. Those are not the best examples of AVR quality.

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #1 –
Quote from: SoNic67 on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
For example there are 8 channel 24/192 DACs that have 105 dB dynamic range and are used on the outputs of the DSPs in AVRs.  Less than $3.  Each DAC costs about 3/8 of a dollar or $0.375.

And IMO they sound like $0.375... I have heard some of those "105dB dynamic range" DAC's in AVR's that use "one chip to rule them all" for DAC and ADC. Those are not the best examples of AVR quality.



Two words: TOS 8.

The statement above would appear to violate the terms of service you agreed to when you signed up.

TOS 8 is a major tool that defends this place from the rampant arrogance and stupidity that hobbles the modern audio world.

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #2 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Quote from: SoNic67 on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
For example there are 8 channel 24/192 DACs that have 105 dB dynamic range and are used on the outputs of the DSPs in AVRs.  Less than $3.  Each DAC costs about 3/8 of a dollar or $0.375.
And IMO they sound like $0.375... I have heard some of those "105dB dynamic range" DAC's in AVR's that use "one chip to rule them all" for DAC and ADC. Those are not the best examples of AVR quality.
Two words: TOS 8.

The statement above would appear to violate the terms of service you agreed to when you signed up.

TOS 8 is a major tool that defends this place from the rampant arrogance and stupidity that hobbles the modern audio world.

Yep, and saying “IMO” does not magically make it all right, as so many people seem to think it will.

SoNic67, if you have no evidence of your statement, it will be sent to the Recycle Bin.

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #3 –
Quote from: db1989 on
SoNic67, if you have no evidence of your statement, it will be sent to the Recycle Bin.

Then send the WHOLE thread there. There is no way you can prove the opposite statement either. You either hear the difference for yourself or not. Arnold says that he doesn't hear a difference - you didn't make him support that affirmation.

In this case, personally I prefer the sound of old school multibit DAC (like PCM61, 63) to the sound of PCM1792.
I hear the difference between OpAmps like LM4562 and generic jelly-bean that are usually found in many DAC's - so much that I replaced them in all my DAC's/CD/receivers.
It is my opinion that I hear differences in the high-frequency domain. How would I "prove" that to Arnold? How can he "prove" his opinion that what I hear is not true?

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #4 –
Ah, implying that dismissal of differences claimed without evidence requires the same standard of proof as the claims themselves. A classic fallacy.

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Thing is, even with the added distortion performance is still below the thresholds of hearing, and not by a little bit.

So are you gonna delete that too? I don't see any proof there, just a claim.
 

[TOS #8] From: Audible Differences in DAC's?

Reply #6 –
Apparently you require very basic concepts of objectivity to be explained piece by piece.

There is a large difference between claims based upon a combination of objective measurements (THD, etc.) and generalised trends derived from sets of data regarding the physiology of large numbers of listeners, vs. claims from a single person made subjectively and without any body of evidence to back them up.

There is also a large difference between claiming that something exists vs. dismissing an unsubstantiated claim that it exists; the burden of proof must be shouldered by the person claiming positively, not by the person who refuses to accept the claim on faith due to the lack of evidence proferred.

With regard to either dichotomy, asserting a false equivalence between the two positions therein is highly disengenuous – and if you think it’s making you look better here, you’re very mistaken.