And then? I don't have a DAC.

Quote from: Webdrifter on 2016-10-01 17:26:22

let's assume my installation slightly colors the reference signal. Than I would hear the colored signal (if that coloration is hearable at all). However, I would not know how the undistorted signal sounds. To measure the full distortion (if I had the proper equipment for that) I would have to record the sound with a microphone near my speaker. This recordingproces in itself would create some distortion of which I don't know wether it is hearable or not. Than I would have to replay that recording and I don't know how much impact the extra distortion has on an allready distorded signal. If I hear a difference than where does that come from, my installation or the recording. If I don't hear a difference does that mean there is no distortion or just that the difference between single or double distortion is not hearable? You see the methodological problem?

A microphone is used when you want to check the distortion of the speakers themselves.

If you want to record the distortion from your amp, you have to do the loopback test from the speaker output of your amp while you have a load (resistor) connected to the amp (close to the impedance of your speakers). However there's a detail, It is usually performed with a 1W load, that's 2.82 Vrms for a 8 Ohm resistor, 2.82 Vrms is certainly going to saturate the line in of your computer, so you will need to create a voltage divider to attenuate the signal at the line in.

Here's how you connect everything: Diagram

I don't know the input impedance of the line in of your PC, The attenuation might be more than needed if it turns out to have a <10K Zin, which is unlikely.

Notice that I did not connect the ground of the output of the speaker amp to the ground of the line in, that's because there's already a ground connection established between the line in and line out of your PC, the amp's ground is already connected to the line out ground of the PC. However, always check, if the output of your amp is isolated, then you will need do that connection.

Quote from: Webdrifter on 2016-10-01 00:38:58

And then? I don't have a DAC.

What?  No phone, no music player, no tablet, no PC. no CD player?

I kind of doubt it. Which do you already have?  They all have DACs inside.

I apologise. I fell into the habit of recommending a particular solution based on my subjective experience. And the thing I love about this place is that it requires you to research and decide things for yourself, but gives great ideas on ways you can do this. The posts above on abx are great examples of this. 

Consider you have two separate issues: one is transport, or how to make your music files available to devices in your home, and the other is digital to analogue conversion. The latter is covered by the abx discussion above. For the former look at eg UPNP server software, apple equivalents etc. It seems you already have most of what you need but I apologise if I have unintentionally sent you in a wrong direction.

(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.

(2) Because audible differences between DACs is usually a well-known audiophile myth

Clearly that is not well known in most forums I have read on DAC's.

And strangely enough that was certainly not the first clear answer I got after I opened this thread.

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2016-10-02 06:39:36

(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.

That's an assumption. And assumptions are the mother of all ......... And also recently people have informed me that assumptions is not what this forum is all about.

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2016-10-02 06:39:36

(2) Because audible differences between DACs is usually a well-known audiophile myth

Clearly that is not well known in most forums I have read on DAC's. And strangely enough that was certainly not the first clear answer I got after I opened this thread.

Really?  You were told this immediately:

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112803.msg928863.html#msg928863

Just to add a couple of cents to the pot so that we can hopefully get on with assisting the OP on the main thrust of his topic...

It has been insinuated that double blind testing isn't workable because interconnects have their own sound.  In other discussions it has been posited that all components impart a signature sound.  While I don't know that the OP has fallen into this rabbit hole, I'd like to briefly address it, and while it might appear to some that I'm setting up a straw man, I am definitely not.

The mantra here is that all things controversial in nature are assumed to sound the same until demonstrated otherwise.

Unless you have incompetently designed or otherwise broken equipment or are operating it beyond rated specifications, transducers and your listening environment are going to be your source of coloration. Cables are not, though these can be tested a well.  There are plenty of discussions on how you test various pieces of hardware available if you look for them.

If someone tells you a cable or some other unlikely component has a sound, ask for evidence. The burden of proof lies on the individual claiming a difference, not the person skeptical of the claim.  ABX tests are designed to reveal differences.  Failed tests are not intended to be held as proof that there are no differences.  An absence of objective evidence in the wake of unsubstantiated claims speaks volumes, however.  It is a shame that some online communities forbid requests for objective evidence, though this is understandable when they (or their owners) either sell products or receive funding from companies or individuals who sell products that are snake oil.

I do know that I could hear a clear difference between my earlier audio-sets and my current, already 17 years old Rotel, set.

...  However, by now I am getting the feel of the common opinion on this forum.

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2016-10-02 06:39:36

(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.

That's an assumption.

And assumptions are the mother of all ........

Quote from: Webdrifter on 2016-10-02 17:14:56

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2016-10-02 06:39:36

(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.

That's an assumption.

Wrong.  There were two claims there, and  your answer is in the singular. 

Wrong a second time, because the statement that are are over 500 DACs on the market is based on a published market study that  I happened to stumble over about a month ago.

 Just saying that something isnt't so doesn't make it false without reliable proof. Got any? I didn't think so.

Wrong a third time based on simple statistics. If there are 100's of DACs (For another example, a well known pro audio dealer B&H has about 150 different DACs listed in his online store) on the market place then the odds are very tiny that  the same random collection of just a few products would be owned by two or more individuals posting on the same tiny forum.

Quote

And assumptions are the mother of all ........

In fact you have already shown that you have nothing but assumptions to back your claims up., and ditto for the earlier post of mine that you tried to trash on similarly specious grounds.  You are making me bad about telling you the truth about most DACs sounding pretty much the same.

Quote from: Webdrifter on 2016-10-02 20:48:59

I do know that I could hear a clear difference between my earlier audio-sets and my current, already 17 years old Rotel, set.

On its face this falls under a breach of TOS #8, but since it is vague and may have involved something noncontroversial to this community, I'll extend to you the benefit of the doubt.

In general you should not be offering the above quoted to this community unless you are also prepared to provide objective evidence in accordance with TOS #8.

Sorry I am not able to objectively prove what I clearly heared.

I also clearly hear a difference between my audioset and music coming from my iphone speaker.

Nobody has to believe me for that and I can't prove it to you since we probably live miles apart and your ears aren't mine.

What I don't understand is that under these conditions it becomes almost impossible to share each others opinions.

How would it be if I would ask you guys to back up every claim you made with scientific valid prove?

The dialogue would soon end.

Instead I prefer to show interest in your claims and see whether others agree.

Of course I am interested in prove but I am against religious zeal in demanding it. I'm a scientist that likes to keep an open mind.

Sure, but the more outlandish the claim the stronger evidence you should provide. That a smartphone speaker sounds different than a headset is a trivial claim. In Bayesian terms, the prior probability of this claim being true is very high, so it should come at no surprise that you wouldn't even get a comment on that.
Hearing fine differences™ between DACs that perform much better than any speaker to the point of exceeding established limits of hearing is guaranteed to get challenged, as it should. Prior probability is going to be low, so you need some good evidence. If you then added expressions like "day/night difference" you'd just further raise the bar.

It is really rather simple: either put effort into testing whether your beliefs are true and provide that evidence with your claims, or simply refrain from making such claims in the first place.

... I am of the opinion that there is a clear difference in stating that "I hear a difference" and stating that "there is a difference". From the first statement I would never ever ask prove. From the latter you should alsways ask prove. And it's the inability to make that difference which to my humble opinion is going wrong on this forum. As soon as you say "I hear" or "I believe" on this forum they start demanding for prove. Of course there is nothing wrong with asking for it, but demanding it and forbidding people to make commands like that is an entirely different thing.

Quote from: 4season on 2016-10-02 23:53:57

Wolfson, ESS, Tenor, Burr-Brown: As long as you build a pretty good product around them, they have no signature sound.

I would not know but I would love to believe you. But since this is a clear statement according to TOS8# I am now forced to ask you (whether I like it or not) for prove of this claim. As they call it over here: Put up or shut up.

And now you made a statement that forces you by act of TOS8# to prove to me that I don't hear what I hear!!!

I still hear what I hear and I believe you won't be able to prove the contrary.

please don't tell me I have to prove what I hear

Oh, and another thing, since you people don't believe what you hear you might as well throw your ABX-test into the dustbin.

Quote from: Webdrifter on 2016-10-03 02:04:13

Oh, and another thing, since you people don't believe what you hear you might as well throw your ABX-test into the dustbin.

I'm saving this one from the dustbin for the irony.