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: DAC performance (Read 16629 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

DAC performance

Reply #50 –
@RichB:
Are you suggesting DACs do not sound the same?  If so the onus actually falls on *you*, not AJ, to provide evidence to that effect.

As has been pointed out in countless posts in discussions in which you actively participated, as well as any number of discussions you were urged to explore, in addition to being urged to perform a simple and very routine type of ABX test so that you can obtain a hands-on appreciation, we work from the assumption of a null hypothesis. Otherwise, we risk operating from a position of faith rather than fact. If you continue to choose the former then your relationship with our community will never grow into something that is mutually beneficial.

At this point in time, you are completely out of place regarding your line of reasoning. That you continue to operate like this after all the time that has been spent trying to help you learn something is insulting and disrespectful to the community at large. This point of fact outweighs whatever personal inconvenience it may pose to you.

@Everyone else:
Until this poster demonstrates that he accepts the guiding principle (TOS8) of this forum and genuinely acts in good faith, I personally urge the members of this community to ignore him.

DAC performance

Reply #51 –
Quote from: greynol on
Are you suggesting they do not?  If so the onus actually falls on *you*, not AJ, to provide evidence to that effect.

As has been pointed out in countless posts in discussions in which you actively participated, as well as any number of discussions you were urged to explore, in addition to being urged to perform a simple and very routine type of ABX test so that you can obtain a hands-on appreciation, we work from the assumption of a null hypothesis. Otherwise, we risk operating from a position of faith rather than fact. If you continue to choose the former then your relationship with our community will never grow into something that is mutually beneficial.

@Everyone else:
Until this poster demonstrates that he accepts the guiding principle (TOS8) of this forum and genuinely acts in good faith, I personally urge the members of this community to ignore him.


All I asked for was a documented double blind study showing whether DACS sound similar or the same. The operating assumption is that they do not, and hence I ask, politely, for double blind tests, since this forum prides itself with objectivity regarding audible claims. So I ask, do you have documented double blind tests showing that good DACs do not sound audibly different?

That's all I'm asking for. Is it an unreasonable request?

DAC performance

Reply #52 –
Quote
Until this poster demonstrates that he accepts the guiding principle (TOS8) of this forum and genuinely acts in good faith, I personally urge the members of this community to ignore him.


The guiding principal is that audible claims be met with stern objective data supported by bias controlled testing. I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.

DAC performance

Reply #53 –
Quote from: Rich B on
I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.


Its unreasonable because its physically and logically impossible to do what you are asking.

DAC performance

Reply #54 –
Quote from: Rich B on
Quote from: pdq on
Double blind listening tests of DACs are a waste of time because it is quite easy to perform measurements that show that the DAC adds no audible signature of its own.


But that's not what I asked. In fact that's a cop-out answer.

You can't conveniently tell me when blind tests are a waste of time and when they're not, just because you have nothing to show. I'll ask again, are there documented double blind tests demonstrating that good DACS sound similar or the same, and if so, can you present them to me please?



At least now you're being honest about what you're 'looking for': yet another 'proof' that audiophile claims are bunk.

EDIT:  posted before I saw greynol's request.  Mods, feel free to delete this one.  The other one has more content.

DAC performance

Reply #55 –
Quote from: Rich B on
Quote
Until this poster demonstrates that he accepts the guiding principle (TOS8) of this forum and genuinely acts in good faith, I personally urge the members of this community to ignore him.


The guiding principal is that audible claims be met with stern objective data supported by bias controlled testing. I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.



HA's TOS#8 stance is not based on or predicated on the existence of 'no difference' DBTs, though those can be supportive.  It is based on the properties of the 'DUTs' (devices under test, which can also be file formats, codecs, etc) plus the known properties of human hearing.  When those indicate that audible difference is unlikely, it's *your* job to provide evidence otherwise.

The objective (measurable) characteristics of DACs, plus what is known about human hearing, indicate that audible difference is likely to be absent at best, and slight at worst, when output levels are matched.

So, I'm asking you to cite the measurable and measured characteristics of DACs -- NOT the claims of sighted listening -  that would lead you to believe that DACs are likely to sound different.  DBTs will do, too, though there an element of trust is required.

DAC performance

Reply #56 –
Quote from: saratoga on
Quote from: Rich B on
I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.


Its unreasonable because its physically and logically impossible to do what you are asking.


Why? You have documented double blind tests showing that good amps that  don't sound different right? So all I'm asking for is a double blind test showing that good DACs don't sound different. What's the problem here?

And if it's so logically impossible to demonstrate then how can you defend such an untenable position? Even asking for evidence now is physically and logically impossible. 

DAC performance

Reply #57 –
Quote from: Rich B on
Quote from: saratoga on
Quote from: Rich B on
I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.


Its unreasonable because its physically and logically impossible to do what you are asking.


Why? You have documented double blind tests showing that good amps that  don't sound different right?


What do you even think such a test would look like? 

Quote from: Rich B on
So all I'm asking for is a double blind test showing that good DACs don't sound different. What's the problem here?


Propose a way to make such a test.  You'll probably realize why thats not a logically valid thing to do if you think about it for several seconds.

Quote from: Rich B on
And if it's so logically impossible to demonstrate then how can you defend such an untenable position? Even asking for evidence now is physically and logically impossible. 


I seriously can't tell if you're trolling or just really, really foolish.

DAC performance

Reply #58 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: Rich B on
Quote
Until this poster demonstrates that he accepts the guiding principle (TOS8) of this forum and genuinely acts in good faith, I personally urge the members of this community to ignore him.


The guiding principal is that audible claims be met with stern objective data supported by bias controlled testing. I'm asking you to adhere to those guidelines and provide objective data via double blind studies demonstrating that DACs do not sound audibly different. If my request is unreasonable then please explain why.



HA's TOS#8 stance is not based on or predicated on the existence of 'no difference' DBTs, though those can be supportive.  It is based on the properties of the 'DUTs' (devices under test, which can also be file formats, codecs, etc) plus the known properties of human hearing.

The objective (measurable) characteristics of DACs, plus what is known about human hearing, indicate that audible difference is likely to be absent at best, and slight at worst, when output levels are matched.


Well my criteria for settling the issue is a double blind test. Not measurements that 'indicate' inaudibility. Can I assume that there are documented double blind tests that demonstrate that DACs do not sound audibly different?

Quote
So, I'm asking you to cite the measurable and measured characteristics of DACs -- NOT the claims of sighted listening -  that would lead you to believe that DACs are likely to sound different.


I'm not saying whether DACs do or don't sound different. The claim that people on the forum are making are that good DACs do not audibly sound different. So do you have strong objective data to support that position, in the form of listening tests under double blind protocols? Yes, or no?
 

DAC performance

Reply #59 –
Null hypothesis. RichB, please look it up and send me a PM explaining to me what it is.

Until then this discussion will not be able to continue, and not for the simple reason of my temporarily closing it.