@Michal_Jurewicz1 I recommend that you update your marketing materials ASAP. Your Roon Partners title and description promotes:
SUPERIOR DACS AND AMPS. TRANSPARENT SOUND FOR RECORDING STUDIO AND HOME.
And:
Since 2011 Mytek studio technology is available to audiophiles: Mytek HiFi is a separate division making the highest grade, transparent DACs, Streamers and AMPs.
SUPERIOR DACS AND AMPS. SPECIALLY TUNED MYTEK SOUND FOR RECORDING STUDIO AND HOME.
And:
Since 2011 Mytek studio technology is available to audiophiles: Mytek HiFi is a separate division making the highest grade DACs, Streamers and AMPs using the insights of decades of experience to produce a non-fatiguing, non-sterile, warm, euphonic, and embracing audio signature that is much more enjoyable than run-of-the-mill transparent audio products, especially the inexpensive ones.
And I’d recommend you hear them before you publicly write your opinion about how do they sound.
X M
3 Likes
Bill_Janssen
(Wigwam wool socks now on asymmetrical isolation feet!)
548
ASR doesn’t need to do research into how to achieve the best sound, because this work has already been done. By Floyd Toole and many others at AES and elsewhere. A YouTube video here explains a lot of Toole’s work. He focuses on speakers, because that’s the only tricky part these days – high-fidelity amplifiers and DACs are a done deal, if one is smart enough to buy them. He discusses the blind test methodology, and the scientific research he performed to show that non-blind listening tests are useless at providing information. At 56:42, after explaining how to read spinorama measurements of speakers, he comes back to that, and says, “If you know what [equipment] you’re listening to, I don’t care what you think – it doesn’t matter.”
Truer words were never spoken! I really wish the forum members who don’t listen “blind” would stop telling us what they think they’re hearing!
So, the world already knows how to get the best sound. All you have to do is learn it.
You say “exactly” but then misstate what I wrote. I wrote that if you can’t tell the difference, there is no discussion of preference. The two samples sound the same. It is a classic mistake by subjectivists to assume everything sounds different. That biases them to never consider equipment sounding the same. They always report in such comparisons one component sounding better than the other. Randomization and repetition in blind tests is designed to catch this mistaken assumption.
To the extent you never run such controlled tests, you continue to run with your mistaken beliefs and never learn what true high fidelity is about. For you, there is always something that sounds better better because you keep operating under the wrong assumption of differential existing. So you chase DACs. When that is done, you chase cables. When that is done, you chase footers and stands. When that is done you chase network switches and cables. When that is done you question if Roon sounds worse than another player. When that is done, you wonder if you need $20,000 Windows server to get the best sound. When that is done you think the power in your building must be wrong. When that is done, you wonder if the choice of metal in your AC outlet is write and claim that is a fact. When all of this is done you conclude, “everything matters in audio.”
All of the above because you fundamentally don’t know how to do a proper listening tests. You never read or learn about the science of audio as you dismiss it out of hand. That your lay intuition is superior to any science. Oh “science doesn’t know everything” so it must know nothing about how an audiophile perceives a piece of music. So superior is your intuition that you have no use for science. Oh let’s talk about preference.
So no, we don’t talk about preference until you pass a simpler test: can Michal tell the difference between his DAC and that $99 DAC? If he fails that test, we don’t “pass go” and talk about preference. Across “millions” of audiophiles that Michal says have bought non-performant gear, not one of them has passed difference test and you want to now jump into preference? I pour the same water into two glasses and you claim we need to do a preference test to see which tastes better? Really?
Preference comes into play in transducers as they are by definition different from each other (lack of standards had led to that for the most part) And there, as nicely noted by @Bill_Janssen, we can stand on shoulders of giants that have done extensive work there to show us what sound most of us prefer when tested without bias. Hint: speakers like what our fellow member @Steven44 picked would likely lose. Research shows that we want neutral sounding headphones and speakers.
Make today the day you want to learn about audio science and please stop just arguing to keep yourself confused. You are not the first one to think of something about audio. We haven’t missed something that average Joe just thought of. We really haven’t.
Hmmm…your assumptions about my beliefs are mistaken and the dialogue would be better if you did not assume i don’t believe what is being deemed science aka truth. But science is not set in stone. So maybe there are things that can be learned about what is considered best sounding. What about the harman curve? If by neutral you mean a flat frequency response, then what about the aesthetics of sound? Again, i think this is where some of the disagreements about what is science and considered psychoacoustic fact has room for clarification. No offense, but it seems disingenuous to say because you did not pass our transparency/neutral frequency response test, so your product is not worthy of a preference test. If people don’t believe the audibility of your transparency test and/or are unwilling to carry out the tests properly themselves, then this lack of alignment in people’s beliefs will continue. If you are so certain, why no do it definitively? You have the means and resources, right? Why not put the nail in the coffin?
Ouch, everyone’s a critic! Cognitive science, machine learning, search, computational linguistics…but occasionally data processing. Still, I did work in science, grew up inside science, and know the culture. But do read up if you find any of the topics compelling!
Great video from Floyd Toole. Thanks for posting some solid reference on the subject. Down to earth practical, scientifically correct assessment of the situation in loudspeaker business. Far more refined than the simplistic approach of ASR “just measurements” and made without mindlessly attacking anyone, also a routine at ASR. (comment at 42:00 min - “measuring wrong thing”). Yes speakers are the extreme example- the most prone to subjectivity for a myriad of reasons than the rest of the chain. However if someone is happy with their speakers they can match the rest of chain to get the most from them and that’s routinely done down to include wires, where the impact is the smallest. Mytek makes electronics and we try to deign them to sound great on as many speakers as possible. With each different speaker sound would be totally different but it still can be great. The idea that high Sinad DAC will be the most transparent and the best for the rest of the chain is simply not true.
You definitely want better multitone performance … when you start doing EQ / DSP you can eat up a lot of dynamic range, for digital headroom management
If you start with poor SINAD / SNR / DR, before EQ, well…
Back to price being important rather than fidelity.
What ASR teaches people is that you wasted $4,000 on a DAC. Provably. They save that money and are better for it. That should be reason enough for anyone to read ASR. Where else you are going to get information that saves you this much on your DAC alone? And teaches you to be a smart buyer to boot?
As for Chinese DACs, you bought a Chinese DAC. You think someone in UK/Europe is going to be able to repair that??? ASR readers would be buying a $200 DAC instead. Even if it broke, it is not a huge deal. Yours? It would be heartbreak. So far record of reliability for Chinese DACs is excellent. You could also buy them through Audiophonics in France and get superb dealer service.
We have US companies like Schiit and JDS Labs which have excellent products at very reasonable costs as well. So if you want local comfort, that is there for us in US. For Europe, there are just not that many manufacturers left there. The few that there are, are not building consistently performant products or I would be recommending more of them.
Erin is not a speaker designer if you mean that in commercial terms. He was a hobbyist mostly building car audio speakers. He bought the same expensive Klippel NFS that I purchased so on that front he is equal to me. He is highly motivated by monetizing his channel and content to help pay for that gear. I am not as there are no ads or sponsored links/sponsorships on ASR or my youtube channel. While Erin’s measurements are trustworthy, the subjective remarks are not in my opinion. But hey, if you go by his measurements, you would be worlds better than what you are doing today.
I get speakers that Erin doesn’t. That doesn’t mean anything by itself. I am actually relieved that Chris did NOT send his speaker to me. I have a conflict of interest as he is friends with my Chief designer at Madrona, making it awkward for me to criticize any issues that may have come up. At end, whether a speaker lands in my hands or Erin, it is both the same thing. We both follow proper science for which you have no value. After all, you let your wife pick the most important part of your system: the speaker.
I have been measuring audio gear for 30 years. Seems to me you all keep telling me how to do my job. I also have extensive professional experience in listening tests, psychoacoustics, sound reproduction, etc. Neither you, nor Michal have any experience whatsoever in these fields. So take your own advice and be respectful if proper experience matters.
Mass consumer will be swayed by marketing and price. They would think anyone who buys a $4,000 DAC is crazy beyond help. Audiophiles who are inquisitive will read forums like this and that of ASR. Those are “enthusiasts” and most definitely research a product before buying. That research and massive body of objective reviews on ASR has led our forum to be neck and neck with top forum in audio world:
Look at how the others like Stereophile are playing in the “noise” relative to our traffic. We are neck and neck with Steve Hoffman forums which is far, far older and more established than ASR. But we will pass them as well given the power of truth telling when it comes to audio science, engineering and performance of products.
As I have said, there will always be some people like you who buy on folklore. “Oh, you have nothing expensive enough for me.” You are a lost cause and there are so few of you that doesn’t matter.
Dr. Toole has this great saying that “there are more useful specs on the side of a tire than there is on speakers!” That is easily extended to everything in audio these days. Well, we are changing that. What the manufacturer misses to put in, my testing shows and then some. That information doesn’t sit well with likes of you and Michal. That’s OK. When all the protests are done, there is nothing of substance in your posts, claims and positions. So continue to tell yourself you are right. It is not material to us.
This is an interesting point. If i understand correctly you’re saying that you lose fidelity from dsp/eq. So what you’re saying about low sinad makes sense, but if you go for bit perfect then you can get different sounding headphones and speakers with the maximum dynamic range aka no loss of fidelity from the dsp. Am i understanding your point correctly?
You reduce SINAD / DR / SNR as you reduce signal level.
All the anti-SINAD crowd like GoldenSound and Resolve don’t seem to understand that if you start with poor SINAD / DR / SNR before any EQ/DSP (say poor multitone SINAD / SNR), then if you lose 15dB due to EQ + headroom management, well depending how low you started with, you might find yourself enjoying nice hiss from your transducers (maybe you start to hear the nice hum from your linear PSU inside the DAC)
So there are great reasons to start with high SINAD / DR / SNR.
Very practical reasons, not just theoretical.
I like the multitone measurement most. Of course Amir did not invent multitone but he was first to really make it popular… I hadn’t seen it shown in the more popular measurement places before.
For a DAC and even headphone amp, that’s the first measurement I go to (along with power vs distortion of course for an amp)
Ok, some of the vitriol and conspiracy theory is getting embarrasing.
If we cant stick to the science Iam going to try a different approach. For those of you wanting to try experimenting with harmonic distortion on your high fidelity systems with Roon - here is a solution
I would suggest an Exciter plugin and/or a tube emulator
I know I keep mentioning it but the issue with the reconstruction filters seems to be a massive elephant in the Roon
It raises some pretty fundamental questions. @Michal_Jurewicz1 states, Mytek products undergo testing that is “way more involved than anything Amir mentions in A/B/X listening video”. Based on this:
why was the error not picked up?
what did the testing reveal about sound of the “different” reconstruction filters?
what does the fact that the reconstruction filters were in fact identical, say about the testing?
Perhaps the filters were not actually tested. If this was the case how does that square with the “way more involved statement” ?
The only conclusion we seem to be left with is that a really really good, but accidental, double blind test happened. None of the “it’s stressful” arguments apply because no-one actually knew they were being tested.
Presumably people heard differences which everyone must agree, were not actually there.
If this doesn’t convince @Michal_Jurewicz1 (and others) that a) his current tests are flawed and b) he must introduce proper controls for listening tests, I’d really like to understand why
And finally, as far as I know there has been no mention that the error will be corrected. Why not?
THD of equipment is such a pretty useless number if it is lower than the threshold of audibility. So basically well under 1% at low and high frequencies and under 0,1% between 700-1500 Hz is fine, other qualities can be more important.
One could measure distortion just to be sure. What matters more to me is what I get for my money. If I had €5000,- for a DAC I would also audition a product like the Holo, because it has a different approach, but would not be interested in a DAC that is just an off the shelf chip with a linear power supply and pre-amp for €5000,-. ASR can be useful to check these things out. But if there is more going on in the DAC it is fair to pay for the research when you like what that company is doing. Even if these things don’t easily show up in distortion measurements. I understand designers that don’t explain in detail what they did to make sure that the competition is not copying it to sell it for less because they don’t have to do research but just copy stuff. So when you ask them these details, you know that you are not going to get them. Even if a company did abx tests they are not going to give you the results.
Goes back to what this company has really been selling.
This is baffling to me too, especially after the pre-order fiasco and how that was subsequently mishandled. You would think after something like that a company would be doing all it can to show their customers that that whole situation was nothing more than a blip or rare anomaly. The lack of action here really says a lot.
It’s fascinating to see how, sometimes, people want to firmly believe that audio equipment is more complicated than it is or has “magical” qualities, “secret ingredients” that allow it to be “better” than what science, physical and electronic laws are screaming loudly.
In reality, the only instrument that is in some ways truly magical, complicated, unreliable, malleable, subject to any type of variable that can totally change the perception and of which we do not yet know everything, is our brain.
I want to remind everyone to keep on-topic. This means discussing or criticizing ideas, but not people. Instead of attacking the character, motive, or some other attribute of another community member, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.
If you are uncertain your post adds to the conversation, it may be better to not post.
The moderators don’t intend to restrict the discussion, but any further violations of the guidelines will be dealt with accordingly, and reprimands will be imposed.
Now may be a time to review the community guidelines.
Cognitive science, machine learning, search, computational linguistics…but occasionally data processing. Still, I did work in science, grew up inside science, and know the culture. But do read up if you find any of the topics compelling!
