Indentical measurments = Identical performance?


I’ve been doing A LOT of thinking lately. In particular, about the importance of audio measurments for source components like DACs and CD players.

 

Let us first assume that we have 2 identical DACs or 2 identical CD players. You wouldn’t dare suggest that the same models sound inherently different, now would you? Well we can prove that the output of each device in this scenario is identical by doing a null test. We capature the output of the DACs and CD players and learn that their waveforms (let’s say a 30 second clip) are identical. The only time we might see a difference is in an engineering/manufacturing hiccup...and that is RARE considering we have globalization in the modern world today followed by quality control standards that are not necessarily difficult to get right.

 

And so, if put to practice, any 2 digital audio components that have similar enough measurements should sound identical. For example, a DAC with a SINAD or SNR or 120 dB vs one with a SINAD or SNR of 123. Tiny differences in linarity and frequency response above 20 KHz are not audible to us humans anyway.

Because most of our listening dare not go up to 110 dB, which is the threshold of discomfort. You could only listen for up to about 30 minutes at this level without risking hearing loss! For this reason, the ideal listening level is below that!

 

Should we forget about what companies try to sell us as high-end and focus purely on measurements with respect to accurately reproducing digital audio?

 

Here’s what’s really funny. The Chord DAVE performed worse with respect to measurments than the Chord Hugo TT2! Just see audio science review.

 

Lastly, I consider ASR the best objective website on the internet, bar none. Because if Amir really had a business relationship with any of these audio companies, their flagship or most expensive products would always perform at the very top; we see that is not the case and measured performance is all over the place!

 

Looking forward to hearing from you guys. Let’s not turn this discussion into a flame war. If you disagree with what I’ve written, just tell me why. I will investigate.

 

 

jackhifiguy
Post removed 

@erik_squires

Thank you for thr insight. That makes sense.

@danager

I think your analogy would be more suited when discussing the longevity or lifespan of something. For instance, do power conditioners help components live longer without intermittent failures?

Back to your ending statement - ASR is not measuring the right stuff.

I’m no advocate or fan per say, just want to know the truth.

Dynamic range, multi-tone, thd, headphone output power, output power of the analog/balanced stages, frequency response, and linearity.

Please excuse me if I missed one or two. But beyond these measurments, how can we conclusively prove that the DAVE is better than the Chord Hugo TT2?

Perhaps you can shine some light on this. Are there measurments beyond a null test that can find out if one DAC has greater instrument separation and detail?

But beyond these measurments, how can we conclusively prove that the DAVE is better than the Chord Hugo TT2?

Controlled blind listening test, with obvious level matching which will show they are different, and if done as a preference test, then better for that single person doing the test.

 

The ASR test of the DAVE shows problems on one channel. Is that endemic or single unit.

@erik_squires +1

My advice: refrain from engaging this "audiomaniac" dude. And if you feel that you have dealt with the dude before, like a deja vu, despite the fact he just "joined" Audiogon last week, you are not wrong. You have. With his previous 15 usernames, now all banned. Here is the full list:

theaudioamp

 

deludedaudiophile

 

thynamesinnervoice

 

cindyment

 

snratio

 

yesiamjohn

 

sugabooger

 

dletch2

 

audio2design

 

dannad

 

roberttdid

 

roberttcan

 

heaudio123

 

audiozenology

 

atdavid

Post removed