Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

FAQ / News / Events

Digital Drive

RE: "The problem with measurements". Some thoughts ....

72.211.237.239

13th Duke of Wymbourne

In Reply to: RE: "The problem with measurements". Some thoughts .... posted by morricab on February 22, 2024 at 00:58:54

Some options:
- conventional measurements cannot capture whatever recreates soundstage depth from a recording
- soundstage depth is an artifact created by less accurate reproduction
- reviewers have to find something less-than-stellar to say about a non-astronomically priced product in order to justify the astronomically priced products
- reviewers will find something critical about Chinese products (this may be more about price, see above, but maybe a little xenophobia creeps in)
- reviewers will find something critical about products that don't fit their criteria of the 'best' implementations, i.e. using opamps instead of discrete no-feedback buffers, using SMPS instead of a beefy linear supply, etc.
- If a product is perceived as having a weakness then reviewers jump on that train and never get off.
My comment earlier about not measuring what goes on between the ears was about psychology - is the listener in a good mood, did the listener have a poor night's sleep, is the listener more critical in the morning, afternoon or evening, has he/she had, or not had, a shag recently, is a reviewer rushing to meet a deadline, how large is the ego of the reviewer and where does this product fit into their world view of the audio hierarchy, etc?
Why is the Topping D90 even a concern to you? Because it measures better than your own choice of DAC so you have to find something to criticize?

Edits: 02/22/24 02/22/24 02/22/24

Follow Ups:

RE: "The problem with measurements". Some thoughts .... - morricab 07:55:21 02/29/24 (0)
Or, the most obvious, the reveiwers all hear the same deficiency and it is not up to them to find out the exact technical reason just what they hear.

You are also involved in this discussion so what is it to you if I critique something? Are you a Toopping D90 owner who feels burnt by my suggestions?

This is a bigger picture discussion around measurements and audibility. There are people on this forum who think if it measures perfectly, that you are truly hearing the recordings but based on my experience and hearing this just can't be true unless most recordings are truly wretched.

I also don't think you can really create things like soundstage and imaging in a recording that doesn't have the information...or at least it will sound always the same regardless of the recrording.

I have a friend who had a Topping DAC and when he heard something that sounded much better (that for sure measured worse) but was much more expensive, he still jumped on it and bought it. He was not a big spender on audio and now that DAC is comfortably the most expensive component he owns.
An 'artifact' in case of single-component soundstage - Feanor 04:36:38 02/26/24 (3)
That is, not the soundstage dependent of room setup and speaker positioning, but that varies with as single component, which is the sort morricab is talking about.

" Soundstage depth is an artifact created by less accurate reproduction" .

Many people including me have heard the phenomenon produced by tube devices, referred to as "depth" or "image layering", (thanks to AbeCollins for the latter phrase).

I came to this conclusion over a decade ago by comparing a tube preamp with s/s preamps and passive volume control; none of the latter produced that effect.

I believe the tube-produced "depth" is an artifact created by tube distortion, possibly 2nd/3rd order distortion also responsible for tube "warmth".

Dmitri Shostakovich
- RE: An 'artifact' in case of single-component soundstage - morricab 08:01:28 02/29/24 (2)
  That is NOT what I am talking about.
  
  I am talking about swapping in a DAC in a system and hearing the change in soudnstage from that swap.
  
  And how do you explain then when the same tube amp or tube DAC give DIFFERENT soundstage depth and image dimensionality with each recording? Compared with an amp or DAC that has a flat soundstage and a flat image with each recording? Which one sounds more like an artifact to you?
  
  Even with gear that doesn't result in a totally flat soundstage and a totally flat image, if that is truncated vs. gear that results in maximum contrast in this perception...how can you say the maximally differentiated is due to "artifacts" whereas the "pure" gear is more homogenized? Doesn't make logical sense honestly.
  - So what "magic" accounts for the phenomenon? - Feanor 04:49:31 03/04/24 (1)
    Since the Topping D90SE has SOTA specs in terms of low distortion but has a "totally flat" soundstage, what is different about the more dimensional DAC?
    
    A plausible conclusion is that it has something to do with distortion ... or "magic".
    
    FWIW, my Topping D90, (original non-MQA with AKM DACs), doesn't seem to be lacking in dimensionality -- if it's on the recording.
    
    Dmitri Shostakovich
    - RE: So what "magic" accounts for the phenomenon? - morricab 06:05:38 03/04/24 (0)
      The other Toppings I heard had flat soundstage compared to better sounding DACs, therefore, when a couple of reviewers say the soundstage is relatively flat I am inclined to believe them because of my experience with other models in their lineup and the similarity of design concept.
      
      As I mentioned in other posts the flatness of a soundstage seems to be a function of high frequency content. If there is distortion or accentuation (some reviewers thought he D90se could be considered a bit "bright"). Loudness cues affect the perception of depth. Louder things are closer and high frequency content also drops with distance. If that is accentuated then that can truncate the soundstage and make images sound flat.
      
      I once had a preamp for test that was a tube/mosfet hybrid. I owned an amp from this company that was also a hybrid, which had very good soundstage depth/width and solid 3d imaging (it was a very good hybrid in fact...one of the best of that type I know). The preamp, however, was FLAT, FLAT and FLAT sounding. Remove the preamp and replace it with basically anything else I had (they were all tube preamps) on hand and the depth and 3d imaging returned. The weird thing was that it sounded pretty good otherwise, but the soundstage flatness was disconcerting as it was so obvious. Finally, I concluded that there was something in the treble that was accentuating loudness (and therefore distance) cues that resulted in the unfortunate outcome. Did it have a lot more or less distortion than the other products? Probably not...but it seemed to have something in the range that regulates this perception.

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.