HiRes and Re Mastered. What the Hell is going on!

Juancho

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 22, 2014
1,597
573
158
London
AKA
David
I only helpful suggestion I can make is bat out of hell should not be played on any source

more serious: I only rip the original cd so I don't have this problem unless its on the recording Like: money for nothing
Compare the cd to LP and its frustrating when the drums kick in - the difference so so large
I'd be looking at your digital source. I get massive dynamics on streaming and LP
 

mac72

Wammer Plus
Wammer Plus
Apr 12, 2014
1,780
1,181
183
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
There is a series of measurements that can be taken for a DAC. Each is objective and there is no interpretation required of individual measurements. Agreed?

Examples courtesy of Benchmark:

FREQUENCY RESPONSE
THD+N VS. LEVEL
DISTORTION PLUS NOISE (THD+N)
DISTORTION ONLY (THD)
THD VS. LEVEL
THD+N VS. FREQUENCY]
THD+N VS. FREQUENCY
1 KHZ FFT
10 KHZ FFT
INTERMODULATION DISTORTION
AC LINE NOISE
etc etc


Agreed?

My assertion is that: nobody has created a list of critical objective measurements required to assess the performance of a DAC, ranked the list in order of importance, given each measurement a weighting and score, and shown a definitive calculation to reach a conclusion as to the *total performance* of the DAC. And further that this list has not been submitted for peer review and agreed upon by the industry.

This is a normal method of evaluating the performance of a complex item that has many performance measures. And yet in the Audio world this has not happened as Tuga if it did you would be the first to link it to me as I have asked several times in the past for it and so I can only assume that this objective assessment work has not been done.

So what are we left with? A list of measurements that whilst objective in each individual case need to be assessed as a whole. As there is no agreed method for doing this then what people will do is apply their *opinion* as to the criticality and weighting etc of each measurement. And so we are left with a *subjective opinion* of the disparate *objective measurements*.

Edited to state that I have just seen that whilst I was writing this response and got delayed by a call you have said that you underatsdn where I am coming from. Anyway I shall leave this post as it's useful for this who don't get it.



If you are to state that DAC A is better than DAC B then you have to sum the measurements otherwise you cannot make that statement

My assertion is that: nobody has created a list of critical objective measurements required to assess the performance of a DAC, ranked the list in order of importance, given each measurement a weighting and score, and shown a definitive calculation to reach a conclusion as to the *total performance* of the DAC. And further that this list has not been submitted for peer review and agreed upon by the industry.

This is a normal method of evaluating the performance of a complex item that has many performance measures
Can you give an example of one ?
If you are to state that DAC A is better than DAC B then you have to sum the measurements otherwise you cannot make that statement
Once again , you do not
 

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,341
7,001
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
FREQUENCY RESPONSE
THD+N VS. LEVEL
DISTORTION PLUS NOISE (THD+N)
DISTORTION ONLY (THD)
THD VS. LEVEL
THD+N VS. FREQUENCY]
THD+N VS. FREQUENCY
1 KHZ FFT
10 KHZ FFT
INTERMODULATION DISTORTION
AC LINE NOISE

THD+N is useless because it conflates two parameters which vary across the range into a single value.
THD is also more or less useless because it conflates the differences in performance across the frequency range into a single value. THD at 1kHz is insufficient.

Frequency response is the most obvious, which is why it usually comes first, but most decent DACs are flat from 20 to 20,000 Hz; this ties in with the response above Nyquist which shows the filter behaviour (Jussi Laako from HQPlaer defends that measurements should go at least as far as 1MHz)
IMD at the top of the range
FFT at different frequencies and levels show the noise spectrum, HD, linearity
Multitone is also revealing

My assertion is that: nobody has created a list of critical objective measurements required to assess the performance of a DAC, ranked the list in order of importance, given each measurement a weighting and score, and shown a definitive calculation to reach a conclusion as to the *total performance* of the DAC. And further that this list has not been submitted for peer review and agreed upon by the industry.

This is a normal method of evaluating the performance of a complex item that has many performance measures. And yet in the Audio world this has not happened as Tuga if it did you would be the first to link it to me as I have asked several times in the past for it and so I can only assume that this objective assessment work has not been done.

So what are we left with? A list of measurements that whilst objective in each individual case need to be assessed as a whole. As there is no agreed method for doing this then what people will do is apply their *opinion* as to the criticality and weighting etc of each measurement. And so we are left with a *subjective opinion* of the disparate *objective measurements*.

If you are to state that DAC A is better than DAC B then you have to sum the measurements otherwise you cannot make that statement

We agree again! That equipment performance is complex, which is why many parameters are measured.
Unless one of the measurements shows a significant level of noise/distortion/issue then which one is better becomes irrevelavant. It's time to listen.
And when I listen I don't focus on what it does well but try to identify issues and then see if I can find correlation with measurements (when available) and perhaps try to understand what is behing the audible issue.
 

Bokke

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 18, 2018
1,404
895
148
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I'd be looking at your digital source. I get massive dynamics on streaming and LP
no its the recording - its only the one song - there is a massive difference between lp and cd on any source and any system
 

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,341
7,001
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Thanks for saying that you understand where I am coming from as it's a point that I don't think that is made here very often. I am sorry that I get a bit vocal about people being *absolutist* about objective performance but someone has to be when clearly it is not '100% objective'
I guess it depends on what use makes of measurements.
I don't think that one should expect to look at measurements to compare different equipment and come out certain than one A is better than B. Measurements are not like dumb star-ratings. Each will tell how the equipment peforms in that particular parameter. It makes no sense in my view to compare e.g. jitter measurements, or IMD plots. One certainly won't come out any wiser from the process... I use measurements to evaluate the performance of one particular equipment, not to assess its absolute performance.

And the fact that equipment does not perform on its own but is inserted into a system makes matters even more complicated.
Fortunately some measurements like output and input impedance or the Kantor dummy load are indicative of equipment behaviour when inserted into a system (e.g see Prima Luna integrated test).

It would be nice to pick up a magazine, look at a "fidelity" rating and be done with it. But real life is not that easy, not for audio or for anything else.
 

Juancho

Wammer
Wammer
Jan 22, 2014
1,597
573
158
London
AKA
David
no its the recording - its only the one song - there is a massive difference between lp and cd on any source and any system
As I said, LP and Qobuz streaming same massive dynamics on any of my three systems.....I use this for testing day in and day out
 

mac72

Wammer Plus
Wammer Plus
Apr 12, 2014
1,780
1,181
183
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
THD is also more or less useless because it conflates the differences in performance across the frequency range into a single value. THD at 1kHz is insufficient.
I agree about THD as it was poor attempt to create a single number from harmonic amplitudes, unfortunately it takes no account of audibility of distortion of different orders also is very insignificant when it comes to transducers ie: speakers, cartridges where THD normally is quite high
On the other hand THD measurement sets a bound on harmonics and correlates well with IMD so worth considering when testing electronics as given amount of nonlinearity will generate similar amounts of harmonic distortion and IMD, that's why putting all measurements into one bag and creating a single formula or assigning standard weighting system to all audio equipment is not possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tuga

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles

Wammers Online