Proof that DACs CAN make a difference! - Blind ABX Testing

[@metal571]

GoldenHearing

[@underh1gh]

plz comeback metal we miss u

[@JennyDarukat]

unreal, this guy

[@Jordonater]

How can he afford the Focal speakers in the background at his age?

[@darwinaheng3316]

Comeback plz

[@One-Two_swift-kickbox]

​@@JordonaterInheritance / trust fund

[@stevetech5150]

i trick my brain every day convincing myself that i like people

[@imjustherefortheks]

😂😂 I don't even bother...

[@markaprill6501]

The important part is do they pretend to like you back. That is true love.

[@stefanschuchardt5734]

You dont like me?

[@GuiltyRocker]

Ahahahahahahahahshha

[@elasmojones]

I gave up on that 20 years ago

[@JiajuChen]

I am literally amazed. I didn’t know there are serious reviewers like you who uses ABX test device just for regular DAC reviews. I am impressed.

[@patrickmiller4987]

Well it was the first time.....and bout time!

[@augustinvaclavik6282]

Well, if manufacturers were obligated to release atleast a small list of measurements with certain parameters, listening tests of eldctronics wouldn't be needed... Plus, measurements are infinitely more reliable

[@nwimpney]

@@augustinvaclavik6282 The problem, as demonstrated by this video, is that you might not necessarily be looking at the right things. While I think anything you can hear is measurable, that doesn't necessarily mean that you're doing the right measurements to see it. There are also cases where something _is_ shown by the measurements, but not in a way that stands out until you hear it, and look for it. In this case. the measurements made didn't clearly show the difference, but because he could hear it in an ABX test, it drove them to figure out what it could be, and what needs to be re-measured differently to find the cause of the difference.

[@augustinvaclavik6282]

@@nwimpney I understand that there is quite alot of to learn if one wants to know how Exactly measurements corelate to what they hear. However, I'd say my point still stands, I might've gone a bit unrealistic, that it would remove the necessity of listening tests, but at least some measurement standards would go a long way, I'm sure of that

[@augustinvaclavik6282]

@@nwimpney sooo, 1.ppl should learn how to read graphs(need a reference point) 2.Psychoacoustics win everytime Got ya, but that doesn't negate my point...

[@jakee2094]

I appreciate the skipping timestamp. Shows your respect your audiences time. In an age of clickbait and filler that is very appreciated. Little thing but still. I decided to watch straight though because of that.

[@hartyewh1]

I spent a week comparing high-end speaker cables and a few very basic ones and for 5 days I believed I heard differences until a friend helped to ABX and mysteriously the differences went away. I wouldn't believe any individual on such specific claims without proven ABX since I didn't believe to hear anything, thought it's all bs and still a thick heavy cable sounded bassier and a thin silver cable more bright😂

[@mcnyregrus]

I commend you for accepting that the differences you heard were imagined. I've had similar experiences. But unfortunately, many people won't accept that the differences are imagined, so instead they dismiss the blind tests and insist that there must be an audible difference.

[@lbunjes]

Great work. After watching this, and seeing that you were surprised to learn that you can hear 20k+ I wanted to see if I can as well. I've always noticed that I hear things other people do not, such as an induction burner on high...I did a little test and found that I can hear 19k+ for sure and I'm 40 years old. I've always had super sensitive hearing and cool to see that that's still true.

[@fahryst]

Your surprise and joy looks so geniune that I'm more happy that you are happy than the test is a success

[@net_news]

well... being so happy could be a proof of bias.

[@Uebelkraehe]

@@net_news Which due to the methodology wouldn't be relevant.

[@net_news]

@@Uebelkraehe there are camera cuts so who knows...

[@miguelbarrio]

I would also add the caveat that not everyone has enough listening skills to notice a difference. If we were to talk about wine, I don't think anyone would agree that being discriminating about wine tasting requires training. Same is true in audio.

[@cmprodutions]

Haven't multiple studied proved that wine tasting is bullshit?

[@cowboyflipflopped]

Adam Conover hasn't ruined wine for you yet? You should find and watch that video. Funny and true. Anyway, you're correct that what is true for wine is also true for audio-- the experts are easily fooled. Cameron had to claim super-human hearing to make his 18/20 remotely believable. But had he failed, he would have lost his credibility for all the dac reviews he had done before, and would never be able to do dac reviews again. And since this is his livelihood, I understand. He's not a bad person. At least he clearly showed the 21kHz tone he was hearing was being played at -3dBFS. He probably just heard the driver distorting.

[@miguelbarrio]

@@cowboyflipflopped Actually my comment is not about Cameron (I think he can listen, but as all probably will get better at it) but more about people saying "all these sound the same" or "I have never heard a difference from cables" and I mean to say, frankly, that not everyone has developed the skills to listen and discern differences.

[@cowboyflipflopped]

@@miguelbarrio In this case, they showed us on an oscilloscope the exact frequencies Cameron was supposedly hearing to differentiate dacs. They're over 20kHz. So, Cameron was forced to claim the ability to hear in that range. In other words, the two dacs sound exactly the same to anyone with normal, human-level hearing. Dogs and bats can pick out differences in dacs we can't. And of course all working cables sound the same. You do understand the basic physics of signal transmission, right? Even an oscilloscope can't pick out a difference between competently-made cables. You should watch that video where Adam Destroys Wine. Experts in matters of taste are bullspit, every time. And we can know because it's so easy to fool them by pouring one wine into a different wine bottle before pouring it into a glass for them. Their expert, professional oenologists could not differentiate cheap from expensive, or even red from white wine with red food coloring in it.

[@dsnyder0cnn]

I appreciate your thoroughness. I've suspected that advances in DAC performance over the last ten years were mainly due to improvements in oversampling and reconstruction filters. Your test seems to confirm that. What's left to compare is the analog section of high-SINAD DACs, but perhaps the science is settled there too. I understand the reasons why, but I'll admit to being a little disappointed that you ended up not actually using two different DACs in your ABX test. Finally, it seems that being unable to hear anything past 13 kHz is a blessing. 😂 Cheers!

[@alantan6786]

Thanks for this video. It's fantastic that you approached this topic from a scientific perspective. I'm a former cognitive psychologist and well versed in the methodology used in psychological research studies. A couple of thoughts around running something like a psycho-acoustic study or any kind of scientifically sound research study. The number of trials is dependent on the statistical power that you are trying to achieve with the study. Something like 20 trials that you mentioned may or may not be sufficient since it's highly dependent on the effect size. Effect size represents the magnitude of the experimental effect. If the phenomenon is easy to detect then usually the # of subject and trials in the experiment can be low. When the effect size is small, you have to run substantially more subjects and trials. The # of participants, the # of stimuli, trial order of stimuli and the participants demographics (age, gender, etc) used all play a role in crafting a well designed experiment. Please keep making more of these videos!

[@GailGrant-m4o]

Wonderful work. Fascinating and informative. This kind of care and attention to detail - a deep concern for "getting it right" - is precisely what makes being an audiophile more of a kind of applied science rather than neurosis. As one who has been an audiophile for more the fifty years, I am very grateful.

[@Malangsufi]

Well done! I knew from the first moment I read your work, as a reviewer, the standard that other reviewers will be judged as risen.

[@louisteerlinck7228]

My favorite aspect of this video is witnessing the great friendship you have. Headphones are awesome, but friendship is even better.

[@tara387]

Great video about importance of blind testing done well I would love to see more of the reviewers try the test too. It should help account for variations in hearing (like your excellent hearing)

[@GingerDrums]

I'm a mastering engineer and listen to audio in a measured room on a Kii Three rig. Many of my peers in the industry cannot reliably differentiate between a 320kbps .MP3 and a 24bit .wav in ABX conditions on a world class monitoring rig... And I'd argue it doesn't matter at all. The content of the music, the ideas, the melodies and lyrics are what moves us, and much of the audiophile scene has more to do with people gaining a status identity which allows them to feel superior. Most equipment made in mid-pricerange is very low distortion and reliable, and even more so in the DAC market. An Audient soundcard for €100 can pass the audio through the converters more than 50 times before the phase inverten sum is audible. This means that it is almost mathematically perfect. When you pay more you might be getting a different EQ profile or "desirable" distortion. The additional harmonics can enhance some records... But this is something that can be achieved using any DAW using stock plugins. To wrap up: don't have fomo, enjoy your favourite audio files with whatever mainstream reputable brand that encourages you to enjoy as much music as possible. Most mastering engineers like me cant hear over 18khz, I certainly cant hear over 16.6k. Content that high is not part of the musical range. Im highly sceptical that this content creator can hear above 20k, but taking his word then he is hearing things that most 5 year olds cannot hear.😊

[@mccririck01]

I'm not at all sceptical that he can hear above 20kHz. When I was 18 I could hear over 21kHz. Granted I was the only one in the class that could but I definitely could and I was surprised to see everyone else's hands had gone down when it went past 20kHz. I agree with you about whether it's particularly relevant though. And he hasn't actually blind tested DACs here.

[@Jordonater]

I wonder since people like you mastering the music cant hear it does that mean he is hearing the noise you haven't filtered out the recording because you didnt know it was there?

[@Ari_M47]

Your kii monitors have DSP so any interface/DAC is irrelevant. The ADC is most important for mastering

[@antonhelsgaun]

​@@mccririck01yeah I could also hear ~21k when I was 18. Haven't tested in a while but I think I'm down 19-20k now

[@mccririck01]

@@Jordonater lol

Interesting video. Thanks for doing the testing. My practical take away from everything I've read about DACs and amps is that I simply get something that does not measure as broken, has the features I need, that I like the looks of and that is within my budget, and do not worry about any differences in sound. Since I can't hear anything above 13 kHz I will continue to ignore the question of reconstruction filters as somebody else's problem.

[@uglybob7505]

I have a few different DACs around the house and I can tell the difference between them but you, my friend, are a while different level completely ! Great video, thanks for sharing 🙂

[@IOSAShorts]

The Headphone Show, Wow, this made my day brighter! Thank you!

[@LucianPSimracing]

Sorry to hear your day was full of treble.

[@stratelite1337]

Excellent video! These should be standard for all DAC/amp reviews. More of these please!

[@939Productions]

Erin from Erinsaudiocorner started doing it and although he doesn;t show statistic results he does share often that he couldn't hear a difference during his abx test. So that's something.

[@m-zurowski]

Now I need to test my own hearing range 😅 You did amazing job preparing this test, Mr. Gold ;)

[@m-zurowski]

lol, just quick test showed me 10Hz - 21kHz - need to redo it in a quiet environment :D

[@mabehall7667]

Beautiful test! Well done. This tells me that my 73 year old ears probable won’t know the difference in a high dollar DAC and my current WiiM Pro plus. My hearing stops somewhere between 9 and 10khz but you would be surprised at the difference I can hear from various sources. Or maybe that’s just my dementia kicking in seeing as how our minds play tricks on us.

[@rev8962]

He is in the zone.

[@t0nyxgq]

Already gave you a thumbs up before even getting to the results because of how thorough and clear your explanation of the whole thing blind ABX testing is.

[@TheGreatMrBill]

I don't mean this question to be critical, only inquisitive, however you said you believe if you can hear it you can measure it. Therefore, how does one measure things like imaging, layering or sound stage size for example? I have never seen any measurement on a headphone saying it has xx area of sound stage size. The only way you know of that size (outside of listening for yourself) is by reviewers telling you its big but not as big as the Sony Z1R (if it's closed) or not as big as a HD 800 (if it's an open back) My point is, if this is a quantifiable number then why don't manufacturers put specs or numbers alongside the frequency response numbers telling you this is the imaging rating or this is the sound stage size rating?

[@JingoLoBa57]

These aspects of audible sound from audio systems are a fundamental missing link in audio research. As are the relative differences between impedance capacitance and inductance of cables. Which tells us what and how? Which is valuable to understand a component or cable?

[@v0ldy54]

Some things are part of psychoacoustics, I guess there is just no way to measure them since it depends on the interaction of the sound + how the brain is interpreting it.

[@cmprodutions]

Just because you don't know how to measure something does not mean it cannot be measured. I don't know how to measure frequency response, but I can tell the difference between EQs.

[@eskamobob8662]

There is a big difference between measuring something and correlating those measurements with specific sonic traits. That second part is what is missing. There is no part of the signal that is impossible to measure, but that doesn't mean we know what we are looking for

[@v0ldy54]

@@eskamobob8662 one thing that's measurable tho is that in theory two top spec amp should have an output that's so similar it's essentially impossible to distinguish between them, let alone saying one has more sound stage etc

[@jaredcrandall9145]

Good work to even take a feet like this! Very bold to do so based upon the fan base and that's very apparent based upon the comments

[@sjqideez6626]

A massive thanks to Cameron & Blain for this, it is much appreciated.

[@nikfore]

Although I don't really decide what to purchase based on measurements, I'm glad you exist in this hobby 😁

[@reveyrie]

Big DAC trying to get us to spend $10,000 on metal boxes again. nice try 🙄

[@kazumasatou6124]

Its the capitalists i tell you! 😂

[@mtham2323]

😆

[@eruilluvitar]

Worked for me! (Jk.... For now)

[@aceofspades6667]

Go back to Amir

[@En_Joshi-Godrez]

BIG FUSE MUST BE STOPPED

[@taidee]

No, you are Golden Ears, and thank you for this in depth assessment on this controversial topic.

[@dvbowen]

Very brave to get into this debate; very interesting result! You could also ask someone who you know _can't_ hear above 20 kHz to do the test; they should confirm that they hear no differences. If they did though, then you'd have to reconsider your conclusion that it's only your range in hearing that makes the difference. Of course, it never ends: you'd then need to get 20 people who can hear above 20 kHz, and 20 people who couldn't, to repeat the test! 😉😱

[@audiodemos2579]

Yes. Concluding that the differences where only because he can hear above average frequency is not really a real explanation. So he can hear that fine. What about the rest of the spectrum. How he can be sure that he prefered one DAC above other only for the slower roll off filter? how about the bass quality or the voices? those are impacted by the filter pre and post ringing effects too. So if filters are different DACs can sound different. Even as they are flagged as "transparent" and ASR insist ignoring many people that can discern them and precisely identify their sound signatures.

[@blainelacross]

Anecdotally, are least one person whose hearing is lowpassed at 17khz or so (me) heard the recordings during production, and they sounded *exactly* identical to me. I'll be interested in other people's ABX results, but to me, that's two copies of the same sound.

[@Lif-999]

Fantastic! Such a refreshingly rigorous and highly controlled methodology! Only this standard of testing can produce truely meaningful results . Or - as is the case here - reveal a surprising and otherwise hidden conclusion. This is Gamers Nexus but for the audio world. And your acknowledgement that a level of trust has to be established is just pure class. What a contrast to the usual biased, none disclosure ridden, more often than not just plain wrong, woolly thinking nonsense that so plagues the internet. Bravo!

[@miguelbarrio]

I think the result is interesting, but my question would be: if you compare two DACs that in the region 20Hz - 25KHz are flat (flat within say 0.1 dB), can you or not hear a difference? My expectation is frequency response is just one aspect of performance, and a steady-state one at that. There's also IMD, and possibly other aspects of transient performance.

[@Reno-god]

Good video, keep up the good work, we need more in this.

[@chungang7037]

Cables look like snakes, just saying.

[@carbon_wavelight]

If not snake then why snake-shaped??

[@Lishtenbird]

That's why they extract oil out of them.

[@nelsonang]

bird brain…

[@chungang7037]

@@nelsonang snake brain?

[@nelsonang]

@@chungang7037 bird oil?

[@FireStorm4056]

Links to buy the ABX switching hardware, please!!!!

[@MadJack38]

Great video! Love the incredible effort you’ve put in! I do think the tests is incomplete though. You’ve shown different oversampling filters can make a difference via the filter rolloff (which you are able to hear). But that’s not all there is to a DAC is it? Things like SINAD, jitter, and distortion are all measurable aspects in a DAC. I think you should go back and use the blind ABX testing device. Put a 20k low-pass filter on all the test tracks to simulate losing that hearing range. Then test DACs with measurably different SINAD, etc., and see if you can statistically significantly differentiate them.

[@Drn10n]

and that's why testing with multiple people is important

[@seaneckhart9914]

And multiple sessions every different day. Your listening ability pretty inconsistent.

[@chungang7037]

After getting a hearing test and my doc saying everything is normal for a 40 year old I decided to pamper myself with a new amp. So I went to a hifi shop and sat with 4 amps at the same table up to the 2000 dollar range, trying them all with the 800s, a headphone I know well. I knew what I was testing, was expecting to hear a difference and be blown away [and make a purchase]. I didn't hear any difference, really. What? One sounded like it might have a roll off in the treble, big whoop. Not exactly worth the money. For kicks the shop worker told me to try the Questyle CMA15, a 3000 dollar amp. Surely I would hear something. Nope. I tried a few headphones, can still hear a difference between them, and maybe that should be enough in this hobby. I felt bad for the shop, the workers looked pretty annoyed when I left.

[@TheRealPotoroo]

It wasn't that long ago that DMS (on his channell, I think) was complaining about having a backlog of DACs he was supposed to review except he couldn't hear any differences between them. Such is the state of the industry in the 2020s, there's sod all room for improvement that humans can detect left.

[@sto-humanfriendly]

the hd600s would be more source sensitive than the hd800s

[@chungang7037]

@@TheRealPotoroo Wow really, do you remember what video that was?

[@haelscheirs_haven]

I had lately after deciding that the DCA Expanse or Stealth did not provide the measurable performance upgrades compared to my Meze Elite that I was looking for became enthused about dishing out on a Holo Audio Bliss KTE as an "upgrade" to my FiiO K9 Pro ESS's internal THX 788+ amp that I was already pretty happy with, whereby I would either experience a revelation about "Class A sound" or be able to "brag" about not being able to hear differences in at-home controlled listening or even when sighted. I before biting the bullet managed to spend quite some time at a shop closely A/Bing under sighted and decently volume-matched conditions a few amps driven by my DAC/amp's line out and concluded that they were through my Meze Elite (which has so far shown the best EQed multi-tone distortion I have ever measured) all, even the albeit technically advertised as neutral McIntosh MHA200, identical in virtually every aspect I could pinpoint from detail to tonality, texture, dynamic impact, transient incisiveness, clarity, bigness, "holography" (which I find can be easily heard with some recordings, even one of Chinese orchestra only published on KZbin), or the precise imaging location of certain sound sources in a reference track, which is to say that any measurable differences between those amps were probably indeed below audible so as to not matter. I am not so easily fooled into absurd subjective perceptions, but do know what extensive EQ and binaural HRTF rendering DSP can do for me. For more details, see post #9 of "Recommend a high-end DAC and amp stack to a genuinely curious objectivist" on Head-fi (links tend to cause troubles on KZbin).

[@chungang7037]

@@haelscheirs_haven Thanks for the post I'll check it out. Your experience mirrors somewhat what I experienced. To be honest it was weird because I actually wanted to hear differences but couldn't. Even worse, a lot of amps that people said had a "warm" or smooth signature just sounded the same to me [one of those I demoed was the Wa7 from Woo audio]. edit: Wanted to add that dacs/amps now for me are going to be more about features than anything else.

[@charlesnr]

Impressive testing. For single components such as a capacitor, or a cable, I always found it useful to have one item on the left channel and one on the right channel, and quickly move from one to the other with a balance control. This minimized the time between comparisons. For that everyone can do it without an ABX box.

[@LeoMakes]

Long time viewer, but I subscribed to the channel after seeing this video because I liked the rigorous approach! Conducting truly blind (ABX) tests is painstaking work and I appreciate you taking the time to do it right. Also: I'm super jealous of your extraordinary hearing. Enjoy it while you can!

[@WheezyTech]

Incredible work. Echos what I've always thought, there might be a difference, somewhere, but the chances are high that you definitely cannot hear it.... Unless you have GoldenEars. I don't know the age demographic of your audience but I'd bet most arent hearing above 15-17 Khz. Also I'd add that even if you could hear it, the fact that you would need to do this kind of ABX test to verify if it was real or not, means that its kind of irrelevant. Awesome video, thanks for putting in the work.

[@joeg7755]

Excellent presentation!

[@MFKitten]

Can you hear 20k, or can you hear the diaphragm breakup/distortion that results from playing those frequencies that loud?

[@AlessandroBertocz]

Exactly my thought. If you have to "turn it up" to be able to hear it, chances are you're just listening to distortion

[@quackgarage9551]

@@AlessandroBertocz Yep. That's why this test was a joke.

[@VSN-wb2ly]

My thought as well

[@amanieux]

bravo, great test !

[@tysontyson1244]

Nice video GoldenSound!

[@lord5619]

Over 20k? Man, you have ears from an elf :D i can hear clearly 16,5 kHz, but after that it faint very quickly to "feel", more than a "hear" and anything above 18kHz is silent. Age is a major factor for this condition at 37 i presume. Great great vid guys!

[@trevor245]

Please do more of these with different types of gear! I would be pretty interested in a test like this for cables for example like the blind test with issues you mentioned. It would also be interesting to do this type of test with different price ranges of gear where you would need to guesstimate the price range. Ofcourse with prerequsites like that the test design starts becoming much more complex but audio coverage has been much to personal and verbose with most of the technical elements being used out of context in reviews and marketing for decades IMO. It is obviously not a scientific research that is being done as that would require much more research, planning, time and money but it is a nice middle ground IMO and can help put things into perspective. It is always hard to jump the gap between saying there is a difference between things and truly describing what this difference is. It is kinda like those videos of people trying different bottled water. They usually get the exact brands wrong. But the conclusion for a lot of people therefore seems to be that they are all the same which is simply not true. There is a difference but in order to know which would be which you need to be intimately familiar with each of the types.

[@Kevschwa]

I'll be honest, I'm feeling pretty dumb. I thought you were going to be ABX testing two different DACs, but it was just 2 audio files? Do I have that right?

[@GoldenSound]

The two files are to test the effect of the oversampling filter in the DAC. By showing that this single factor makes a difference, that shows that DACs make a difference (and oversampling as a standalone factor makes a difference). The reason to do it this way is because there is no way to do a physical ABX test in a remotely verifiable way. Doing a digital test with shared and verifiable inputs and results was a necessary precursor to sharing physical ABX results in future reviews as this establishes a conclusive difference in a way that does not rely on trust.

[@KodigyTech]

​@@GoldenSound although this explanation is mathematically correct, I also felt disappointed. I got excited about this ABX device and expected you to invite several random listeners over to have a larger sample. And then it went into comparing the oversampling filter of a ~$4k device by reproducing the filters digitally. With the main difference being way beyond average listener's hearing. I understand, that your point was to prove if DACs can possibly make any difference at all. But from an entertainment perspective, the physical ABX would be much more fun to watch, especially if multiple listeners express what exactly they hear and how they tell the difference subjectively. Just an idea for pt. 2 ;-)

[@Lif-999]

@@KodigyTech Surely the whole point to a test of this nature is to eliminate any possibility of subjectivity in the results?

[@onepieceatatime]

During an ABX test, can't your brain trick you into thinking two things sound the same that otherwise don't?

[@antonhelsgaun]

If you have a bias and are expecting them to sound the same, yes

[@GoldenSound]

It can yes, but not in a consistent manner. Your brain can trick you into thinking one file sounds a certain way, but the point is that if you do enough runs, you can then show whether that difference is consistently attributable to one of the devices/files (ie: there is a genuine audible difference you can reliably pick out), or whether it was random and not likely a genuine difference

[@magicscreengames4353]

Yes. That's why blind tests are usually fail.

[@dieselbrodeur]

It set up just to confuse you in to thinking "there is no difference" completely flawed and ridiculous. This is not some kind of medical effect you are trying to find and separate from the placebo effect.

[@cmprodutions]

If they are that close in sound, does it really matter?

[@mkcraghead]

I recently watched a video from another reviewer that was focusing on a new DAC in the market. He suggested that while it sounded good (he may have used a more positive term, but that's not important) it doesn't compare to the flagship models from companies A and B because it didn't have the heft or the number of internal components that those other DACs had so it could not possibly be in the same class. WTF! I thought being in this hobby is all about the sound, right? How can a person possibly make such a statement? I'm not saying that components don't matter. They do. However, I doubt, in most cases, that an individual could consistently pick out the DAC that is the most expensive or has the most internal components just by listening. I think that was a placebo effect run wild. 🤣🤣🤣 BTW, I like your presentation style. I think you are very thorough in your approach and this video is a perfect example of that. And the British accent makes you sound very authoritative. Everyone know that the British know best. 🤣🤣🤣 Seriously though, keep up the great work and keep those videos coming. 👍🏽

[@robertcarlsson6558]

Impressive! You do great work! Thank you

[@Harley1Lovegrove]

Fabulous work. Thank you for all your efforts here. I have no doubts in your testing processes but I was wondering how you measured your hearing up to 21khz? The reason I ask is that if one uses online or even offline signal generators or even cd’s with test tones, I have noticed that there is always an abundance of lower harmonics (and vice versa in the lower register). I think a great deal of these harmonics are generated by the playback equipment and perhaps you were hearing a second order lower harmonic of 21k? or other 3rd, 5th. etc? In a strange way this doesn’t change the result because you would have the same phenomenon during your comparisons? ie ‘we’ hear differences due to things happening above 20k because of the weaknesses of our playback equipment producing lower harmonics for some reason

[@manulaverdiere]

That was the test? DAC filters above 20khz? No Apple dongle vs Schiit Modi vs ifi Diablo? No dac vs dac? Just that Goldensound can hear above 20khz?

[@wagninger]

The conclusion is, different DACs use different filters, on some you can change it, on some you can't, and if there is a difference on the same DAC with different filters already, obviously there is a difference between different DACs

[@rapier8886]

An Apple dongle vs super expensive dac would have been a far more relevant test.

[@cosmicheretic8129]

Exactly my thoughts. Hearing difference between filters is not hearing a difference between DAC's.

[@d0nj03]

@@cosmicheretic8129 Sure it is, different DACs come with different reconstruction filters enabled by default, and a lot of users not knowing about any of that would keep using them with stock settings and be able to hear filter differences if the filters were bad enough. Like even if the same selection of e.g. minimum-phase slow-rolloff filter is preset on two DACs from different brands, the implementations could differ in how early they start to roll off in the audio band, and they would really and truly sound different (earlier rolloff = more muffled/veiled sound) to younger users.

[@zaniix11]

Great video.

[@Spractral]

So the takeaway is 1) this guy has better hearing than me and 2) no one else is capable of doing a real test.

[@raf7127]

great video mate. thank you!

[@dyckstefan]

Would love to see such a test with different dacs, with chord upscaler and without, with diffère music, headphones vs speakers etc. To determine what matters and to what degree

[@papermate8773]

Thank you for doing this.

[@twoften]

Pretty fun that this video on itty bitty, very likely inaudible differences in DAC sound has Zu speakers in the background.

[@_eya]

wondering when we would get a video like this

[@proffessasvids]

Love it cam. Very interesting xx

[@1061shrink1061]

So you can hear 20-21khz… ok that’s fine… but what sounds in recorded music exist in those frequencies? As in I can’t imagine there was anything to hear, unless the DAC’s are generating HF noise at that level.

[@939Productions]

Simbals, snares and hihats can get into the upper octave

[@patrikfloding7985]

Cables may affect amp performance, and the effect of this may depend on the specific amp. And the connectors (termination) are a generally overlooked factor.

[@MrThacke]

You headphones enthusiasts are freaking me out ! When I ran across this I thought there was another hostage crisis afoot. I will be ransoming someone’s LCD4 to cover emotional damage and suffering.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

2:56 I mean is that bad though? Like how many times to you "taste" food blind folded with you nose pluged and it made to a perfectly smooth and nuratal temp and texure? I get the test though because I do want to know if my $50 M audio interface is no btter then a gucci option or am I missing out so one day I'll need to upgrade?

[@Gixgine_the_Fool]

look and smell constitute to the overall taste of the food. That's why when you got a flu, most food will taste more bland than usual. Looks does not really contribute to make a DAC sounds great, tho.

[@lth_lch]

Cool to have some evidence through blind (as blind as you can get at least) testing in support of what I think I’ve been able to hear in my very unscientific sighted A/B listening while fiddling with the DAC filters in my Q5K lol. Bat frequencies aside, don’t some filters affect frequencies even a little under 20kHz? Would that not just be straight up audible to most people?

[@zantdoeseverything3523]

This confirms something I wondered for a little while, I noticed myself even with just headphones and iems is that if they roll off at upper treble especially if they roll off hard they seem muffled to their sound, but depending on the device if I boost 18khz-22khz even a little they sound more natural. Which I found I can hear 22khz but it is of course it is quiet, I am 21 so it makes me curious what the difference would have been when I was younger. But that has an impact on headphones possibly even on amps and dacs just because of the extended hearing range which can be for some why they prefer brighter tuned devices not just with hearing damage. Also glad there is someone else confirmed who can hear above 20khz so it doesn't make me sound crazy lol. Edit: I should also note it also makes it easier to tell about recording quality and if it is lossy or how lossy.

[@Jordonater]

Did you find that you can hear a slight static pressure in your ears before a thunderstorm is about to happen? This is something i used to be able to do at 17 years old but have lost the ability to now at 23

[@gurratell7326]

It could also be IMD that you're hearing, ie something above 20khz that give audible errors below 20khz.

[@zantdoeseverything3523]

@@Jordonater Interesting, I never noticed if I could. I do notice something similar to that with any electronics/electrical wiring especially if there is bad wiring with ceiling fans. CRTs drive me insane with that too. Even LCD/IPS/etc panels I could tell they are on even if it was from a few rooms away, these days I have a much harder time with that, thankfully.

[@zantdoeseverything3523]

@@gurratell7326 That is always possible too but I have also experienced real world scenarios best examples are in my other reply. But another scenario is there is a parking garage near me that uses speakers to scare off bats and birds and out of a group of people I am the only person who can hear the whole audio snippet to the point where the audio clips and loops, everyone else I know it is dead silent to them after halfway through it.

[@Jordonater]

@@zantdoeseverything3523 Thats cool

[@Paffi.]

Great Video! Where did you get from the testing (switching) device or have you built it yourself? The last months I often thought about blindtesting myself but didn't find a solution for automated switching...

[@KristianK42]

Great job, great video. So for you hires makes quite the difference I guess :)

[@KristianK42]

Btw, I'm 34 and can still hear 21k as well (according to some app).

[@Randy-nb6fw]

i always though that phase interactions at ultra high frequncy and potentially high frquency binural beat type effects could maybe affect audible ranges and make things like cymbals sound more realistic, but it could well be that alot more people can hear these upper frequencys than we thought

[@Another_Audiophile]

It will be interesting to record with audacity the output and compare two the files from different dacs. If there is a difference than will come up by reversing the polarity in one sample

[@knorrissirronk8665]

As someone with an additional 30+ years of road-wear over your hearing, you'll be glad to hear that I'm REALLY close, (Hit or miss, but more hits when the tech went back to verify.) to hearing 20K. (As of winter, last year) That said, squealing girls/women when they gather at parties makes me wish for that minute or two that I couldn't... ;-)

[@Anti3D-0]

I've fantasized about going to audio conventions and set up a blind testing booth to get an actually meaningful sample size

[@lrba5524]

What's going on up in the 20khz area anyway?

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

Ok so the high pass filter felt more open to me though only just but the OG track sounded really nice and full on my $50 M-audio interface and Sennihizer HD 600 headphones.

[@xos]

You may retain your high frequency hearing longer than you expect! I can still hear above 20kHz at even relatively low volumes and I'm 30. If that's the range in which DACs are potentially providing an audible difference, then I'd honestly rather not hear it at all - you really aren't missing out on anything interesting or fun up there. There's genuinely no upside to being the person that hears the toaster, or the lights, or whatever.

[@johncheng9665]

the opening with the drum gave me PH vibes

[@poturbg8698]

But can the differences be heard between DACS when there are **no** oversampling filters in use?

[@GoldenSound]

Very few DACs can actually run NOS. And the ones that do typically have much larger measured differences in other areas as doing R2R well is pretty difficult

[@edmaster3147]

Yes. You can oversample and perform analogue filtering (either active or passive). Digital filtering is quite harmful to the sound in my experience. A standard method is a 'third order' low pass filter on 40khz or so. Modern DAC's are very integrated and sound quite poor to me, They perform many tasks making it easy to build in devices, but that comes to a price. It's a bit technical, but the current to voltage conversion is critical and I like it external to the DAC chip.

[@NotTheOnlyMattAround]

Cool experiment. Being almost 40, it might be unsurprising that I can't hear close to 20k. I can barely hear above 15k, which I didn't realize until I was thinking about the Dusk 15k peak and thought to myself... hey, I should see if I can even hear that now. I can hear below 20hz, though, which is neat I suppose. Thanks for sharing the test.

[@maegnificant]

You should do a blind white noise test between two different white noise samples to actually reveal how high you can hear

[@PiercingSight]

I used to be able to hear above 22 khz when I was a teenager. I can no longer do that, sadly. I can only barely hear 18.5 khz if I really turn up the volume, but in reality my hearing drops off steeply at 16khz. Honestly, I'm incredibly sad about it. But at the very least, it means I don't need to spend a ton of money on devices that only make a difference in ranges I can't hear.

[@terrencebucker]

If' you're listening to sounds that you recognize well-cymbal hits and so on-your brain fills in that missing information anyway, so you're probably still getting a similar experience listening to most music.

[@dipanjanbiswas6580]

Interesting - I seem to recall that recently @ErinsAudioCorner did a video on the same topic - demo-ing an ABX Tester in the process - forgot the make/model of the device.

[@GuiltyRocker]

You show time and again that you're a gem to this industry, unlike some other cult leaders lol😂

[@StephanBuchin]

You should continue to regularly and consciously listen to these high frequencies because this can prevent, to some extent, the neurons that respond to these frequencies from dying.

[@MrSmitheroons]

Nice! I really think there's a gap between scientific method knowledge, knowledge of the engineering (physical and operating characteristics) of the parts used in audio gear, and general enthusiasm for audio that perpetuates most of the "bigfoot" audio myths in the audiophile space. It's not that everyone is foolish or gullible, though some are. And it's not that proving or disproving these things is impossible. It's just that it's *hard* and doing it right (and sharing/explaining the results properly!) takes a lot more effort than people on forum posts are usually willing and able to do. Not for nothing, it's actually hard to do, takes time and care and sometimes gear. It takes colleagues to bounce ideas off of who are all just as dedicated to science and facts as you are. The number of people who have all that at once is pretty small on the planet. It's surprising how much of scientific advancement is within reach, sometimes even in reach of a dedicated hobbyist at home, but it's mostly because it's not trivial, and the people prepared to do it don't have infinite time to do it! Not impossible, but not trivial! Thanks for insisting on science and taking a good close look at this. This is what the audiophile world needs, is seeking falsifiable hypotheses to the big pressing questions and good methodologies to investigate them, and first-class communication of the results like this video has. In a word, top-notch science, beginning to end. Love to see it.

[@AliArghavan]

Great Job. Any chance of a studio, room tour?

[@outolempinimi5165]

What no affiliate links to snake oil shop?

[@giorgosapo4508]

Can more people test the REW app 20K tones? I used the exact same settings and at 12 o clock volume on the Balanced output of the SPL PhonitorXE using the HE1000SE I hear the tone on both ears but better on my right one. Changed it to 25K and I can still hear from both ears so I am wondering how accurate it is.

[@gurratell7326]

Could be IMD, ie stuff above 20khz will give sounds under 20khz.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

16:31 thanks for this for me a 28 year old with an AC running full blast with an online extended tone test... 14KHZ was autoble but 24khz was feelable.... So yeah I may need to one day get that Gucci gear.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

13:48 Thank you so much this is perfect now I can see forf my self if my $50 m_audio inface is the same or worse for my needs then a gucci one! And is giving me ideas of how to do a tone wood test which I could record a sample of a open strum on my mahogany guiatar and my Poplar guitar then mix them around to get them to match in my Daw. I'm unable to do better then you have for tone wood but I can try.

[@teachonlywhatiseasy]

there should be a gofundme/other campaign to send you to all these youtubers like anderson/british audiophile/iiwi reviews etc to have them ABX the dac's in their house and get their scores.

[@timpecker2527]

iiwi was confronted with the network switches. They told him he would fail a ABX, and he said "bet," then never did. It's the true sign of a man when his confidence it will never happen is his argument.

[@mark9104]

great hearing, I lost over 14k, did test couple of years ago. Used to be able to hear 20 - 20k when I was in my 20s/30s

[@Krishnakumar-wl7ih]

I can attest to the fact that DAC difference exist. I wholeheartedly hate Chord products like Mojo and Hugo for using old connectors. I have vowed to never buy a Hugo till they come with a Type C version. But, everytime I listen to songs in Hugo in CanJams or in friend's place, it gives so much happiness to me to listen to details in songs I have never heard before. I fall in love with the Hugo2 for a solid 5 mins and then begin my job of hating them the moment I see the micro usb

[@DekoniAudio]

Did Doug get you one of those cool light bars too?

[@Whyamibzsdmh]

15:43 Man I'm jealous. I can't hear above 14k

[@high-captain-BaLrog]

i wonder how does the world look like and hear like to my 96 yo grandpa For that matter i wonder how dull does the food taste to him

[@juliangst]

There isn't really any useful information above 14kHz anyway so it's not a big deal if you can't hear that imho

[@gioponti6359]

don’t worry, you still might get the difference because of intermodulation distortion ;) and certain deviations in hearing from the norm might make you especially sensitive to compressed music formats

[@DaveRessler]

I understand completely. Once I hit 40 I lost that 15-20Khz range as well.

[@Whyamibzsdmh]

@@juliangst My expensive headphones sounded noticeably better when I was younger. Which is how I realized I had lost a portion of my hearing in the first place. So no, that's not true at all.

[@sashadejong7592]

Not that i disagree with what you say in this video but there are a couple things I would point out. (nitpicking) 1. the suggestions that you can "try the test a couple times before you catch on" is quite a slippery slope because you can get into the problem of people cherrypicking runs (confirmation bias) where they score highly under the pretext that they have "improved". Im not claiming that you did but saying it that way can lead to people misinterpreting their own test results. 2. (OPINION) I believe that, when people talk about sonic differences in dacs, they are usually observing differences in the amplification stage. Again I am not claiming there may not also differences in in filters or other variables but rather I think that the differences in the output stage are the most impactful. 3. Just because you could hear sound while a 21khz tone was being played into your headphones does not mean that you can hear said frequencies. Maybe you can, however it is also possible that what you are actually hearing is some other form of resonance (at a lower frequency) either in the headphone or in your ear. Either way this does not in any way invalidate what you are saying, if you can pick up on it, regardless of whether or not you are hearing 21kHz or something caused by 21kHz it remains relevant regardless. It would be interesting to see whether any lower frequency sound appears on a spectrogram when 21kHz is played through those headphones both through a measurement mic and when placed on a B&K (even if yeah obviously this is not representative of your own ears/head). Anyway thanks for the vid and sorry for nitpicking :)

[@Godbluffer]

I’ve been able to hear differences between headphone cables, and between USB cables (where I did not expect nor want to hear differences), but I once did a totally not blind test between the Chord Mojo 2 and the DAVE (from its headphone socket), where I desperately wanted to hear a difference, yet wasn’t able to detect any, soooo… was I simply not impressed by the visual difference, *are* they the same, or is the DAVE’s headphone socket simply not better than that of the Mojo 2?

[@andikawidianto9060]

How about compare apple dongle to high end dac, might be interesting

[@hpwrotethis]

I'm glad you got the ears the hear the difference. I'm in the wrong hobby.

[@Hitsujiomeguruboken]

Hello, Please tell us which of the two triangles at 16:39 min you prefer!!! Is it the triangle between 21 kHz and 22.05 kHz where there is more energy in the red curve, or is it the aliasing triangle from 22.05 kHz to 23.5 kHz (or sometimes even much higher frequency’s). Preference is for red curve or blue curve???