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

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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...

[@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)

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.

[@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?

[@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.

[@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?

[@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

[@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 🙂

[@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.

[@FireStorm4056]

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

[@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.

[@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 ;-)

[@philipkershaw7918]

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

[@joeg7755]

Excellent presentation!

[@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.

[@Negatywny2]

yeah i didn't get this. The dude says he abxes dacs but then just abxed oversampling and reconstruction filters witch has almost nothing to do with DACs quality or sound reproduction - its just different reconstruction filters. So at best he has proven if you can hear above 20k, the reconstruction filters still almost don't metter xD

[@MisterChibs]

That’s what I was hoping for as well. It’s a great idea but perhaps a missed opportunity. Interesting video and test methodology in any case. Hopefully a DAC comparison is coming?

[@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

[@louisteerlinck7228]

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

[@Reno-god]

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

[@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

[@enjoshi-godrez8775]

BIG FUSE MUST BE STOPPED

[@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.

[@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.

[@Drn10n]

and that's why testing with multiple people is important

[@seaneckhart9914]

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

[@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

[@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

[@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.

[@nikfore]

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

[@_eya]

wondering when we would get a video like this

[@philipkershaw7918]

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!

[@taidee]

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

[@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.

[@tbreit]

Two key points need addresses here: (1) Just being able to confirm a difference is audible doesn't confirm which unit is "better", simply a difference exists. You MUST them follow through and explain/discuss what the definition of "better" then is. (2) For statistical testing, you MUST use 25 trials. This has been established by the Audio Engineering Society for 30+ years and the medical field. Note: I was an Electrical Engineer involved in the very first published "sound of amplifiers" study by Stereo Review in the 1980's and have been involved in dozens of tests since. Unless there is true ABX testing I rage at manufacturer scum bag claims and KZbin charlatans - and I was in manufacturing for 30+ years but now in the high end retail field.

[@Decenium]

and for audio im definitely skeptical enough to not fail for placebos, again I seems its mostly to protect people's feelings that they did not make a stupid purchase or whatever.

[@andikawidianto9060]

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

[@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!

[@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.

[@lexmuller78]

Honestly Placcebo is helluva Drug, I went to the HiFi show in Leipzig and the guys at AudioQuest demoed cable risers and silver vs copper cables. I came to their booth with the expectation that cables don't matter and cable risers even less ... I walked out being disturbed how crazy Placebo is

[@GoldenSound]

It can be shockingly powerful. One time I was comparing two EQ profiles, had my mouse over the button toggling on/off and trying to decide which I liked more. After a while I looked up....aaand the mouse wasn't even over the button, nothing was changing. It can be quite humbling when you have an experience like that and realise how massively your perception can be influenced by your expectations.

[@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

[@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.

[@allesgeklaut]

Ok, you can hear a difference but does one sound reliably better than the other without knowing which is which? Because isn’t that the important question? Does the expensive dac sound better than the Apple dongle?

[@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

[@lrba5524]

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

[@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.

[@twoften]

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

[@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 :)

[@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.

[@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.

[@gurratell7326]

A bit of a misleading title, the blind test is not between DACs, it's between two difference audio files where one is an offline uspcale using from what I understand a bit of a computational heavy filter that gives a bit of a shelf at between 20-22khz. Though it's still at -100dB so I'm not sure how easy that is to actually hear. And I'm not sure I wouldn't call this a correct filter either and maybe not something that a normal DAC even can do. Though different filters in can of course give difference in frequency response even down to 10khz sometimes that can give an audible difference, but it doesn't mean it's a correct reconstruction. And then we have the topic of IMD, when stuff above 20khz can give audible errors below 20khz and it can be done by DACs or something else in the audio chain which might fool people into hearing a difference which ain't at all what they think it is, it's just their gear that faulty. But even then if all this wouldn't be a problem the musical energy up there is quite low and the difference is really quite small. Might of course be there, but for 99.9% of audiophiles it's still totally inaudible, especially when they ramble on about "tighter bass", "more open midrange" or whatever they might say which is just clearly subjective biases talking and nothing else. . But yeah, 44.1khz is a pretty tight samplerate to use since some people actually can hear over 20khz, but a samplerate of 48khz would be enough to remedy that which have been my argument for some years now, 16bit/48khz is what we need for full 100% transparency. Though in 99% of the cases Spotifys 44.1khz OGG Vorbis will do more than fine ;)

[@DekoniAudio]

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

[@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???

[@tigertiger1699]

lol however I do get that Cameron is straight up interested in the truth/ best sound…👍🙏

[@draztiqmeshaz6226]

Over the years ive gone from a SoundBlaster PCI card to a Presonus cheapo to a Motu 896 then 2408, and finally landed on an RME FireFace. I might upgrade to a newer one (FS) at some point, but we're well above diminishing returns at this point. I still drool at the Holo, but its like a celebrity crush, not a practical candidate to replace who I'm with.

[@Anti3D-0]

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

[@metalman616]

Video suggestion: When you listen various songs on Tidal (for example) you hear the difference between a good, very good or a bad production with a good headphone (even if all are flac you listen too). What could be the best headphone to cover that up or maybe you can use a dac to hear less the bad or cheap production? Or a combination...

[@privateuser7726]

taking various supplements, or different medications can affect your hearing, .....your hearing can change on a daily basis, cdp choline & various nootropics can improve hearing, inner ear hair nerve cells run on choline

[@AliArghavan]

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

[@palefaced1]

The issue with better dacs is that you need a better source, amp, and speakers / headphones to fully hear it.

[@iurigrang]

I would love to see this same test made by a very experienced and respected audiophile that CANNOT hear above 20k. I mean, if the 3 hour call trying to "troubleshoot" why the test gave a positive result is any indication, I'd suspect you reckon such person would not be able to hear a difference. Is that assumption true tho? I'd love to see this revisited.

[@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.

[@dantealighieri4258]

Very interesting video, and I am impressed by your strict attention to controls. But I do feel that the title should be 'Proof that oversampling filters make a difference'. I thought you were going to test different DACs. Another point: Rob Watts talks about designing his FPGA filters with the target in mind of eliminating noise down to -300 dB. He isn't saying he can hear that low, just that the presence of even that low grade noise in the system seems to affect the way the FPGA decodes that information in the audible range. I wonder whether the higher treble information in your example is having a similar effect - so not necessarily that you are hearing those high frequencies (although entirely possible you can) but that the presence of those high frequencies in the digital signal affects the DAC performance in such a way that it alters the delivery of the more mid-range and lower frequency notes.

[@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.

[@scollyb]

It is literally meaningless to say you can hear things in recorded sound that can't be measured. A sound recording is a measurement of sound Very good test, I'd add one other common flaw. A blind test, should be double blind. You can't have someone in the room who knows what's being tested because we are very good at reading their reactions to what they say. I saw one claiming his wife could hear a difference when he swapped cables

[@net_news]

hahaha my wife came from the kitchen... did you change something?

[@smolbo1]

couldnt you have done the same test by cutting it the audio off at ~20khz?

[@dieselbrodeur]

A general comment on digital filters. They have a great impact in the time domain not the frequency response.

[@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.

[@VOLKOV9]

Can you do your same procedure to a 48+ kHz recording so that all the filtering happens above 24k?

[@maegnificant]

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

[@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.

[@sebastiantomita5956]

Why not compare a topping DAC to your May instead? Both ran with the same upsampling filter.

[@mccririck01]

Yeah that's a good point.

[@GoldenSound]

I have done, if they were the same I'd have sold the May and freed up a bunch of cash

[@mccririck01]

@@GoldenSound why not video the abx then?

[@GoldenSound]

@@mccririck01 I'll happily post some, but as discussed in this video, the problem is that people will just say "Ehh you faked it/you're lying". That's the entire reason why this test was done in a remotely verifiable way

[@mccririck01]

@@GoldenSound It's hard for us to understand how you can hear a difference though since the both measure very well. It would be interesting to see you do the test.

[@PauReydefaura]

Thank you for this highly interesting and original video. I am aware there is a lot of work behind it. I was wondering, how quickly you jump to conclusion when you realize you can hear above 20kHz....and that is the only explanation and justification you give for the AB test results. I doubt there is much going on at 20kHz in any music file....and even if there is something going on, the levels are very far away from the -3 dBFS you shown in the video 15'40'' (probalby many young people can hear 20kHz at -3dBFS, but can they hear something at -20 or -30 dBFS?). Imho....there is no way you heard something at 20kHz in the AB test you pefromed. It is impossible because there is nothing at such high level -3dBFS.

[@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... ;-)

[@juanblanco7898]

You don't have to be able to hear up to 20 kHz to have the ability to perceive the difference between digital reconstruction filters. Many begin to attenuate below 20 kHz. My Topping G5 had a default set filter with a roll-off starting from ~5 kHz and would drop by 0,6 dB at 18 kHz, which right around the limits of my hearing. It was changed for a different filter with no roll-off below 20 kHz, but significantly worse attenuation at the Nyquist frequency with 44,1 kHz samplerate signals. I can't make any claims regarding the impact of worse aliasing suppression in this, or any other, case. But that also can be a factor worthy of consideration.

[@bennyloppo]

I can hear upto 18k and I was still able to hear difference in sound when I was doing diy to reduce the vibration on my iem. I tired to immitate the resonance chip(Reducing virbation chip) on my IEM with rubber sticker and double sided foam tape and found a difference in sound on most of the iems. If accoriding to the measurement... there shouldn't had been any diference however, IT'S DIFFERENT!!! So I was wondering,,,, is there's any other reason how we perceive sound...? Rather than eardrum only picking up the sound, our brain may also detects a signal from the virbration on our skin and combines it with the sound signal?? I know it's a super wierd imagination, but with my shallow knowledge, this is only thing I can think of. Tested iems are Variation, Blessing2, Nova, XSL-One, Sound Rhythm SR5, HD600 and Momentum 3. (No difference in HD600 but yes difference on Momentum 3... weird) + One of my partially deaf friend once told me that he used a vibration on the throat to learn how to speak when he was young. We somehow remember the vibration on our skin and sends a signal to our brain...?

[@ahlbergmagnus]

So just to be clear about the conclusions of this video, if I can't hear above, let's say 19kHz, all good measuring DACs sound the same?

[@PaulLembo]

Most people old enough to have the money to worry about this… no longer can hear any difference! Get great speakers and headphones and stop worrying about dacs and codecs.

[@vladpetric7180]

Fourier transform completely converts time into frequency and phase - it really completely removes time (and most of us around here are mere mortals who experience time, though there are some exceptions). As such, Fourier transform is a not a perfect model - helpful, yes, but not perfect. In particular, microtransients don't quite play well with "you can't hear above 20something khz"

[@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.

[@MetalHead123345]

I herd a beeping when you clicked on the 20 and 21k lol was that it was there eny audio sapose to come through

[@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).

[@AbsoluteFidelity]

My left ear can hear up to 13.5khz and my right can hear up to 15.4khz, and just barely. Im 41 years old. Guess any well designed DAC would sound the same to me unless there are filters that start to roll off at 10khz.

[@BrentLeVasseur]

It starts with the individual and their ability to hear things or not. If you are 90 years old and have hearing aids, you could have the best DAC and speakers in the world and it won’t make a difference. A single speaker 80’s boombox would probably suffice instead. Then its the room and speakers which make the biggest difference. Once you have your room and speakers dialed in perfectly by proper placement and eliminating room reverb through treatment and decorations, then you can focus on your upstream chain like source, DAC, pre-amp, and cabling and electrical noise reduction. But for most people, this is a huge waste of money because they don’t have the hearing to appreciate these differences.

[@Jordonater]

I got a Moondrop River Ti and it 100% sounded very slightly different to the THX onyx and was more listenable to me. I was shocked and thought it was just placebo however perhaps it was the fact that cirrus logic use very different FILTERS to ESS hence the oversampling difference mentioned in this video. Unfortunately i returned it because it cuts the first 0.5 seconds of songs on foobar which annoys me i wish i could get the replica of that slight change in sound with another dongle as i really dont need desktop level power.

[@JingoLoBa57]

I suppose someone has mentioned burn in period. Are the test DAC’s beyond say a 600 hours operational time? Second, you assume hearing is done only via the ears. And consequently that headphones represent a satisfactory test of differences in DAC performance. Hearing in rooms via speakers in a room is a much different listening experience. Most hearing tests are done using headphones. Again this is another limitation. Doing hearing tests in rooms would be another basic update of your methodology. Since most (?) listening is done in this situation there is a good argument to be made to support this direction. And another thought, if listening to audio gear does change evaluation and assessment - understanding - over longer periods of time say months of exposure to specific equipment where getting used to a sound or finding more differences (liked or disliked) is reported as ‘real’ then this is another important direction for testing to be developed.

[@KeenAesthetic1]

Does this mean with Harman tuned headphones DAC differences aren’t detectable or can’t hear above 15kHz? I can save a bunch of money - yay!

[@andrewchen8125]

Huh??? Aren't you finally just testing two filters in HQPlayer??? Your final blind test has nothing to do with testing different DACs!!! Bogus title video 🙄

[@SergejVolkov17]

Holy shit, I tried the test and I can hear the difference as well. Does it justify paying $$$ for TOTL DACs? I think no. The difference is so small that any kind of DSP such as resampling or EQ completely obliterates it. This means that one basically needs to use stock sound signature everywhere. For me versatility of EQ >>> tiny bit of performance at dolphin frequencies.

[@martinlindberg1983]

Thank you for putting all this work with a flawless presentation. However, I thought you should tried different DAC's, not if you could here different filters... The sound up in the 20K range is not important at all. The actual music (engagement, tonality, expression, sound stage, vocal body, depth perspective etc) is something totally different. So I am not sure about the actual value in this video. I was left wanting... I can hear difference between DAC's, as most others, that is why there are thousands different implementations with DAC chips, balanced/unbalanced, importance of separate power supplies, jitter, time domain, pre ringing etc on the market. These things matters and are indeed audible IF you are a sensitive/trained listener. Cheers!

[@j4nv]

Respect for all the work you're doing, but it's all based on 1 person's hearing. Why not for example 10 audiophiles and 10 average consumers? Cheers!

[@johnserpo9267]

PCM and DSD have greater differences than other comparison when it comes to DAC. I can do a blind test and I can immediately tell which is DSD. That includes PCM that's upsampled to DSD. PCM needs an algorithm in the DAC to decode it into analogue sound, DSD doesn't - the digital signal is pretty much analogue sound imprinted. This is the reason DSD has less distortion or harshness that's created by the decoding process of PCM.

[@kf1865]

I just found that I can hear 21khz, with a powerful amp. Last time, I could only hear 17.5khz, but I guess that means I didn't try higher volume.

[@christopherviers8302]

I thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated this episode, especially in consideration of all the time, thought and effort you put into the whole thing...!!! Kudos...!!! On a personal note, I travel the path of - (1) Watch a lot of different reviews on DACs by reviewers that you trust/like... (2) Buy a DAC that fits your budget, hook it up, and then enjoy it without any more afterthought - continually obsessing about "is there something better out there" doesn't make you an audiophile... more likely, it makes you a person with slight neurotic tendencies... (3) If all the aforesaid doesn't help out, then just roll up a 'fattie' and you'll be amazed at just how great your music's sonic qualities improve - guaranteed...!!!

[@charlesbabbage6725]

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what sounds better and why, whether it's imagination or not. In the end, the listener has to be satisfied with it. If someone can and wants to spend 1000$ on headphones, DAC or cables because they think it sounds better that way, they are welcome to do so. If you think it's all nonsense, fine. In the end, it has to suit you and be fun!

[@hpwrotethis]

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