Tír Na HiFi

Guys, you might have read my post on PFM but I don't expect any sensible response (or any response) from there so I'm repeating it here:

What do you think about my logic on level matching? If we perceptually favour higher volume levels then this should throw our preference into randomness as I doubt anybody is able to consistently match volume levels to within 0.1dB by ear. So each time we set up a DAC we have just as much chance of disfavouring it as we have of favouring it due to volume setting - result random preference.

The fact that our preference remains consistent, even though we can't say our volume setting is consistent, surely undermines the whole vol matching concept?

I think keeping volume matched for consistency would be wise otherwise a slighty higher volume in the bass say, might excite a room node giving an impression of more bass from the DAC. Just one instance where inconsistant volume levels might cloud the truth.
I dont think volume matching is necessary for the complete picture though. I mean the difference from the dCS was so apparent yesterday, I dont think any volume matching was required. But perhaps that incidence was a one off?

DaveF wrote:I think keeping volume matched for consistency would be wise otherwise a slighty higher volume in the bass say, might excite a room node giving an impression of more bass from the DAC. Just one instance where inconsistant volume levels might cloud the truth.

Indeed but it would make the preference more random. Was there ever a time when we flip-flopped between the DACs in our listening on Sat? If 0.1dB matching is the great leveller being made out on PFM, then we would just get random preference results every time. I know the whole idea of level matching is attractive & the well known showroom trick is oft cited but using a bit of logic is also necessary.

I dont think volume matching is necessary for the complete picture though. I mean the difference from the dCS was so apparent yesterday, I dont think any volume matching was required. But perhaps that incidence was a one off?

Does anybody think that if we turned up the volume on any of the DACs we listened to yesterday, we would have then favoured it, then?

jkeny wrote: Does anybody think that if we turned up the volume on any of the DACs we listened to yesterday, we would have then favoured it, then?

Dunno about favouring one over the other but the Lampi has a sort of signature bass compared to the rest. Today I actually turned it up during one of the loud symphonic passages when the Lampi was playing and did the same with the Meitner later. Did my best to level match. On my system in my room the Meitner just seemed to work better for me on that piece.

I don't think it really matters maybe if the dacs are very similar in sonic signature but the dacs had some obvious differences.
The type of music to use when trying to identify differences is important. Dave pointed out quiet live stuff with easily picked out instruments/voices help. I can't be tearing out anymore of my hair on this type of stuff. Really doubters just need to go and listen to a system/components where they are advised that there are differences and bring their own testing methodology to bear.

Nobody in the grouping yesterday cared a hoot which Dac won the day except maybe the owner of the DCS who needs a sale and he wasn't there thank god! No doubt we all had our preferences but at lot of people during and post have advised they preferred a particular dac depending on the track. For me the lampi on the beethoven allowed me get what Dave see's in it. When Dave pointed out the drum section which came from the right speaker on lampi/meitner but from the centre on the DCS it was uncanny when replayed.

One more point on the level matching as a group there is a lot of insistence to make sure things sound very close in volume. Any obvious deviation was picked up on by somebody and invariably when we referred to the sound meter they were correct.

Thanks to Dave - a very enjoyable few hours comparing the beasts on offer. He described the sound exactly as I heard it too. I think if you want to be 100% sure of a reliable result then you would want to match at 1kHz between changes. Small volumes differences are certainly an issue when things are close - also dacs don't all put out the same level. Volume can certainly change the "impact" effect, but not so much soundstage from my previous experience.


Anyway Dave - as I said you have a great chance now to listen to the main contenders for a while. Throwing the harsher recordings at it is also a good idea! Sometimes the trade off between detail and listenability is worth it.

Next up: MQn and computer audio!!! Honestly, its worth a listen at least to see if we are all bullshitting or not!


Fran

for reference, the NOS dac was from Peter Daniels at audiosector http://www.audiosector.com/ and the sabre DAC was from twisted pear audio - myself and Derek both have one of these.

Fran wrote: for reference, the NOS dac was from Peter Daniels at audiosector http://www.audiosector.com/ and the sabre DAC was from twisted pear audio - myself and Derek both have one of these.

thanks i was gonna ask

ok audiosector dac info is a bit of a mine field
is it a t1543 based dac?

Dave I can truly understand when you say about it being a close call and hard decision to make as I was in exactly same position not so long ago (well not exactly I was not really looking for a new DAC but it just happened that I bought one... after this DAC circus has stopped at my place one day ;)).

I strongly believe there is one more thing to consider when making a choice especially at this level of equipment when everything start to make a difference even cables, as we have seen, can become make or break factor !

If you would pair those DACs with even better transports (in our case highly tuned PC-transport) you would be able to read into their true nature even more and see and judge which signature suites your system better as better transport acts as magnifying glass for a DAC.

For example Lampi will get a nice lift in amount of perceived details and better bass control with even better sound staging capabilities which in combination with detailed and fast Quads might be just perfect mix while retaining its magical midrange and increased weight to the sound.

Of course MA-1 and Hugo will also get a lift but with the lift, balance and final mix of details / warmth / bass / sound stage will change also as it would for Lampi and overall impression of the system will also change which is worth evaluating before pulling the trigger on any of them.

Just my two cents.

As to level matching I believe that when the DACs have similar sound signatures and differences lie only in the certain areas of the sound then even small differences in volume can influence the final choice. Of course I am not talking about level matching to 0.1 db :D but as close as possible without going mental about it as it can take away part of fun when OCD kicks in... and in fact cloud the judgement on its own as you tend to focus more on level matching then on listening ;) (been there, done that ;))

Saying all of this I will probably buy one of those yokes from Maplin to measure DB on more consistent bases without cooking my phone in the process (HTC one gets really hot when left on with the sound meter running for longer periods of time).

On a side note - the DCS did not require level matching. It was so different in presentation that it was obvious straight away that it is different, Then it was only to figure it out if one likes this type of sound or not. For me it was an easy decision in the end.

Cheers,
seb

Great read lads. Seriously envy you the DAC adventure you had.
Back to True Detective now......;)

Since the Meitner has 2 coax inputs I'm going to connect both the Meridan & Arcam transports and play the same few tracks tonight. My thoughts on transports differing is not too far off my stance on power chords but I'll go ahead and do the comparison. Meitner's marketing spiel talks of removing jitter so in that case both spdifs should be the same?
Noise is one caveat but I'm not yet convinced of its affects. But lets see how I get on.

As for the PC front end, well I didnt want that included on Sat as it would have introduced too many variables for me plus the problem of ripping CD tracks etc. I did try my own PC connected to the Devialet recently and while I had access to a vast amount of music online, I just found the experience of sitting there picking the tracks on the pc utterly souless. I got bored after an hour and disconnected. Sorry lads, I just cant warm to it yet. That said, I'm well up for someone to show me MQN on my system someday but it would have to be a pretty big improvement over CD/JRiver to make me consider it.
What I'd really want is a finished product, something like a NAS/Disk or Flash memory unit connected to the DAC and and being able to browse through tracks via an ipad/tablet from the couch. I don't want a PC/Monitor/keyboard/mouse or a variation of it in the equation at all.