I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
Oops. I misspoke. It was the Transparent OPUS cable ($46000), not MIT. Here is the link.
"And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up."
And there were four total listeners, not three.
@amir_asr- Thank you. I couldn't find a reference to the exact model of Monster cables, but there's a mention of a $1.2k price point. Most likely they may have been the M2.x series or Sigma Retro Gold, which are both thick copper wires with gold terminations. Frankly, this doesn't surprise me as they're comparable, aside from price and a carbon fiber 'vibration dampener.'
This may be shocking to some, but when I lived in a tiny studio apartment in NYC, I experimented with alternatives and ordered Mil-Spec wire meant for spacecraft (silver coated copper in teflon) and appliance wire (12 gauge solid core copper). I ended using the appliance wire with excellent results, although it was an absolute pain to work and didn't look too pleasant. That said, I do enjoy fancy-looking cables and silver solid core for analog signals.
I do think there's some degree of truth to the marketing claims, but they're usually misunderstood and overblown. For example, the recent trend of using gold wires as speaker cables (where gold is preferable for applications where corrosion is a concern, but poorer conductor than copper) or Rhodium plating everything.
When you set the filter to "off," the output level jumps up by some 4 dB. This easily results in better perceived detail, air, etc. This is why it is critical to match levels in such listening test comparisons.
Failing that, you want to pay attention to measurements as it not only tells you about higher volume, it also shows that "off" starts to cut off the output starting from just 5 kHz. There is a whopping 4.5 dB droop by the time you get to 20 kHz! If you had matched levels, you would have hopefully heard the much attenuated high frequency response. Granted, some confuse this with "less digital" which it is not.
I should clarify that I was getting the odd tweeter cut-out across all filters and even when volume was set at -3.0 dB. Admittedly, I don't measure as often as I should, but I think there may have been have been something else at play and possibly some conflict with my speakers' high pass filter and the D1se2's drop off in the higher frequencies. I did cross reference frequency response to troubleshoot and it did go away once volume was set less than -5.0dB. I also get what you're saying and the boost to the more pleasant frequencies may have worked well with my preferences and/or speakers. Overall, it's a great entry into DACs and would recommend. (I picked it up on eBay for $300 and tested in my MBL system with excellent results.)
I guess my point was that measurements are a good baseline, but listening and testing play an often enjoyable, sometimes frustrating role in the hobby. My layperson observation is that people often take measurements as absolutes without diagnosing their own issues within their circuit.
Isn't this similar to audiophile marketing half-truths? I do, however, value the idea of teaching people to think and make their own judgement calls.
@pynkfloydd Was it Bruce Brisson who developed the first Monster ICs the M300? That was the best cable for the price although it had soft, rolled off highs and limited resolution but it had a smooth, warm mid-range. Today, a comparable inflation adjusted cable that is extremely superior is Bedlen/Blue Jeans ICs (well, the XLRs). I use their XSRs in a $200,000+ system.
I heard 3 levels of Transparent speaker/system cable at an LA Show where the more expensive the system (up to $750K), the more awful the sound. Don’t even mention High Fidelity cabling with those horrible giant in-line magnets.
As to the Topping DACs, I’ve now heard 5, mostly early ones with the super high resolution but poor musical sound. The Topping D70s turns out to be their best. My best friend uses it in a modest priced system anchored by Von Schweikert VR35 export speakers. In my system with Lampizator Poseidon DAC/pre-amp which is $25K, the Poseidon is NOT 50X better than the Topping. Maybe 30% to 50%. I paid more as it was designed as a pre-amp and the Topping pre-amp is awful (probably just a cheap op-amp). As a DAC, this Topping is super musical osounding. It lacks the dynamic contrast, soundstage width and depth and music separation (instruments/voices) of the Poseidon but unless there is a head to head ccomparison, it’s a tremendous bargain and physically unimposing. The SOTA DAC costs much more than a superb one. I also own a (near or actual) SOTA CD transport in the Jay’s Audio CDt3 Mk3. For $5K, it is 5X to 10X less expensive than exotic French and Swiss transports or even upper cost Esoteric units.
As to phono cartridges, most of my friends use Dynavector or have multiple arms/cartridges. I have multiple tables for 78s and microgroove so I use a less expensive, less resolving 20X2 L with a SUT costing 3X, table at 7X and arm at 4X the cartridge price . The reason is it is a nearly universal LP transcriber. I own 31,100 LPs from 1950 mono to 200 45 rpm recuts. This relatively inexpensive cartridge provides great sound although not SOTA for the best mastered modern stereo LPs and great sound for my older, noisier vinyl 1950s mono LPs.
Just my two cents at this point of this mostly Amir/ASR discussion. Since my original forum, Amir began posting on Oct 16, 2022, now up to 754. He spends an inordinate amount of time on ONLY Audiogon forums involving ASR. I have 1,934 posts in 23 years from 2001. 3X the posts in 10X more years. He is OBSSESSED with a few recent forums. (I did learn from many forums I participated in, not like Amir who apparently learns nothing and knows it all).
I realize the OP was talking about ASR speaker measurements and I went off on DAC measurements but this post has turned into an ASR free for all.
This my be the most logical explanation of why all DACs don't sound the same and why chasing the best measurements doesn't produce the best sound quality.
This my be the most logical explanation of why all DACs don't sound the same and why chasing the best measurements doesn't produce the best sound quality.
The most "logical" explanation is one that takes science into account and tells you that sighted evaluations by the designer and reviewer have no value especially at these low levels of detail.
Fortunately Cameron is starting to learn this as you can tell from this video of his produced 5 months later than above video. The title is clickbait as he does not at all test two different DACs but do listen to the introduction where he fully acknowledges that such testing must be blind and repeated:
Was it Bruce Brisson who developed the first Monster ICs the M300? That was the best cable for the price although it had soft, rolled off highs and limited resolution but it had a smooth, warm mid-range. Today, a comparable inflation adjusted cable that is extremely superior is Bedlen/Blue Jeans ICs (well, the XLRs). I use their XSRs in a $200,000+ system.
I heard 3 levels of Transparent speaker/system cable at an LA Show where the more expensive the system (up to $750K), the more awful the sound. Don’t even mention High Fidelity cabling with those horrible giant in-line magnets.
As to the Topping DACs, I’ve now heard 5, mostly early ones with the super high resolution but poor musical sound. The Topping D70s turns out to be their best. My best friend uses it in a modest priced system anchored by Von Schweikert VR35 export speakers. In my system with Lampizator Poseidon DAC/pre-amp which is $25K, the Poseidon is NOT 50X better than the Topping. Maybe 30% to 50%. I paid more as it was designed as a pre-amp and the Topping pre-amp is awful (probably just a cheap op-amp). As a DAC, this Topping is super musical osounding. It lacks the dynamic contrast, soundstage width and depth and music separation (instruments/voices) of the Poseidon but unless there is a head to head ccomparison, it’s a tremendous bargain and physically unimposing. The SOTA DAC costs much more than a superb one. I also own a (near or actual) SOTA CD transport in the Jay’s Audio CDt3 Mk3. For $5K, it is 5X to 10X less expensive than exotic French and Swiss transports or even upper cost Esoteric units.
I’m not familiar with all of Monster’s models, but found an article that talks about the relationship and history. I’m assuming every model since those early designs is some variation (aside from the mainstream Monster products that were sold at Best Buy) based on those patents. I also have some bulk Powerline Signature 400 cable and it’s comparable to what Furutech is selling for many, many times the price.
I’m a bit skeptical of those listening tests since there are pretty easy ways to game them. The Kimber one at Axpona compared also their cheapest (thinnest) cable with their high end. I like Kimber and own a run, but a better test would be to compare a similar gauge wire.
I haven’t heard the D70, but heard their D90 III and it was terrible. I do like SMSL’s ES9039MSPRO-based DACs for the price and leaving it in a spare system. The bigger problem with Topping/SMSL is that product support is nearly non-existent and their sales channels are an absolute nightmare with some genuinely dishonest tactics (such as many burying their ’certified’ no return policy). You’re pretty-much buying a disposable device you anticipate may never get a firmware update and may die at any moment.
I don’t have extensive DAC audition experience, but have heard MBL’s 101 X-tremes at a private audition, which were running through their Sigma Delta-based DAC (not sure the chipset) and I doubt I could tell the difference between SMSL’s D1se2 and their 1611 F. (I’m going off of memory compared to the SMSL running into my 101s, which isn’t a direct comparison.) I ended up buying a Laiv recently and it sounds good, works with how I use my system and isn’t a furnace. Digital audio has come quite a ways from the ’high-end’ soundcards everyone was happily running.
I haven’t heard the D70, but heard their D90 III and it was terrible.
Had a member send me $30,000 worth of CHORD DACs/Resmpler/Cables for testing. I asked him how fast I needed to test them and to my surprise, he said to take my time. And that he had bought a Topping DAC and couldn't tell the difference between them so he was going to use that until I returned his gear. Who is right? You or him? Measurements demonstrated by the way that the two DACs would sound the same but of course, Topping was more than 30 times cheaper.
Then there are views like this:
Again, are you right or him?
Topping sells thousands and thousands of these models. Why is it that they don't all return them if they sound "terrible?"
I tell you why: until you learn to only assess fidelity with your ears alone, you will continue to live in the fog of subjectivity and not know what is what. Once you do these tests properly, then you will that there is no conflict between objective performance of these products and what you truly hear.
You’re pretty-much buying a disposable device you anticipate may never get a firmware update and may die at any moment.
Firmware updates are rarely needed on DACs. When they are, they are absolutely provided by the likes of Topping and SMSL. Now, high-end companies, that is another matter. I bought a $10,000 TacT processor years ago. Paid another $5K to upgrade it but didn't get a chance to test it right away. Eventually I powered it on and noticed some channels were no longer working. Go on their site and find a new firmware. I upgrade the firmware, reboot and the thing gets stuck in an infinite loop on power up!
I contact the company owner/founder/designer. Told him what happened and he said I am screwed as he no longer supports that product. The thing is still sitting here in a closet as I don't have the heart to part with it.
My Mark Levinson DAC that I bought for some $6,000 back in 1999, broke down. I had to fix it myself, replacing a blow capacitor. Company had promised upgrades but none were ever provided for newer/higher sample rate. It too is sitting in storage while a Topping powers my DAC.
My other electronic failure has been a DAC made in Germany. Its USB interface just stopped working one day. This product cost over $1,000.
In contrast, I have about 300 to 500 DACs here, mostly from Asia. None have failed on me. Majority cost less than what it would take to ship my high-end gear to be repaired!
As to return policies, there are places that give you that such as Audiophonics in France. You can also buy them from Amazon and if there are early mortality, get a refund or replacement.
The dude you are responding to spent $25,000 on his DAC. The sales tax alone would buy you not one, but two of the best DACs Topping makes! And it is not like he can get support from anyone local. He would have to ship it to EU for repair, deal with customs and who knows what other grief to get it services. And you better believe a tube product is going to have far more problems than any of the DACs I recommend.
Wow, I am really starting to question your intelligence. Why would you post such nonsense? Don’t you think we cannot see right through that post?
A member? Of course, he is a member.....he cannot hear. About 5% of audiophiles (my quess) cannot tell a difference between anything. They are some of the "members" of ASR....the rest are cynics, "measurement science freaks" and non believers who won’t even listen . I have read at least 2 posts (and I go there seldom....so there are probably tons of comments like this) by your "members" that stated they could hear no difference between components.....you see, these hearing impared people flock to your site.
The other guys video is fine.....However, his title is "click bait".....for the real title should be. "This is the best DAC under $1000 that I have ever heard.....and I have not heard them all". He has never listened to any higher priced DACs....let alone the Gishelli. But I trust what he said......he said the latest Topping "sounded better" than any before it......meaning....DACs all sound different.....which makes your statement of "All DACs that measure a certain number of SINAD are completely transparent".....a LIE....a big fat LIE......and YOU posted it. Thank you....Great job of convincing everyone how really FOOLISH you are......Do you have more posts like the one above? I am sure you will have to have the last say......so, start searching....I give you a few hours........What a JOKE!
For every stupid post that you come up with that states that all DACs sound the same....I can link thousands of posts and videos....saying they all sound different. Let’s see.....one for you and thousands for the other opinion. Who is right? All those thousands who listened....or you (who will NOT listen)? Go on, find another person who agrees with you and link it here....go on...Let’s ave it!!!!!
For every stupid post that you come up with that states that all DACs sound the same...
I have not told you all DACs sound the same. Indeed I have post expensive DACs that are not transparent.
What I am saying is that you all have no prayer of backing your sighted listening tests when you don't use your eyes and perform a controlled listening test where only the sound differs. You fail miserably in controlled testing where the outcome is known so we can check your answers.
Who is right?
Science and engineering. It predicted that MikeL wouldn't be able to tell speaker cables apart in controlled testing, that he could sighted.
Go on, find another person who agrees with you and link it here....go on...Let’s ave it!!!!!
Countless people agree with me who come to ASR. I even post people from your camp such as the long standing member here with half a million dollar system that could not tell his uber expensive cable from cheap. Here you go again:
---
It was the Transparent OPUS cable ($46000), not MIT. Here is the link.
"And to cut to the chase, Mike could not identify the Monster from the Opus MM with any accuracy (nor the reverse, which also would have been a positive result if he had been consistently wrong) using our testing methodology. We stopped the test a little less than halfway through, I think we got through 8 A/Bs before we gave up."
Sure loves his Chineee Dacs! lol. If they all sound the same and are perfect to human hearing why keep measuring them. Why ever change one out?? Think the Toppings of the world aren’t benifiting greatly from Amir’s unconditional praise? Think he’s gettin paid…? Yep I lived in China for 6 years in a professional position. He’s either gettin paid or turning it down like I did. Somehow I think he’s not.
Also my my main question was how do you measure dynamics?? Never answered it. Just “Said” how loud something can play, then you said it’s not a real thing , then in your blog on you asser site you were raving about some amazing dynamics! So… how do you measure dynamics with your test tones?? I’ll just keep posting the same question since you won’t answer it….you snotty little p…k
Really on thin ice here. You keep quoting the one A/B where someone did not hear a difference as your proof that your "pretend science" is true. Again, I can link thousands and thousands of posts and quotes and videos and online and print magazine articles that say the exact opposite....again....who has truth?
And over and over agian you post about your one time that a DAC measured poorly.....so you listened to it and it sounded bad......However, you never listen to any DACs that measure what you like because you think they measure good enough that they are transparent.....this is WHAT YOU BELEIEVE.....and it has never ever been proven. You simply made it up.....that is why it is false science. You have NO science on your side....you have measurements and then a "belief system"......you have no proof. As, I have previously stated....you are in an ego loop....defending a position that is undefendable. I predicted....yes, I PREDICTED.....that you will probably never give up your position this lifetime (you have invested in this belief for so long and now have a website promoting it, etc).....so far, I am correct. I would like you to prove me wrong....and become a more honest person.....Honest.....means ONE with what is (EST). The WHAT IS.....is that all DACs, preamps, and amps sound different....and all cables sound different....and we can hear it. But you cannot.....or shall we say....WILL NOT allow yourself to even try to hear it......You are simply stuck in a belief system....ego based. Happiness is not in that system....happiness.....looks for, and expresses what is real....what is true. What is real is how beautiful you are.....how magnificient...and always have been and always will be. That is real. Ego defending is NOT REAL.....and NOT happiness promoting...for yourself or anyone.
Really on thin ice here. You keep quoting the one A/B where someone did not hear a difference as your proof that your "pretend science" is true.
He is a great example because he is the uber version of you all. He is a member here and you can question him if you like. And his experience in this test is fully documented and not some folklore you are repeating.
Again, I can link thousands and thousands of posts and quotes and videos and online and print magazine articles that say the exact opposite....again....who has truth?
You certainly don't have the truth because you don't follow the simplest protocol to make sure the results are valid and indicate fidelity as perceived only by your ear. Further, plurality of people confused doesn't make them right. People lack awareness of how their perception works. By not reading and learning the science and engineering, they are easily confused. See this video for example:
@mofojo - I am pretty sure all DACs are mostly Chinese these days. There are, of course, cheap Chinese DACs and properly engineered Chinese DACs and "engineered somewhere else, but coded, manufactured and tested in China" DACs.
Don't confuse playback equipment with content. No one is showing you analysis of your music but rather, cold, engineered hardware with zero awareness of what it is playing. It is an engineered piece of hardware which can trivially be examined using engineering means.
You on the other hand, make a super lousy fidelity meter. Your mood changes. You take into account your life experiences to evaluate something. You don't know your biases. You let your eyes override your ears, etc.
We can turn you into a decent fidelity meter by using proper protocols.
For music enjoyment, we don't need any of this. Indeed, non audiophiles are just as good as you in determine what music sound good to them vs not. Different domains.
Had a member send me $30,000 worth of CHORD DACs/Resmpler/Cables for testing. I asked him how fast I needed to test them and to my surprise, he said to take my time. And that he had bought a Topping DAC and couldn't tell the difference between them so he was going to use that until I returned his gear. Who is right? You or him? Measurements demonstrated by the way that the two DACs would sound the same but of course, Topping was more than 30 times cheaper.
I don't doubt someone enjoyed it and, as I said, I thought the SMSL DACs were just fine, but the D90 III sounded like poo to me. I compared the D90 III directly against the SMSL SU-9 Pro, VWV D1se2 and even a Yamaha RX-A8A. In theory, they should have all sounded exactly alike, but they were only 'similar' with their own noticeable faults. Any one of the numerous differences could account for what I heard and, of course, the unit I received could have been faulty. I'm not willing to live with something that I gave a fair shot and didn't enjoy.
Firmware updates are rarely needed on DACs. When they are, they are absolutely provided by the likes of Topping and SMSL. Now, high-end companies, that is another matter.
Firmware updates can be found on Topping's site, but not SMSL's. There are exactly 0 DAC firmware updates listed via SMSL's site. I am aware they're buried in dark corners of the internet, but they're not exactly easily accessible.
The dude you are responding to spent $25,000 on his DAC. The sales tax alone would buy you not one, but two of the best DACs Topping makes! And it is not like he can get support from anyone local.
I'm am huge fun of MBL because their North American CEO invited me to a private audition then gave me his entire evening to listen to their flagship products, which was nearly a $1mil room! I have his business card and can message any time for support, which they'd coordinate with Germany for me. I bought their 6010D preamp ($32k MSRP) shortly after because it sounds great and I like the big shiny gold knobs. It's also a simple design that has remained relatively similar >30 years. Am I wrong for spending my money any which way I please? I'm financially very comfortable in my early 40s, it didn't come out of investments and have $0 in debt.
You can also buy them from Amazon and if there are early mortality, get a refund or replacement.
I'm happy to call out Apos, an authorized seller for those DACs. Nowhere on their sales pages nor listings do they mention their refurbs are "final sale items." You would have to have foresight to actually check their FAQ by specifically searching for their policy, which should be listed on the listing itself:
What happens if the unit dies after the return window? Plenty of stories online with people waiting months and paying costly international shipping to get their Topping/SMSL repaired or replaced.
I don’t doubt someone enjoyed it and, as I said, I thought the SMSL DACs were just fine, but the D90 III sounded like poo to me. I compared the D90 III directly against the SMSL SU-9 Pro, VWV D1se2 and even a Yamaha RX-A8A. In theory, they should have all sounded exactly alike, but they were only ’similar’ with their own noticeable faults.
No. In theory and practice, you are assured to perceive differences between them! This is the nature of sighted testing where your brain is working differently in such comparisons.
They would sound the same, gosh I can’t believe I have to keep saying this, if you matched levels, conducted the test blind, and repeated. Until you do this, you are going to produce random outcomes. Measurements can never predict what your eyes and brain are doing. Only what your ear will capture. Until you focus the comparison to your ears alone, that is the outcome you are going to get.
I can tell you story after story of thinking two things were different when it turned out to be identical.
On AVS Forum, some post a test of lossy audio and original CD. Test was blind. Everyone voted privately to the person organizing it. I listened and found two files to sound the same so voted that way. Results were posted later indicating I was "wrong." And a famous "engineer" who mixed movie soundtracks had gotten it right.
Puzzled, I go and do a binary comparison between the files. I find them to be identical to the last bit! I go to the test organizer and tell him this. He can’t believe it and not accepting it. I explain the results and he goes and checks. And finds out that he had mistakenly uploaded the same file twice! He declared the test invalid.
Meanwhile the "engineer" is furious and insisting that this can’t be. He was so sure of his golden ear abilities. Yet he had voted two identical files differently. Why? Because he was told they were different.
"Thus, I’ve had to re-render the files from the compressed versions back out to 16bit .wav. Doing that, it appears the Tracks 1 and 2 are BOTH the 192Kbps encoded files. Track 3 is correct in that it is the 320Kbps encode, and Track 4 is correctly labeled as the 192Kbps & compressed/boosted track.
[...]
Specific thanks to Amir for speaking up to make sure accuracy prevailed, even though my bad results actually tended to make his company’s codec look even better than it was.
Again with sincere apologies, thanks everybody for your efforts thus far. Sorry to have blown it after the anticipation build up."
I am not posting this to brag about my ability to detect the duplicate. I too could have picked them as different. The main point is that no amount of self-qualification means anything until you are formally tested where we can check answers. Your experience is just an anecdote. If you want it to be a reliable outcome to use as an argument here, you must follow proper procedure to make it so.
Finally, if everyone’s listening tests results are right, my experience with Topping DACs is that they sound superb and transparent. No way, no how would I remotely agree with your assessment. My experience can be backed with measurement and audio science. Yours are easily invalidates using the same.
So I beg you to conduct a blind test and determine for real how those products sound.
Basically, Amir is the world’s greatest cynic.....He believes that we cannot believe what we hear. We can repeat an A/B a thousand times and hear the same difference but Amir believes we have fooled ourself thousands of times. He does not trust his hearing....he must be deaf! He does not trust anyones hearing.....we are all deaf! The one that is deaf is certainly Amir.......for he has his hands over his ears and will not listen.....but just keep sqawking like a parrot. We need to teach that old bird some new words.....sqawk...sqawk...sqawk.......yet no truth comes out.
I'm happy to call out Apos, an authorized seller for those DACs. Nowhere on their sales pages nor listings do they mention their refurbs are "final sale items."
Refurbished? Why are we talking about refurbished products?
"We recognize the importance of a customer-friendly return policy for audio products. We want to make sure you have plenty of time to test the equipment in a comfortable environment with music that you love before making the commitment.
If you are not satisfied with your purchase, feel free to request RMA (Return Merchandise Authorization) within 45 days of the delivery of the order."
That is darn good return policy, better than Amazon.
Compare that to a power cable I bought from GR Research:
"Company advertising says that you can try the cable out and if you don't like it, you can return it and "get your money back." Close look shows that you are responsible for shipping it back, the cost of shipping it to you and unknown credit card charges. I paid $40 for shipping for 2-day service ($25 for standard ground). So if I ship it back the same way, I will likely incur some $80. For this much money, could have bought a dozen ordinary AC cables. So much for money back guarantee. "
Indeed I got hit with those fees. Worse yet, company no longer accepts returns on these products:
"
Custom Orders (Finished cables, cabinets, and speakers)
(Applies to all orders placed on or after August 11)
All fully completed cables, finished cabinets, and speakers are all custom built to order.
Full-refunds are only possible if cancelled within 24- hours. (standard 3% cancellation fee still applies)
Partial Refund: Once assembly has begun on your order, only a partial refund is possible up, to the remaining cost of labor and materials at time of cancellation.
No refunds OR cancellations at, or after, the time of completion/delivery."
What happens if the unit dies after the return window?
A few choices. Post on ASR Forum as reps from all of these companies are active there. And members may have experiences of the same. Due to large volume of products shipped from these companies, you will get far more relevant answers than some boutique company that sells 100 DACs a year.
Second choice is to buy a replacement for $200 or even less if you just need unbalanced.
Third option is to send it back to the reseller for repair. Yes, in some cases this will take a long time as the product would have to go to China. But again, note that there is essentially no repair of any high-end audio product outside of the country that it is sold.
Basically Amir is the world's greatest cynic.....He believes that we cannot believe what we hear.
I don't "believe." I know. In my last corporate job, we blind tested large community of our audiophile employees to see if they could tell lossy audio from the source. They performed miserably, missing flaws that were instantly audible to me and our trained listing panel. I was hoping we could use our audiophile community to expand our testing this way. But it did not work out and served as an embarrassment to me.
You simply are not critical listeners. You perceive a difference where none should be and instead of thinking hard why that could be, go around brag that you heard the difference. Not once do you allow anyone to grade you. You take the test. Give yourself A+ and keep going.
Just because you have ears and like music, doesn't make you able to hear better than average person on the street when it comes to non-obvious differences. You need to learn this.
You on the other hand, make a super lousy fidelity meter. Your mood changes. You take into account your life experiences to evaluate something. You don't know your biases. You let your eyes override your ears, etc.
Sounds like you chant this every morning upon waking over and over as you make your coffee.
If you are not satisfied with your purchase, feel free to request RMA (Return Merchandise Authorization) within 45 days of the delivery of the order."
@amir_asr- Please read personal experiences of people trying to actually return anything to Apos and a number of other authorized Topping / SMSL retailers.
Here’s a whole thread on Head-Fi, which is actually sponsored by Apos:
Another thing to point out is that when I was in my 20s, I had no problem buying as-is broken electronics on eBay and fixing them up as I didn’t have much money and all the time in the world. These days, I average ~60-80hr work weeks so while I now have the money to buy nice things, I don’t have the luxury of time.
All these blind listening tests, nightmare sellers and unreliable products cost me more than if I were to spend $10k+ on a working DAC that I can forget about for the next 5 years or so.
The bottom line is that you cannot prove that you "know" anything. I have stated several times that you have no proof that your beliefs are true. I have asked you several times to show us the proof....you have not even mentioned what I have said or asked.......you simply ignore it. Ignore it again why don’t you. You ignore it....because you are wrong and cannot prove you are right. No one will ever prove it because our ears tell us what is real....not a distortion meter.
I again ask you to show proof that a certain SINAD measurement means that a component is totally transparent in sound. Please show us the hundreds of double blind tests done over a long time with hundreds of subjects that prove this....please...please....please. YOU CANNOT....there will never be such tests because why would we need to prove that we hear what we hear......only someone like you would even try to prove such nonsense. And if you sponsored it......it would have no clout as you are biased. Only someone who is completely unbiased could even run the tests. Even the Boston Audio Society or whatever is biased towards numbers......so it would have to be done by someone not even in audio for it to be considered valid. So, go on and show us the tests results that prove all DACs, preamps, and amps that measure a certain SINAD or better are transparent. If you cannot prove your "theory"......then it is just a theory....made up by you.....which is what it is....plain and simple....you are playing "make believe"....like a child.
Where’s the BEEF?!!!!!!!! Where is your PROOF?!!!!!
You say that you "know"......this is incredibly arrogant. You say we are not capable of doing listening tests and knowing anything. So, all the high end reviewers were completely wrong all these years.....Martin Colloms, HP, Gordon Holt, Peter Moncrief, Jean Hiraga, Robert Harley, John Atkinson, etc. to infinity......and all the manufacturers.....to infinity....have been wrong....all this time.....not to mention the 200K audiophiles who listened and "thought" they heard a difference. For you, those people never heard a difference in equipment or wires or caps or resistors or damping or power cords or fuses, etc ets. etc (they all made it up).......unless that equipment had a bad SINAD.......This is what you claim. Only YOU know what is right....and what you say, is right...and that is, that they all sound the same....same with wires......you are the final say in all of this. None of us mean anything....we are all just fools. Only you have the golden ears....which you don't use....You don't need to....you have your fake science....you have distortion measurements that are 100% the indicator of what we hear. No other kinds of distortion exist (that is what you believe).....only the kind that you measure on your machine. You sound like a child on the playground arguing that the moon is made out of green cheese......this is not the mind of some wise person.....who really WANTS to know the Truth.
Real science is based on "testable" observations using our senses....along with measurement machines in order to understand the world. You have no proof......your beliefs are not tested.....and they not use our senses.....your fake science just uses your ego based rational mind to defend a position you decided long ago. You really don't care about the truth or finding out what is actually going on....you just want to be right. VERY SAD.......you must be very lonely and feel unloved. We love you......no matter what you think.
It is really joyful to discover another hidden gem of tweaking that makes your stereo come alive. I wish you all an ever expanding sound stage and life.......as Buzz says......to infinity and beyond.
@ricevsThere is no point trying to discuss A/B, A/B/X, any kind of listening test with Amir. Any test he conducted or was directly involved in is by his definition, is scientific proof. Of course, in every one of those cases no difference was noted, or if some slight difference was noted it will be explained away.
In every listening test Amir references, that he was not directly involved in, resulting in no difference heard, again that is scientific proof.
In every listening test Amir had no involvement in, that noted differences heard, it is dismissed as invalid.
Without any direct participation in listening tests, Amir can determine validity simply from the outcome. What a talent, indeed.
@ricevs There is no point trying to discuss A/B, A/B/X, any kind of listening test with Amir. Any test he conducted or was directly involved in is by his definition, is scientific proof. Of course, in every one of those cases no difference was noted, or if some slight difference was noted it will be explained away.
"So there you have it. "Proof" that amplifiers do sound different in double blind tests."
Throughout this thread, I have post a number of positive outcomes of double blind tests which hard core objectivists saying "can't happen." I suggest you adjust your talking points to who you are addressing.
Please show us the hundreds of double blind tests done over a long time with hundreds of subjects that prove this....please...please....please.
That is like you claiming aliens landing in your backyard every night and when I say that can't be true, you want testimonials from "hundreds" of people to prove they can't see them!
Instead of asking for hundreds of tests, you should do one test to prove you can hear the difference in a proper way where only your ears are involved. Here is an example of ASR member doing a blind test of DACs :
"I am sharing my experience with my first ABX testing. Last Friday me, together with a friend performed a double blind test on this systems:
1) Chord Dave + Upscaller from Chord2Go+2U - headphone output
2) Topping D90 + A90 from a laptop
3) Chord Mojo headphone output from Iphone.
4) Apple lightning 3.5mm adapter, output from Iphone.
[...]
Result.. We could not tell the difference reliably between the systems. Which is.. proving either that we are both deaf or audio fools. We are repeating the test this Friday, I will post update if I can still type though my tears. Silly enough I can 100% reliably say which one is better when I see what system is connected."
Who was the member here that said Topping sounds terrible?
For a fraction of time it takes to keep posting here, you could transform your knowledge of audio fidelity by conducting one controlled blind test. Many have and enjoyed the benefits.
I get that living in the Matrix can be nice. But ultimately it is not real...
It is really joyful to discover another hidden gem of tweaking that makes your stereo come alive.
It would be if it is real. If it is imagined difference, it will disappear like a fart in the wind, leaving you with emptier pocket and thicker fog of audio subjectivity.
I suggest you learn about Equalization. In most cases it costs nothing. Results will be transformative. And you can tweak it for months if you wanted to.
Two groups of audiophiles were selected. One that subscribes to your beliefs, and one that didn't:
'Two groups of audiophiles were used as subjects. Lawrence Greenhill's Long Island based, The Audiophile Society (TAS) provided the high-end oriented "golden ears." David Clark's Southeastern Michigan Woofer and Tweeter Marching Society (SMWTMS) provided the "engineers."'
They were randomly given one of two boxes, one that did nothing and one that added 2.5% distortion. Testing was done both with quick switching in ABX versus long term evaluation using "take home" version of the same.
This was the outcome:
"The results were that the Long Island group [Audiophile/Take Home Group] was unable to identify the distortion in either of their tests. SMWTMS's listeners also failed the "take home" test scoring 11 correct out of 18 which fails to be significant at the 5% confidence level. However, using the A/B/X test, the SMWTMS not only proved audibility of the distortion within 45 minutes, but they went on to correctly identify a lower amount. The A/B/X test was proven to be more sensitive than long-term listening for this task."
In other words, "long term" testing substantially reduces your ability to hear impairments, not improve it as subjectivists wrongly claim. This is backed by how our hearing works. Short term memory that lasts just a few seconds, captures hugely more data about what you are hearing than long term memory.
Long term listening also causes adaptation which means you get used to flaws and no longer perceive them as much (or at all).
@ricevs I notice that the all-knowing, the magnificent @amir_asr didn't address your question. What a surprise.
Flat-earther demands to have testimonials from hundreds of people that earth is not flat to believe. You are going to amuse him by gathering such data? Or do you provide proof points that earth is not flat and let him decide to learn or not?
This is too hilarious. Amir comes up with a test between '70s or '80s vintage amplifiers so he can claim both sides of the blind test argument when convenient.
One amp out of production, both of undocumented pedigree Were any measurements performed? Were the amps pristine as new or in used condition? What were all the other components involved in the test?
A Sheffield Lab vinyl against Gordon Lightfoot and the Eagles of run of the mill vinyl. Hardly a good representation of audiophile source material or even significant variety. Only three listeners is insufficient to reach the conclusion stated.
However, Amir puts this up to cover his behind on both sides of the debate. Yet, more recent blind tests of any audio related item noting audible differences conducted with similar rigor and number of listeners are routinely dismissed by Amir and ASR faithful. Gentlemen, you can't have it both ways.
This is too hilarious. Amir comes up with a test between '70s or '80s vintage amplifiers so he can claim both sides of the blind test argument when convenient.
The test was run back then. I had to go and buy the rare old magazine issue which had the report in it. The quotes you see there are from scans of the magazine.
Were any measurements performed?
Yes but rudimentary by today's standard:
Gentlemen, you can't have it both ways.
But you seem to be that way. You claimed I make excuses to dismiss ABX test results. I show you one and now you are doing exactly that.
Yet, more recent blind tests of any audio related item noting audible differences conducted with similar rigor and number of listeners are routinely dismissed by Amir and ASR faithful.
Once again, a blind test alone is insufficient to produce reliable results. You must match levels, and repeat enough times to get statistical rigor. If someone doesn't know to do these things, then they don't know what they are doing. The test I post above followed the right protocols. As did the tests that I have run that also showed positive outcomes.
The importance of repeating enough times cannot be underemphasized. Here is me attempting to pass an ABX test:
Notice how I was doing well to the bolded trial with 7 out of 8 right. But once I kept going, it was clear that was accidental and I had to terminate with defeat at the end.
Someone passing such a test once or twice is meaningless.
An extremely old test that proves nothing and a deaf ASR member saying he hears no difference... That is all you got? Go on, how about the old Audio Magazine test of amps....you can use that one.....look it up.......
Pathetic.....you will never prove your point......you just keep looking for crumbs.....We have the whole loaf.....You are not even standing in your loafers.
But go on.....find us more silly tests that are meaningless. I am sure you can. For those of us that listen......you are irrelevant......However, your lies limit peoples ability to get better sound. So, you are a happiness limiter. You will have to live that truth till you admit you are wrong. You are a downer.....debbie downer.
How do you make your stereo better? Listen and experiment. Try things you have not tried.
How do you get good sound and think that you have incredible sound? Follow the guru of limitation....Amir.
You decide what you want in your life. Do you want an ever expanding stereo gift that keeps giving you more and more goosebumps and fun?......or do you want to feel ego smug and comfortable that you have the best stereo in the world for pennies?
Happiness exists every second. Embrace it NOW. You can be slightly happy and ego smug.....or you can be ecstatic and ever expanding......you choose.
Enjoy whatever you do......feel the love that exists....right now!
What a tragedy Amir's life must be. This appears to be all he has. I felt pity and then I visited ASR and all I could do was laugh. Imagine being proud of such an association.
How do you make your stereo better? Listen and experiment. Try things you have not tried.
Did you experiment with AC sockets? If so, did you then experiment with AC socket covers?
How about what you wear? Surely sound waves hit them and the fabric impacts the reflections that your ear then hears. Did you try the effect of cotton t-shirt vs sweater?
How about orientation of the cables on the floor? What if you make zig-zag pattern vs straight?
How about what you ate that day? Surely that impacts the blood vessels in your body and by direct implication, your ear and brain. What foods make your sound better or worse?
How about testing multiple samples of the same audio device model? There are hundreds or even thousands of components in them. Each one has variability. How do you know when I buy DAC X and you buy DAC X, that the two perform the same? Maybe your DAC X performs great and mine, horrible. That is possible, right?
Do you have 100% temperature control of your entire system down to a degree? Electronic devices change their characteristics measurably with temperature. Even the equipment chassis and your speaker enclosure are impacted by it. The latter is impacted by even humidity. Have you tried to figure this out and come up with exact temperature your system sounds best?
How about the type of ground you have outside? All high-end audiophiles know that grounding matters. What if I have sand and you have loamy soil? What if it has rained or not? What if there is snow on the ground? Did you test and tweak all of this?
And where did you buy your gear from? Surely if it is kept in a warehouse, vs a store, vs temperature controlled chamber, it would make a difference.
What if you painted your audio systems a different color? The particles in paint may impact EMI. Lot of audiophiles think EMI is a problem. Have you experimented with paint then?
How about how much weight is on each piece of audio gear? Did you tune that to the nearest pound? Surely that directly impacts resonances induced in the case and its impact on sound.
I have a lot more questions but let’s get the answer to these.
So, all the high end reviewers were completely wrong all these years.....Martin Colloms, HP, Gordon Holt, Peter Moncrief, Jean Hiraga, Robert Harley, John Atkinson, etc. to infinity......and all the manufacturers.....to infinity....have been wrong....all this time
They have been indeed. That part is certain as in all these years, they have not managed to put together a single, controlled listening test that shows their sighted evaluations are true. None!
On JA, he often finds measurements that directly contradicts his subjective counterparts. But that line is buried in a bunch of text, among measurements that high-end audiophiles don't understand or read.
As to plurality of them, for every one of those audio poets of subjectivity, there are thousands of engineers who would laugh at any notion they have about audio fidelity. Take Dave Jones who is the leading engineering blogger in one of his earliest monologs about Panasonic "audio" capacitors:
Do you see any signs of future vitality in high-end audio?
Vitality? Don't make me laugh. Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me, because I am associated by so many people with the mess my disciples made of spreading my gospel. For the record: I never, ever claimed that measurements don't matter. What I said (and very often, at that) was, they don't always tell the whole story. Not quite the same thing.
Remember those loudspeaker shoot-outs we used to have during our annual writer gatherings in Santa Fe? The frequent occasions when various reviewers would repeatedly choose the same loudspeaker as their favorite (or least-favorite) model? That was all the proof needed that [blind] testing does work, aside from the fact that it's (still) the only honest kind. It also suggested that simple ear training, with DBT confirmation, could have built the kind of listening confidence among talented reviewers that might have made a world of difference in the outcome of high-end audio."
Engineers that do not listen MUST know a lot about how something sounds.....NOT
The fact is.....we have not figured out how to measure what the ear hears. There is no proof otherwise.......For the millionth time.....Show us the proof!!!!!
You either listen and KNOW or you Sqawk, Sqawk...Sqawk and don’t know. Amir Squawks well.....he is the king of Squawk.
ASR stands for Amir’s Sqawking Religion. Praise be to the great leader.....May he protect his flock (of sqawkers) by constantly removing all non believers from his land. May he go out and attack the non believers on other forums to spread the lies of sameness. For the only thing true is what our leader speaks......I bow in obedience. I do not do any thinking or listening on my own without his approval.
Sqawk, sqawk, sqawk.......the one and only religion.
I don't need to prove anything. I know what I hear. You are the one with the weird point of view.....90% here know that all cables sound different. You are the one of the 10% that says they sound the same (and you don't listen, so you have no knowledge). So.....YOU NEED TO SHOW PROOF THAT WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DO Not ask that I prove that I can hear differences.......you are the odd man out.......I have common knowledge......you have no knowledge....because you don't listen. You can post all the weird posts you want.....you will never convince anyone here who listens. The only people that are on "your side" were already in that camp. Your sermons are not making any difference here. You have not convinced anyone that you have knowledge.....because you admit to not listenng.....nor doing double blind tests (which you say are necessary). What a joke.....Sqawk....Sqawk....Sqawk.
Amir says “As I have said, nearly half of my reviews include listening tests. That amounts to hundreds of reviews this way. So don’t keep saying I only go by measurements. I go by what science requires which is either objective tests or controlled experiments.”
hundreds of reviews, half of which are accompanied with time consuming and pressured controlled listening tests, and time spent defending one’s need for the last word, and one dares say one actually has time for music, let alone listens to it? Regardless of whether one is telling the truth or lying, measurements must certainly have the last word, not listening, as has been denied before. This is so tragically sad, there are no words for it.
In friendship - kevin
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
