Mr Spock would levitate towards ASR. Logic would tell him not to worry about technical details that do not matter.

McCoy would likely hang around here and enjoy tube swapping.

Kirk would have nothing to do with any of this but might be able to come up with some contorted logic in order to get Spock and McCoy to play nice together. ☀️

Or not .

@deep_333 That's hilarious.  I'm sending it to my wife and friends.  

My last statement "I've heard only about two dozen all high cost systems." WITH Transparent cables (I've heard many 100s of high end systems, maybe 500 at shows and showrooms).  Just clarification. 

I never engage during my music evenings : ) had to take a week break from amirs graphs and word games

The minions must have it tough when they go through his initiation program at ASR.

It is clear you don't know what my position is in audio. 

Congratulations, you made a statement with a grain of truth.  Since you take both sides when convenient to be "right" and have the last word, it is difficult to know your position.

You making excuses to dismiss it makes your position extremely odd and self-defeating.

More Amir double talk.  Pay attention this time. The test result is irrelevant as it relates to the validity of ABX due to the tiny sample of listeners.  Nothing self defeating about stating facts. 

I challenged them for years and eventually got one to agree and disclose this test.  I bought the magazine and provided the first online record of it.

Once again, you are in the CYA mode selectively releasing bits of information.  How convenient to reveal you challenged the authors of the test for years.  No matter what, you always construct a "pure as the driven snow" image for yourself.

And, in line with that….

Amir says “You all do though by worrying about spec of dust on the wall screwing up the sound. That level of anxiety must impact the listening pleasure. If that doesn’t, certainly the amount of time spent buying and messing with the system does. “

• While there may be doubt regarding who actually cares about specks of dust, we know a lot about the hundreds of hours he spends measuring and rationalising, messing around with the line of each graph, or each little distortion screwing up the measurements. That level of anxiety must impact the listening pleasure. If that doesn’t, certainly the amount of time spent having the last word on confirmation bias after the measurements are known, does.

In all truth - kevin

@fleschler yup, I never engage during my music evenings : ) had to take a week break from amirs graphs and word games. Really, he can’t be enjoying his music much, how could he possibly have the time?

In friendship - kevin

@kevn Oy Vey! I return to this forum and it looks, sounds and smells just like my two prior forums with 2000+ posts. Here Amir has utterly dominated the conversation (is it a conversation or dictatorship (conversational narcississt).

@mofojo Well as far as answering my questions in my last two forums, no good answer why Topping is compelled to continual develop new DACs, is it 4 or 5 quality levels and how many within each level? If the D90III is the best ever, do we nope to see a D90IV or V or another number D100? Such foolishness (and marketing). The best musical sounding of the Toppings with many positive reviews giving reasons why is the Topping D70s. It just is unless gets a bum unit that is just off whether in or out of phase setting. The good units are superlative, even at many times their original price, now cut in half used, as if they aren’t as good as ever. Compared to a SOTA, they fall short, not in musicality but in sonic capabilities. Why so many, many DACs? If they are nearly perfect, is a drop in noise by 2 or 5db that critical. Something is very wrong with their philosophy-most qquality audio manufacturers do NOT change models constantly PER YEAR. Some like Synergistic Research, change fuses every 2 years on a schedule and up the prices each time. That sounds as ridiculous as the massive changes of Chinese DACs annually or biannually as well.

I've never heard a system which I liked which was wired with Transparent cable.  I've heard only about two dozen all high cost systems.  

 Sloppy on all counts....but, I'll let you and the minions flounder in darkness on this one, lol.

Sorry, but there is not a thing you know that we don't know and haven't discussed about acoustics at ASR Forum.  Start with this: 

Automatic EQ systems do that by using a trick that relies on how much headroom your speakers/amp have. You pull the overall level down to the minimum of nulls (within reason). You then use PEQ with negative gain to fix the peaks. Result is flat response (or close to it).

Sloppy on all counts....but, I'll let you and the minions flounder in darkness on this one, lol.

Amir says “We don't spend any time rationalizing music.”

and then “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.”

’We’ may not, but he certainly does, by clear conclusion.

In disbelief of hypocrisy - kevin

Absolutely correct. I am so happy for those who spend more time listening to music than rationalising it.

We don't spend any time rationalizing music.  You all do though by worrying about spec of dust on the wall screwing up the sound.  That level of anxiety must impact the listening pleasure.  If that doesn't, certainly the amount of time spent buying and messing with the system does.  I have seen member threads on forums go for hundreds of pages as the swing in the wind with this or that cable, tweak, product, etc.  One minute this is the best they have.  Next minute a veil is removed with something entirely different.

Folks in our camp buy performant gear, plug them in and enjoy.

Funny thing is that this argument is not new. Had hobbyists listened to the empiricists decades ago, we would not have improved cabling, tube amps and turntables. 

I don't get involved in turntables but for sure there are no "improvements" in cabling.  Your cable company has provided long links to your house carrying hundreds of high frequency channels.  You want to say with straight face that audio needed something extra despite its ridiculously low bandwidth?

You can't use your own faulty assumptions to make another point.  My $28,000 audio analyzer has zero audiophile cables.  Yet it can measure small signals that are orders of magnitude lower than threshold of human hearing.

On tube amps, as I have said they are the steam engines of audio world.  At best they are transparent as solid state amplifiers.  On the average and certainly at worst, they screw up the audio pipeline, adding significant amount of noise and distortion on top of modifying the frequency response of your speaker.  These are all step backwards.  Not forward.

1. YOU harp about how nobody can trust their own hearing.

Everybody can trust their hearing.  I trust my hearing when I post double blind tests showing full ability to detect differences.  You too can get there if you only trusted your ear and didn't need the knowledge of what is being tested into the equation.

2. YOU base that claim on ABX tests of Audio components where no audible difference was noted and extrapolate that to a universal truth (see #1).

Nope.  Never said this either.  It is however a universal truth -- or as close as we can get to it -- that you all will absolutely flunk tests that measurements show no audible difference.  We know that because engineering tells us that.  We know that because psychoacoustics science predicts it.  We know that from experiments where you all fail miserably when only your ears are involved. 

Heck, you can't even reliably tell the differences between speakers and you want people to believe you can tell the difference between cables?

3. YOU dig up an ancient test with the staggering number of 3 participants as a valid example of audible differences being heard in an ABX test. (see #1).

The authors made the first ABX comparator.  That makes them very notable in this sort of thing.  Those authors then took the rigid position that no audible differences exists no matter what.  I challenged them for years and eventually got one to agree and disclose this test.  I bought the magazine and provided the first online record of it.  You making excuses to dismiss it makes your position extremely odd and self-defeating.

If that test was brought to YOUR attention as proof audible differences can exist, you would have dismissed it. 

The opposite is true.  I post about that test frequently when objectivists go overboard with claims of everything being the same.

It is clear you don't know what my position is in audio.  Yet you are so sure it is wrong even though it works against you.  I suggest you think again before making lists like this.

@audition__audio

I think you meant rationalists, as in “Had the hobbyists (empiricists) listened to the rationalists…”

Absolutely correct. I am so happy for those who spend more time listening to music than rationalising it.

In friendship - kevin

Funny thing is that this argument is not new. Had hobbyists listened to the empiricists decades ago, we would not have improved cabling, tube amps and turntables. If the industry ever gets to a point in which it can adequately defend some of Amir's theories, he will be the last person this industry would turn to as its spokesperson. 

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.

Once again, Amir, you talk both sides when convenient.

1. YOU harp about how nobody can trust their own hearing.

2. YOU base that claim on ABX tests of Audio components where no audible difference was noted and extrapolate that to a universal truth (see #1).

3. YOU dig up an ancient test with the staggering number of 3 participants as a valid example of audible differences being heard in an ABX test. (see #1).

The test result in your example is irrelevant, as the test itself is so poorly constructed.  Guess we are supposed to be impressed by the name David Carlstrom and ignore that it is crap test.

If that test was brought to YOUR attention as proof audible differences can exist, you would have dismissed it. Disingenuous is too kind a description of the double talk you peddle.  

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

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.

There is no proof otherwise.......For the millionth time.....Show us the proof!!!!!

You are the proof.  If you were right, you would do an ears-only test and show you can tell your tweaks make a difference or not.  

But sure.  What do you think of this youtuber:

The fact is.....we have not figured out how to measure what the ear hears.

How do you know that?  List all the literature/books you have read on the topic.

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 missed that you had Gordon Holt in there.  See this interview with him.

"

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."

Your own witness leaves you out in the cold.

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:

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.

@audition__audio ​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.​​

You've posted 60x on this thread. Irony is dead. Hypocrisy is waking up ​

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.

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!

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:

---

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/09 17:39:55

File A: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arny's 30 Hz Jitter File\Arny's new files\no jitter.wav
File B: C:\Users\Amir\Music\Arny's 30 Hz Jitter File\Arny's new files\30 Hz jitter barely noticable level .015.flac

17:39:55 : Test started.
17:40:40 : 00/01 100.0%
17:41:30 : 01/02 75.0%
17:41:41 : 02/03 50.0%
17:41:52 : 03/04 31.3%
17:42:04 : 04/05 18.8%
17:42:19 : 05/06 10.9%
17:42:32 : 06/07 6.3%
17:42:46 : 07/08 3.5%
17:42:58 : 07/09 9.0%
17:43:12 : 07/10 17.2%
17:43:27 : 07/11 27.4%
17:43:42 : 08/12 19.4%
17:43:53 : 08/13 29.1%
17:44:15 : 08/14 39.5%
17:44:46 : 09/15 30.4%
17:45:00 : 10/16 22.7%
17:45:12 : 11/17 16.6%
17:45:30 : 12/18 11.9%
17:45:52 : 12/19 18.0%
17:46:23 : 13/20 13.2%
17:46:28 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 13/20 (13.2%)

----

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.

Only three listeners is insufficient to reach the conclusion stated.

Yet we are told to believe sighted, listening of DACs, cable, etc. by single individuals here.

By if you want to be dismissive of a test that favors your cause, be my guest....

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.

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. 

@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?

 Please show us the hundreds of double blind tests done over a long time with hundreds of subjects that prove this....please...please....please.

Forgot to address the folklore around "long term" testing being better.  Read my digest of AES paper,  Ten Years of ABX Testing, by David Clark

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.

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.

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...

@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.

Double Blind tests *did* show amplifiers to sound different

"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.

@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.

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.

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.

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?!!!!!

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:

Head-Fi Apos Return Experiences

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.

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. 

All the best,
Nonoise

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. 

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?

Here is their FAQ on returns of new 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. 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 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.

Here it is if you want to check (post #3):

"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.

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.

@amir_asr 

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.

SMSL Firmware Page

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:

Apos Certified Refurbished Page

Apos Certified FAQ

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.

Does not equal 

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.

@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.