The Emperor DAC has no Clothes

Lots of interesting comments on this thread. I think there’s some truth in Rob’s observation that dacs in the same price range have similar sound quality. The same thing could probably be said of preamps, amps, and even speakers. The same thing could also be said of other consumer items. Cars in the same price range have a similar build quality and design quality, which largely determines their “drive quality.” Dacs in the same price range have a similar build quality and design quality, which largely determines their sound quality. Let’s treat this as axiomatic…

(1) Build Quality + Design Quality = Sound Quality

This statement is intended in the same spirit at Steve N.’s comment that…

What makes a really stellar component is the other "STUFF", as well as the IMPLEMENTATION.[emphasis added]

I agree with Steve, though my opinion about these things is far less informed than his. The point is that Rob’s observation that dacs in a similar price range sound similar can be largely explained by the fact that the similar price reflects similar design quality and build quality, and that results in similar sound quality. You get the idea.

Having said that, I think Statement (1) is true ONLY UP TO A POINT. That is to say, design quality and built quality are not the only determinants of sound quality. Another major determinant of sound quality is the SYSTEM in which a piece of equipment is heard. So, to revise…

(2) Build Quality + Design Quality + System Quality = Sound Quality

That’s more like it. Statement (2) is intended in the same spirit as Al’s comment that…

…while it is easy (and very common) to blame THE QUALITY OF A SYSTEM when there is a reported inability to perceive differences, that is not necessarily what is going on. And in fact an inverse correlation may often exist between THE ABILITY OF A SYSTEM to resolve musical information, and its ability to resolve differences between components, cables, tweaks, etc.[emphasis added]

I agree with Al. The system in which a component is heard is an essential (and somewhat paradoxical) determinant of sound quality. That would seem to be the end of the story. But it isn’t.

There is another major determinant of sound quality, and that is THE LISTENER. To revise again…

(3) Build Quality + Design Quality + System Quality + Listener Quality = Sound Quality.

You see where I’m going with this. The variables are increasing, the equation is expanding, and “Sound Quality” is becoming less and less easy to determine. But before I get into that, what do I mean by “Listener Quality”? I mean both the listener’s EXPERTISE and the listener’s VALUES, both of which vary widely from audiophile to audiophile. Statement (3) is intended in the same spirit as Audio Oracle’s comment that…

…pay me a visit I can demonstrate to you that your findings are only accurate in your limited set of circumstances: your system setup and your EARS, extrapolating your particular BIASES and EXPECTATIONS to the rest of an industry is fallacious.[emphasis added]

So where does this leave us? In a state of uncertainty, I’m afraid. Here is the reason: As you move through the various “Qualities” listed in Statement (3), they become increasingly subjective. In other words…

Build Quality… slightly subjective
Design Quality… a bit more subjective
System Quality… more subjective still
Listener Quality… largely subjective
Sound Quality… quite subjective

If sound quality were merely a matter of build quality and design quality, then estimates about sound quality would be quite uniform. But add into the equation different systems, which includes different rooms and different source material. Then add different listeners, which includes different expertise and different values. What you get when you add all that up are estimates about sound quality that vary widely, EVEN FOR equipment with similar build quality and design quality. Some will see the Emperor’s new clothes, and some will not. Some will find his new clothes beautiful, and some will not.

I generally don’t like to conclude something so Subjectivist, but I don’t see any way around it.

Bryon

02-16-12: Learsfool
I think many audiophiles place too much importance on Build Quality. This is much more than slightly subjective, IMO. "Better" technology isn't much of the time...

I introduced the distinction between "build quality" and "design quality" only to illustrate a tempting way of thinking about the determinants of sound quality. I go on to identify two other determinants of sound quality, and surely there are more factors I didn't identify. So I think we're actually in agreement that build quality isn't a definitive determinant of sound quality. It is one factor among many.

02-18-12: Foster_9
"Build quality" matters, but the most important aspect is always sound quality.

Again, I agree.

I also agree with you, Learsfool, that build quality may be more than slightly subjective. Even so, I believe it is less subjective than the other determinants of sound quality I mentioned -- design quality, system quality, and listener quality. This point isn't merely academic, and it bears on the topic of this thread in the following way...

The build quality of affordable (~$1K) dacs often leaves something to be desired, IME. What I mean by this is that the components of the dac are often chosen for cost, rather than performance. This is not a novel observation, of course. Many folks here on A'gon, particularly those interested in modding, are aware that substituting higher quality parts - i.e. improving build quality - can yield dramatic improvements in sound quality.

This has been on my mind lately, as I've been building new crossovers for a set of speakers, replacing not-so-good parts with better ones (yes, better). At this point I've modded 1 of 3 identical speakers, so I can A/B the old and the new crossover with the flip of a switch. So far the results are a major improvement in sound quality. As it happens, I've also been modding my preamp/dac, again with significant improvements to sound quality.

The point I'm wandering around to make is that build quality, while not a definitive determinant of sound quality, is a major determinant of it. And to some extent, build quality is something that an audiophile can change, unlike some of the other determinants of sound quality.

Bryon

02-19-12: Learsfool
My main point in this context is to state that too many audiophiles tend to assume that just because component A uses a more expensive part than component B, that it is therefore going to sound better.

I think you're probably right about this, Learsfool. And I think you're also right that good build quality, in the sense of excellent parts, doesn't guarantee good sound quality, particularly when the design quality is wanting.

Of course I'm speaking from the point of view of a consumer and not a designer, so I don't mean to imply that I have any special expertise on component design. Like you, I know it when I hear it! :-)

Bryon