What is the most overlooked consideration?

Synergy is of course important but room acoustics can be definitive.

I consider many things when buying a component.   I live in the south so it gets very hot in the summer.  So one of my issues is can I live with this item?  Will it put out too much heat?   How much will it cost me to own this item?  Will my electricity bill go up?  Will I have to re tube the unit in a year?     I am not a reviewer, so musicality plays a big role in my choice.  I listen to quite a bit of music that is not recorded very well.  So I do not need something Hyper revealing.. I want good resell value.  I may want to sell it if I upgrade my system.   

System and room correction combined with solid quality amplifiers and speakers.

Dirac Live room correction can be a "game changer" in achieving optimal sound. Check out our videos and tech blogs and resources on utilizing tools like Room EQ Wizard (REW) for system setup and Dirac for true time domain correction. Deer Creek Audio emphasizes the importance of a system simplicity, single digital-to-analog conversions and purity in the audio chain.

Deer Creek Audio - Digital Signal Processing Products
 

How is your room “the most overlooked consideration when buying a piece of audio gear”?  Because if your room is all lath and plaster walls, or super modern with large pane glass windows and concrete floors and walls, and is overly bright requiring gear that has significantly rolled off treble?  Or because your room has shag carpeting with Elvis and tiger fabric wall hangings everywhere and acoustic tile ceilings that suck up treble?  In those cases I see the room weighing on your purchasing considerations.

And while super important, purpose building a space for audio, or purchasing substantial room treatments for an existing space seems like a separate topic for a separate thread.  When I think of purchasing gear, I think of stuff downstream of the electrical outlet and is available for purchase on Audiogon.  Based on the OP’s original post, I think that is what they were asking about as well.

kn

And, you know, always put the cart before the ox.

Synergy is by far most important , the dac or front end most important why ?

for the incoming signal comes through and this dictates how it is going to sound down stream , once information is lost then it cannot be fixed down stream 

a quality dac very important , then maybe loudspeakers .

cables too are much more important  then many think necessary 

I have had several , the Cardas clear are possibly my next cables 

gidital absolutely nexeccary , good Ethernet cables especially at the end point 

usb for sure .I just bought a Upper tier Tubulus audio and Stealth Tunable usb cable , worth every penny extracting more detail, for my audio system.

OP:  What is the most overlooked consideration?  Don't believe quality components and room acoustics are the most overlooked.  Most here drilled down to exactly that, most overlooked.  Overlooked not the same as most important.

We've all been caught, confirmation bias leading us down a road only to discover "wrong thing".  Thought my DAC or preamp were experiencing a 60Hz ground loop.  It was the ceiling fan downstairs humming away.  Overlooked that effect.  Doh!

I have to wonder why so many contributors here are assuming that something as basic as room acoustics is being overlooked. Are they merely misunderstanding the question and confusing "overlooked" with "most important", two completely different things?

Grounding is overlooked and powerful...

Vibrations control is overlook too but less so than  proper grounding...

Acoustics controls of the system /room is the most important factor by far...

 The most important lesson is that no factor can replace another factor or even compensate for its lacks... This is why all working dimensions parameters matter...

 A bad dac, or a non synergetical piece of gear, cannot be cured or compensated really  by any other mechanical,electrical or acoustical controls...

 But a  simple tweak can give something sometimes no easy to buy  gear  upgrade will do ... (Schumann generators for example)

@devinplombier wrote:

I’m actually of two minds. I believe the "external" route is actually easier to implement, gives better flexibility, and is likely to yield better sound quality.

Good to know some people feel this way about it. 

On the other hand, I think there is a certain elegance to a high-end system that consists of nothing more than two speakers, especially when those are pleasing to the eye.

Definitely. Save perhaps a single streamer/DAC/preamp sitting solitarily on a shelf, it makes for a simple, clean looking system. 

Dutch & Dutch, Burckhardt, KEF, a French company whose name I forget right now, and others have produced examples of the latter. If only Dutch & Dutch could manage to get out of its own way, the 8c could be the best system 98% of people will ever own. Instead it’s an unmanageable walled-garden mess, albeit a fantastic-sounding one.

Never heard the Dutch & Dutch 8c’s, but they are very well reviewed. Another Dutch-based manufacturer, Grimm Audio’s LS1c active speakers on the other hand I do know, and fed by their MU1 streamer are a great sounding package. Not cheap, but when you think of the dough that can be spend on a separates, passively configured setup that would seek to achieve a comparable-ish performance, one realizes the Grimm system will turn out to be the less costly option, and - depending on preferences - most likely better sounding at that. 

@aewarren wrote:

I have to wonder why so many contributors here are assuming that something as basic as room acoustics is being overlooked. Are they merely misunderstanding the question and confusing "overlooked" with "most important", two completely different things?

+1

Dual mono at a minimum

Synergy, through the entire audio chain. This will also include treating the room and having your ears professionally cleaned and detailed. 

This is a fascinating diversity of viewpoints.  Many valid ideas and perspectives have been raised so far.  It strikes me, though, that the fundamental question posed by the OP has not really been hit in the bullseye.  Perhaps the answer is so obvious that it goes without saying for most of us:  The first and most important consideration to be addressed every time we are going to buy anything related to our systems should be to decide from whom to buy it.  Or to state this as a first principle:  Pick your dealer first.

@mlapenta  Correct.  That Furutech combo is nuts.  I've not engaged in the dedicated 20A line, but do not doubt.  I've approached that part with a Puritan 156 conditioner, but you make a salient point attacking the source first.

Cumulative is the point here.  Improvement in all things has a cumulative affect in outcome.

imho, people underestimate importance of clean power. I put in a new dedicated 20amp service for my "rig". I also spent 500 on a high end Furutech plug in the wall. These two actions made a Huge difference in sound.

That's two separate actions. The 20A home run to the panel may very well have made a difference for the better, depending on the state of your home wiring and the specifics of your system.

imho, people underestimate importance of clean power.  I put in a new dedicated 20amp service for my "rig".  I also spent 500 on a high end Furutech plug in the wall.  These two actions made a Huge difference in sound.  

Many people building a system often underappreciate the Preamplifier. Be very careful and audition in your system without compromise.

Where you position your speakers and good cables,but you don't need cables that cost hundreds of dollars....

I have to wonder why so many contributors here are assuming that something as basic as room acoustics is being overlooked. Are they merely misunderstanding the question and confusing "overlooked" with "most important", two completely different things? I have no way of knowing but I really doubt that many people on this forum have overlooked the importance of their room as it applies to sound quality. Or maybe the assumption is that listeners outside of this forum are overlooking their rooms?

Quality stands for equipment and speakers.  What components and speakers are placed on dramatically influences everything from noise floor to sound stage and dynamics.  Few years ago I placed a very respectable system initially on an IKEA bench, (yes I know better), then finally placed everything on a proper Quadrasprie SVT stand, beyond shocking.  I knew better, but wow!  Everything radically fell into place.

Many items outside components and speakers are overlooked, I find that particular item the most frequently dismissed, misunderstood and oft poorly executed.

@aewarren 100%

Is this fun?  If buying a piece of gear (new or used) from shopping to buying to opening the box to setting it up to listening to it isn’t fun for you, something is amiss.

Also, will the new piece of gear allow you to enjoy listening to “Exile on Main St.” all the way through from Rocks Off to Soul Survivor.

YMMV

kn

IMO Serviceability. Can it be repaired if needed? Either by a company or technician that specializes in that particular product, or by relatively easy access to the factory, preferably in my own county. Also certain gear in today’s world cannot be repaired, but needs to be replaced, so that’s a consideration as well. 

It's the room. It has a greater influence on what you hear than any source, amplifier, speaker, or processor. And if you argue it doesn't apply because you don't plug it in, realize the end result is akin to a DSP, only better.

@phusis 

I'm actually of two minds. I believe the "external" route is actually easier to implement, gives better flexibility, and is likely to yield better sound quality.

On the other hand, I think there is a certain elegance to a high-end system that consists of nothing more than two speakers, especially when those are pleasing to the eye.

Dutch & Dutch, Burckhardt, KEF, a French company whose name I forget right now, and others have produced examples of the latter. If only Dutch & Dutch could manage to get out of its own way, the 8c could be the best system 98% of people will ever own. Instead it's an unmanageable walled-garden mess, albeit a fantastic-sounding one.

@devinplombier wrote:

I do agree with this approach. In addition to the benefits you cited, you can match amplification with frequency range; for instance, those old Bryston monoblocks you have laying around will do great on bass duty, leaving you free to spec SS Class A amps on mids, etc. or as your heart desires.

The possibilities of amp permutations with outboard active configuration are many, and they’re tempting for an audiophile in an effort to "flavor" or power differentiate between the different driver sections as one sees fit. An engineering approach will likely have a different set of criteria for more technically founded amp matching choices that takes into consideration many factors of both amps and drivers, while also including budget constraints, heat dissipation issues and other that are not strictly linked to optimizing sound quality per se, but rather aims at working around design limitations of a bundled, a smaller sized form factor within a given price range. 

The audiophile who chooses outboard active configuration and thereby mostly a "DIY"-approach to both component choices and filter settings will have carte blanche in most areas here, and essentially is only limited to achieving a particular sonic goal that falls back on his/her own abilities into implementing everything entailed and whatever time and effort is invested with that. While being inspired by pre-manufactured, bundled active speakers with built-in plateamps, DSP and even DAC’s would seem obvious, it’s also a potentially restrictive outset we shouldn’t impose on ourselves. Going outboard active, while intimidating at first, gives one a wider palette of choices that aren’t restricted by size, price, design principles or other, and while most don’t have the R&D insights of companies dedicated to making bundled active speakers we must remember that they’re also and mostly working around restrictions that we don’t have to do. Why put the amps inside the speakers when they can be outside, and typically in much better quality? To save cable length? Well, seeing the forest for the trees should put that argument to rest. Same with DAC and DSP; we can choose whatever we want outboard actively, and have better quality. 

Going back to the choice of amps with outboard active config., my experience has gone from what you suggest and may even advocate; lower powered class A solid state amp for the higher frequencies and class D variant power beasts for the lower dittos that necessitate more juice, to currently using essentially the same high quality and high powered class A/B studio amps top to bottom. Using the same amp topology and preferably brand/design over the entire frequency range, including subs, isn’t trivial, and aids overall coherency and tonality (which is very much co-founded in the sub octaves). Consensus (or dogma?) points to using less power in the upper octaves and from amps that differ topologically from what’re used for the lower octaves, but if more wattage sounds equally well or even better with the highs and lends the opportunity to use similar amps from subs to highs, then I’ll dare anyone to explore the benefits provided with this approach. 

Active crossover implementation is far from trivial, though, especially if you wish to avoid the AD - DA conversions a digital crossover entails.

An additional A/D to D/A conversion step with a high quality DSP unit is the least of your worries (and with a digital input you can avoid this conversion step, but I wouldn’t look for a DSP solely with the intention of eyeing one out with a digital input - there’s much more to it than that as a qualitative measure, if it even is). What is important is how you go about filter settings and all that requires within a given acoustical framework. This is the real beast and where you can really unlock the potential of your active setup, apart from using quality outboard components through and through, and not letting yourself be restricted by a small size factor of speakers. 

You could put together relatively inexpensively active speakers with onboard modular amplification and a USB-programmable DSP module or even a SBC running Linux. Thermal management is going to be tricky if electronics are integrated onboard the speakers. I’ve been kind of mulling over something like that.

Indeed, but how I wish more would venture into those deeper waters for a more all-out approach with an outboard active setup. Give it a shot - you may be amazed. 

@arafiq  well put

This way (i.e.: both getting rid of the passive crossover on the output side of the amp and having each amp channel drive a limited frequency span) the individual amp channels will see a significantly easier load presented to them, thereby making more effective use of their power envelope and quality potential; finally control the drivers better with direct driver connection and harnessing more of their potential as well.

@phusis 

I do agree with this approach. In addition to the benefits you cited, you can match amplification with frequency range; for instance, those old Bryston monoblocks you have laying around will do great on bass duty, leaving you free to spec SS Class A amps on mids, etc. or as your heart desires.

Active crossover implementation is far from trivial, though, especially if you wish to avoid the AD - DA conversions a digital crossover entails.

You could put together relatively inexpensively active speakers with onboard modular amplification and a USB-programmable DSP module or even a SBC running Linux. Thermal management is going to be tricky if electronics are integrated onboard the speakers. I've been kind of mulling over something like that.

I’m always amused when audiophiles push their version of ‘musicality’ as the ultimate truth. 

One of the most overlooked considerations, from my chair, is the amp to driver interfacing, starting with getting rid of the passive crossover between the amp and speaker/its drivers. That naturally necessitates doing the crossover duties prior to amplification on signal level (i.e.: active configuration) and having a dedicated amp channel for each driver section, which in turn means amp load independency between each of these sections. This way (i.e.: both getting rid of the passive crossover on the output side of the amp and having each amp channel drive a limited frequency span) the individual amp channels will see a significantly easier load presented to them, thereby making more effective use of their power envelope and quality potential; finally control the drivers better with direct driver connection and harnessing more of their potential as well.

Next is higher speaker efficiency, or ideally no less than ~95dB sensitivity across the board to lessen thermally induced compression issues (not least as a dynamic phenomena with dulled transient response), and to aid overall ease and fluidity of reproduction. (Then there's the importance of matching directivity patterns, especially at crossovers between different driver sections for good, smooth power response).  

When combining above two (or three) aspects in speaker design, a significant bottleneck in audio reproduction has been addressed. Active configuration isn't just about removing the passive crossover as the perhaps most "visible" measure, but as well - by the same token - to make way for amp load independency in each of their sections, which in turn affects driver performance and accuracy. 

Wise advice !

A little thought and creativity with the acoustical treatments and the colors of the covering will make the installation visually either unnoticeable, or very attractive and will do far more for the sound quality of your system than any equipment upgrade.

None, absolutely none, of this matters if your room is not properly treated. There is simply no way you can properly hear what even an average system is capable of without proper room acoustics, let alone the finer points of equipment sound and integration. The modest amount of money invested for a high WAF acoustical treatment will repay itself every time you sit down to listen.

We have high ceilings in out living room 12-15 ft and fully half of the total wall area is glass, one side is open to the kitchen and dining, and one wall is rough stone - the fireplace - which acts as a diffuser. Putting white 2X4 ft and 2X2 ft 2" panels on the ceiling between the exposed wood beams spaced about 2 feet between apart has been very effective in reducing the both the reverberant field and the ambient noise level in the room. It will never be a great listening room, but it is now at least functional, and the panels overhead are not noticed by the eye. In our theater (a 5.2.2 Dolby Atmos installation with a 110" screen) we did a similar ceiling treatment, and added sidewall treatments, bass traps and a rear wall skyline diffuser which utterly transformed the space acoustically. One of the sidewall treatments uses  5 1X4 ft 2" white panels stacked with 3 1X2" black panels to look like a section of a keyboard, notes C to G. Guests always comment on that as a piece of wall art, not realizing its actual function as an acoustical treatment. 

A little thought and creativity with the acoustical treatments and the colors of the covering will make the installation visually either unnoticeable, or very attractive and will do far more for the sound quality of your system than any equipment upgrade.

To address the question presented, I think anyone auditioning equipment is looking for musicality, although that likely means something different to us all. I can’t imagine that equipment would sound musical to me if it didn’t image well, offer a realistic soundstage, if it wasn't  fast, if it lacked energy and detail, etc. The trap to avoid is that a lot of sins can be hidden by a sound that is veiled. Some equipment can produce a sound that is pleasant enough, but it lacks the energy and realism necessary to be a better experience over time.  
 

As was mentioned earlier, assessing the company that makes the products as a whole might be important and might be overlooked. The big “corporate” names can certainly lose their edge and, after changing hands often enough will become at best an echo of the founders’ intent- doesn’t mean they can’t make really good stuff but it’s going to be different. Every buyer of a business is looking to take cost out of the operation. Is that coming from redundant marketing and back room operations or from R&D and quality of parts? Hard to know but don’t overlook that the manufacturer may be the same in name only. 
 

likewise, some of the best stuff is made by really small operations driven by the passion and genius of the founders. Sounds good, but can they service what they sell and what happens when the founders move on? I think these are important issues that can be overlooked in the buying process. 
 

Timbre cannot be understood with linear Fourier maps because it is a result of a physical event perceived and directly interpreted by us in our own time domain ...

You do not think as an acoustician but as a dac seller...

You distorted what i intend to say to recover your audio seller pitch...

Your understanding of what is "timbre" is obsolete...

Read this material, not yet in Britannica,and link them all together to have a small idea about what i talk about ...

http://file:///C:/Users/Propri%C3%A9taire/Downloads/2024-02-pythagoras-wrong-universal-musical-harmonies-1.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45812-z

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230724368_Human_Time-Frequency_Acuity_Beats_the_Fourier_Uncertainty_Principle

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2308859121

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375865063_Pitch_and_Tone_Primacy_of_sound_sources_in_auditory_perception_by

  Timbre is always a mystery a problem unsolved in acoustics but we know that it cannot be described by Fourier linear maps computations... WE need something else described in the article of Akpan J. Essien, the last article here above...

 And yes Timbre result of the microdynamics vibration of the material components  of the sound source then the vibrating object communicating directly to us listener his various qualias... It does not result of your gaze on a electronic dial as a dac seller making his selling pitch...

In a word: there is a physical invariant in the evaluation of Timbre which is directly perceived  as a qualia of the vibrating sound sources microdynamics....Timbre is not a mere  figure on your electronic dial, it is a bit more complicated ....it is why acoustics is not just engineering but a fundamental multidisciplinary field...

Microdynamics do not create or lead to timbral characteristics — not if you truly understand what you’re talking about.

Overlooked. Options you didn't know about when you made a move. 

I used to work for a billionaire. All he wanted was knowledge. His options.

He got fed up with consumer audio and got three bids from pro audio contractors.  

I never spoke of microdynamics versus timbre...you misread my posts...

Before blaming someone for misreading your post, take a moment to review what you actually wrote. Yes, of course — everything about sound is vibration; no vibration, no sound. But you specifically brought microdynamics into the discussion, which led to a confusing and incorrect statement.  Please do not misuse terminology here.  Microdynamics do not create or lead to timbral characteristics — not if you truly understand what you're talking about.

First Timbre pertain to the microdynamics of the vibrating object ...

i was speaking of the vibrating sound source, for example a vibrating violin, under the touch of a musician which total  resulting microdynamics created a timbre quality perceived differently from different location...

As explained earlier, timbre is tonal color of sound and is fundamentally defined by the spectrum of harmonics and their relative amplitudes. (https://www.britannica.com/science/timbre).  Therefore, harmonic content has more direct, effective control over timbre.  One can use various means such as choice of DAC/filters, tubes, EQ to directly / effectively shape timbre.  It is well known that adding or reducing second and third harmonics gives a warm or more clinical tone respectively — a direct change in timbre.  Here is an actual example presented by GoldSound in measuing one of the Smsl DACs.

On the other hand, room acoustics have an indirect and relatively moderate influence on timbre. While they can affect the perception of sound, they do not alter the fundamental harmonic structure of the source. If you begin with a room or listening space with poor acoustics, treating the room will, of course, lead to a dramatic improvement in overall sound characteristics. However, this does not justify the misleading claim that room acoustics are the more dominant factor in timbre accuracy or shaping.  That is why a lot of audiophiles continuously roll the tubes, change/upgrade DAC (r2r, hybrid), preamp, etc. 

To answer the OP question i will write only one sentence :

 It is useless to buy a 5,000 bucks dac if this dac is not as most dac in most system properly grounded ...

The most important lesson in audio comes not from upgrading experiences contrary to what  most think  boasting about their gear pieces tastes (price and results);

It comes from proper electrical,mechanical and acoustical working optimization process...

It ask for time not for money, it ask for  acoustics studying and experiments not about  audio reviews study...

In a flawed by design stereo system (See Dr. Edgar Choueiri papers here ),

there is no "mythical" reproduction of the timbre experience, which is also not only a tone experience but a dynamic experience (the way the musician hands touch the guitar strings for example ) There is only a translation of the recording trade-off choices of the recording engineer room & micros parameters according to the acoustics parameters of your room system...

i dont listen to a dac, i listen to the timbre experience in real life and in playback to learn how to make an improvement in the acoustics parameters of my room to improve not the impossible reproduction but the acoustical optimal translation of the recording choices in my own room  ...

Acoustics rules audio not the reverse...

The performance, and the composition....these two elements are in all of our recordings. So, buying a piece of gear, because it seems to get the timbre right? The timbre has been altered already. What about the microphones, the selected placement of the mics, and everything else down the line prior to our ears experiencing it....

I suggest everyone here look up the meaning of "musicality". The "performance" and "composition", ime, is what I listen for, from my recordings. Timbre and tonal color, while important, has been changed from reality, once the mic and mixing console has been brought into the picture. Here is a question, as an example. Take your favorite musician (let’s use a vocalist for this), place this vocalist in two different settings. (1) a grand concert hall, (2) an airport bathroom. What will sound better? Now, take a mediocre vocalist who is not very good, and place him/her in the same two locations. What will sound better? I would always take the concert hall scenario for the acoustics, but if I was given a choice, I would rather listen to the better vocalist in the bathroom, vs. the inferior vocalist in a concert hall. This is me, and I look/listen for the performance 1st. What I am saying here is, I have heard so many multi thousand $ systems in bad rooms, and average systems in great rooms. Listening for the performance and composition over everything else, would determine which I prefer......and let’s not forget...the reality is, the recordings for many audiophiles, are the bottlenecks with the entire sq presentation. This is why so many listen only to those rare "great recordings", and pass, on some excellent performances and compositions. I know some of this might not make sense, but......comparing live, unamplified music to recordings, is a destination we will never get to......for timber, warmth, etc. The performance, and the composition....these two elements are in all of our recordings. So, buying a piece of gear, because it seems to get the timbre right? The timbre has been altered already. What about the microphones, the selected placement of the mics, and everything else down the line prior to our ears experiencing it....this is generally decided by the producer and maybe the artists........my current system is less expensive than what I once had (my choice), and it brings me greater enjoyment to the two basic characteristics I listen for. Honestly, this is some rant, if there ever was one. BTW, I would take the bathroom scenario any day, to hear the better vocalist, if it came down to it......whatever works best for you.......can you guess my answer to the question asked? My best, MrD. 

i was speaking of the vibrating sound source, for example a vibrating violin, under the touch of a musician which total  resulting microdynamics created a timbre quality perceived differently from different location... This timbre qualia inform us about the state of the vibrating sound source and even about the state of the musician touch...

I never spoke of microdynamics versus timbre...you misread my posts...

I have to say, your definition / reasoning of microdynamics versus timbre doesn’t seem accurate. I’m not sure where that interpretation came from.  Microdynamics refers to subtle changes in loudness / volume or fine-level details of the sound over short timescales.  Timbre is the tonal color, i.e., warm vs cold / bright, or quality, i.e., rich vs lean, of a sound allowing one to differentiate different instruments or voices.

I have to say, your definition / reasoning of microdynamics versus timbre doesn't seem accurate. I'm not sure where that interpretation came from.  Microdynamics refers to subtle changes in loudness / volume or fine-level details of the sound over short timescales.  Timbre is the tonal color, i.e., warm vs cold / bright, or quality, i.e., rich vs lean, of a sound allowing one to differentiate different instruments or voices.

Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the assertion that timbre is an acoustic "concept" that can be rationed by the ASW/LEV ratio. To illustrate this, consider a simple experiment: move from your main listening position closer to the speakers, thereby minimizing room acoustic effects. You’ll likely find that the fundamental "color" of the sound remains consistent, reinforcing the idea that timbre is predominantly determined by the source and its harmonic structure.

First Timbre pertain to the microdynamics of the vibrating object (violin)  and is perceived very differently in a room or concert Hall in function of the position of the listener...Timbre is at the same time an objective and subjective concept because his evaluation is subjective...

ASW/LV is not a concept defining Timbre "per se" as you wrongfully claimed misreading me but a ratio between sound source width and immersive listening impression which ratio we must control by controlling the balance between reflection/absorption/diffusion in a room and controlling also the zones pressures distribution by using tunable mechanical Helmholtz resonators (in my case)

Timbre cannot be encoded digitally well if it is not recorded well to begin with in a specific controlled acoustic room (concert hall or recording studio)... It is why sound engineer own a pair of biologically created ears...

Not only that but for sure if the dac is not good the timbre perception will be not good, but it way more difficult and essential to control room acoustic with a good or with a bad dac anyway... Why ? because you do not hear just the dac design you hear it through the Speakers/room interaction directly...

Takes the speed of sound and divide it by the room dimensions to know how many times the sound waves will struck you ears in one second...timbre perception depend of your location in your room as in your concert hall...

Timbre is an analog acoustic  perceived phenomenon informing us about the qualitative state of a vibrating body (violin or guitar or drum etc )... Your dac only code and decode the analog waves... The fundamental steps are the recording  step and the play back step in your room...Dac matter but it is  way more easy to purchase a relatively  good dac than a good room...

Publicity for gear and marketers and sellers and reviewers  dont say all the truth to sell a dac precisely among other piece of gear...

Acoustics rules...

But is it necessary to specify that acoustics controls cannot replace a bad dac and compensate for it, nor acoustic cannot replace the bad grounding of this dac at any price... ( all gear must be well grounded and no one pay attention to this between their upgrades race)

from my recent experience: the effect of a hype. Some gear are so mediocre and yet they make the review round as the best thing since sliced bread and nobody wants to say The Emperor has no clothes. 

i am sorry to say so and i apologize to said it to you, but you have no idea about acoustics power to modify the sound in all aspects...

 I do not say this to diminish the importance of picking a good dac....It is fundamental too ...As Acoustics is...

Nothing replace the mechanical (vibrations/resonance controls),or the electrical control, (Gounding,EMI protection,DC filterings) or acoustical controls of system/room.

The electrical controls dont replace the mechanical controls and neither replace acoustical controls...

No dac choice will improve a system in a bad room which speakers are badly vibrating and resonant and which no gear is properly grounded with no EMI protection and no filtering of DC....

But the most important factor is Acoustic control as the more powerful at the end of all ...

The perception of timbre can indeed be influenced by room acoustics—through reflections, absorptions, and resonances that may subtly enhance or diminish certain frequencies. However, these effects are generally minor compared to the intrinsic harmonic content of the sound produced by such components as a DAC or preamp.

@devinplombier to bad you are not in the NYC area where we could show you so then you would know how to select a component then you can narrow down your decision-making.  To many people are just going from one manufacturer to another without knowing what makes sound.

Happy Listening.

@oberoniaomnia Absolutely. Also, feelings of inadequacy, FOMO, and blind faith and willful ignorance sometimes lurk in the background.

@bigkidz It sure helps to understand what's inside the case, but isn't auditioning the primary decision-making criteria here?

+1 @jmera Reliability

The simple answer is:

Understanding how a component produces music which comes down to the build and the parts used like the transformer, power supply design and capacitors used, etc.

Without knowing this, you are just buying one brand or another.

+1 The room.

2.) Psychology. Does it really sound different, or do I only think it has to sound different? Is it better, or do I think it has to be better because I spent more?

Very interesting and thought provoking answers. It’s a way the Audiogon forum can actually help, by sharing ideas, solutions and opinions. It is possible that threads do not have to be filled with arrogance and personal attacks. For those who have a complimentary stereo component or accessory the WAF is another overlooked consideration. No offense intended. Offered by @aewarren and I am in agreement.

Buying equipment you can buy, try in your listening room with your equipment with the ability to return for no or little money if you’re not happy.  That involves Customer service and warranty.  I see so many questions online after people have bought equipment and can’t get help from the manufacturer or are looking for where to get gear repaired.  

Never thought I would say that, but power management is a key consideration. Outlets, power cords and power plants can transform the sound of a system. I was very skeptical until I experimented with them. No need to go nuts, however. Just need clean stable power. Similar experience with external power supplies vs internal ones.