The sound quality from DACs - is it all the same?

it seems like so many of you guys have subjective-only opinions about what "sounds good"

Can we all agree that machines used for measuring audio gear are more accurate than human ears?

Do you use machines to decide whether art is visually pleasing or not? Do you have machines taste your food for you? Do they tell you what smells good?

It’s the psychology in play when a person reaches their internal limit. We all fall back on animal aspects of safety in life. where we require ’facts’. Facts of ’safe’ or ’not safe’. Is there a lion in the tall grass? Will I die, or not, in the face of this unknown? the coloration of the carrier (the body) becomes an overt factor in the fundamentals of forms of query.

Things become binary at the intellectual limits, for humans and our given individualized capacities. The utilization of objectivity as a concept, can defang complexities that may be due to given individual mental construction. Great for the ideal of science, but it’s still all expression through a meat monkey of some given kind.

It can only go so far due to the carrier existing as coloration that increases to an infinity - of turning into being desirous of being binary (yes/no-safe/not safe) at the given real human limit. Declarations in sharpness of speech and projected meanings... can, and many times do become - the given individual norm, at said limits.

Many times we fail to understand the psychology at play, even the idea that subjectivity is the only reality we possess, and that objectivity is a figment of the human mind’s design. Down to the point that most humans don’t really know what the real world applications of the meaning within the word ’consciousness’ are.

We leave that to Descartes-like dissertations and conjecture, without ever referencing, reading or dealing with the works at all. The encapsulation if it can resemble Einstein’s exclamation that problems of/in the world cannot be effectively tackled by the intellectual and consciousness envelopes that created them... (Godel's incompleteness theorem as applied to the realm of human psychology in situ)

This is normal and expected. This further breaks down into mind types, re the idea of liberal/lateral vs conservative/linear, but regarding intellectualism and it’s connective tissue, not that of western/American politics in particular.

And so on.

“Most everyone here understands there must be a balance between measurements and listening.”

I agree but then there are folks like OP who just can’t seem to comprehend anything beyond measurements, you know the type…bits are bits, 1’s and 0’s, etc. etc. It’s like having a conversation with a bot 😂

I was casually involved in the (given local moment of) creation of the fundamentals of AI training via English language structure, regarding the creation of software that could pass the turing test.

I was working with a mathematician/coder who ended up being hired as a mathematician by the given local world class university.

We were trying to create an effective administration program for websites that could integrate with the public, effectively. I had to help him understand how English language rules were also a form of variable complex code, and as such, were a core part of the coming interaction of software and humans. We were also live, in that coding, the feedback was instantaneous and daily. This was the early 1990’s.

As we move to having work forces being replaced by robotic automaton, the same is happening in the world of internet interactions. Eg, this bot design we were working on was also being picked up by things like the military, who had committed to ruling the airwaves, as it were, as their hundred year mission..

To be in command of the internet via bots, groups of bots, under the command of a given set of singular military personnel members (working in large groups, together). Enter Edward Snowden, et al.

That one person could command hundreds of bots (single bot core, multiple facades as ’persons’), maybe 2-5-10 connected to a given website, and to do spot problem work in the bot interactions with the public.

As the given AI becomes better, and better, the human aspect of correction or training, becomes less and less necessary and the programs become more independent and move toward being more universal in application. Not human, but ultimately predictable software, with controllable coloration and patterns. then we are dealing with the interpretation of human psychology in such areas. as the two meet and steadily integrate to high levels, we find that the give and take between the two begin to dance together and the mating is almost complete.

This is now fairly ubiquitous in some global circles of attempts in influence.

Twitter and Facebook spaces and other similars, like tiktok, can be of this nature.

This is the world we live in now, so don’t get caught up in on line interactions in those big swinging and swaying spaces. Try to stick to real world interactions for forming one’s opinions and ideas on ideals.