ASR forums and their $75 dongle DAC ideology

Audio Systems
1

So I made the mistake of coming across a review of the Bartok on this forum called “Audiosciencereview” that is pretty much dedicated to “measuring” audio equipment and then being critical (usually the case) of said equipment due to it measuring poorly vs something a lot cheaper. The review of the Bartok was, well, let’s just say, completely focused on the idea that you can get the same audible performance from a DAC at 1/100’s the price… or even less.

It seems with DAC’s they take a different angle than with speakers or example… they admit that some DAC’s measure better than others, but stand by the “science” that beyond a certain threshold , digital processing is a mature science and all you need (and can hear with your human ear) can be handled by a $75 USB dongle DAC…

Here is just one of their threads where I tried to weigh in with some reason but found myself quickly surrounded by the local villagers with their pitch forks and torches…

2 Likes
2

You can already see the type of confusion that can affect that type of person. In this case it is a failure to distinguish between DAC ( the digital processor) and DAC ( the component with an analogue output stage). Though admittedly a contributor does raise this issue later in the thread. Unfortunately so many contributors to that forum appear to suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

5 Likes
3

:rofl: I feel for you. Been there, done that. As Pete notes . . … In fairness, I think some of their work contributes to better understanding, but they are themselves blinded and biased by their own prejudice, especially the administrator. Still, when you’ve got “skewer candidates” like Audio Bacon, unarmed personnel abound in that battle of wits.

On the plus side, you will know precisely how long the pitchforks are and the exact candlepower of the torches. :wink:

3 Likes
4

Yeah … we’re at the point now where one of them is trying to convince me that dCS builds their stuff in the UK, but uses Chinese chips and electronics … something I know to be untrue.

5

“Dunning-Kruger effect” ——LOVE IT!

2 Likes
6

:rofl: To an extreme degree.

3 Likes
7

Reading on ASR is like watching TV show Emmerdale you can just skip a hundred episodes (pages) and you have not missed anything the first page have the same content as page 99.

4 Likes
8

There is only one way to participate on ASR. You have to stick to their rules, the first one being level matched blind test. If you want to discuss something else, I recommend you go elsewhere.
I participated in a discussion that started out with the usual dismissive comments from ASR diehards, but then actually evolved into something more interesting and even helpful. The diehards simply left the discussion at some point. Some of the people who hang out there seem quite knowledgeable.
Just don’t try to discuss anything that is not numbers based. Statistics and Setup of a level matched blind test usually go down well. Questioning their core beliefs does not go down well. I asked whether everyone was sure that the measurement parameters of the ASR test suite were enough to fully represent the hearing experience. Some people did not appreciate that at all.
It would actually be interesting to take them up on their challenge for a level matched blind test of their favorites (i.e. Topping D90) against some dCS stuff. I am quite sure I could tell them apart easily. But flying across to the US just for that is a bit wild.

1 Like
9

This is my take on things… if one product sounds better than another product but the test results say otherwise then it’s simply a case of not measuring the relevant parameters that can explain this contradition. In the world of hifi/audio it’s you’re own ears that are the key measuring device and what a set of graphs or table of figures say is largely irrelevant.

10

they seem prepared to accept that dCS measures well, based on the measurements that stereophile published, but that they’re saying is pretty much any reasonably well engineered DAC, even the $100 ones, made in China, are going to be good enough for what the human ear can detect…

Hard to make an argument with them from a purely scientific perceptive, but I do value the fact that my DAC isn’t made in a sweat shop… that’s for sure.

11

Amir and his crowd are a kind of sonic nazis…never understand why he posts this stuff. Made a pile of money in the early days of Microsoft so is reasonablly well funded but never understand his animus.

4 Likes
12

everything at ASR is a self fulfilling prophecy. All his reviews (at least digital) begin with what he intends to find, then he devises a test to find it, then he finds it, then his minions pile on and agree that everything he intended to find is what he found and therefore it is incontrovertible that all digital equipment measures the same therefore it all sounds the same… very simple

If he does hear a difference it is expectation bias so can be dismissed. If there is a difference in a measurement it is deemed to be below the threshold of human hearing so can be ignored.

If you question any of his processes you are viciously attacked by the aforementioned minions. For example, he loves to do a spectrum analysis at a fixed frequency and amplitude as a way to show 2 DACs measure identically, therefore they sound the same. If you point out that music consists of constantly changing frequencies at constantly changing amplitudes and therefore his test does not replicate how the DAC is used they really have no adequate response but you are viciously attacked anyway.

One of their favorite positions is… if you can’t prove that there is a difference, meaning show me a measurement that proves there is a difference, then it is impossible for a difference to exist. If you do happen to show me a difference in how they measure, then prove to me that this difference is audible, They feel that everything about how we hear is completely understood so unless you can provide them measurements to prove otherwise, there is no difference. If you point out we can’t completely explain or measure any of the other senses (touch or smell or taste or sight) so how can we definitively measure how we hear, that really sets them off.

Either join the cult or just don’t go there… their mind is made up. It is entertaining for a while but gets old very quickly.

2 Likes
13

For me, it’s still entertaining. I find this mindset intellectually challenging. It makes me think. Just as does Archimago, who is far more reasonable and open-minded, though still an objectivist at heart.

1 Like
14

I think ASR does provide a valuable service testing snake oil devices, ethergen switch anybody?

But I do find irony in the claim DAC tech has matured to the point that the improved measurements are inaudible, that two well measuring devices say an Apple dongle and Bartok are audibly indistinguishable, as it would then seem to negate the purpose of ASR’s existence.

Not clear why a measurement site that claims the measurements of competently engineered equipment are irrelevant as they are not audible would then continue to measure and compare them?

I also frankly find this philosophy incredibly disrespectful, essentially dismissing the brilliance and hard work audio engineers like those of the dcs team among many, many others pour in to evolving the technology behind reproducing recorded sound. ASR tries to wear the badge of scientifically minded engineer while simultaneously calling the work of actual audio engineers irrelevant. If their world view wins out the Apple dongle will end up being the only choice we have as products like the Vivaldi are expensive to develop and iterate. If they truly are audibly on par with the dongle those expenses become impossible to justify.

They seem to be claiming the only gains one can expect in the Vivaldi would be a shiny, larger box - and in the same breath they claim to be heroes of engineering.

The biggest issue I have with ASR is they seem to covet the blind a/b test but fail to understand how to properly run one. You should read their thread with goldenone who took them up on their bet that he could distinguish the poor sound of one of their coveted measured devices.

I will save you the time here, over the course of hundreds of fumbling comments trying to figure out how to run the blind test Amir backed out claiming it was because goldenone had insulted him on a personnal level (seems fishy as that would seem to fan the desire to prove him wrong not run away from the experiment).

The major flaw with their bets against hearing a difference though is that their demand is you take the component out of the chain and room the difference was heard and be willing to travel to Seattle and place it in a chain of their choosing. That is not a blind a/b test by any stretch of the imagination its a suckers bet.

Any experiment requires a controlled environment, that is basic science and engineering, testing something outside the conditions and environment an observation was made to validate the observation indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of how science and engineering works. Scientific results are validated by an independent party who tries to reproduce them using EXACTLY the same procedures and conditions. Science 101 folks.

For a bit of hyperbole — we observe the moon orbiting the earth, they want you to prove it not knowing if they will decide to place the moon next to the sun or an asteroid and on top of that, expecting you to demonstrate it will orbit as it did near the earth 9 out of 10 times!

Their methodology turns a well designed, controlled experiment in to a crapshoot at best and I do not know about you but I would not bet $1000 I could get lucky 9/10 times in a crapshoot.

Amir has an engineering background as do many of the ASR folks, so they know their blind a/b challenge is utter nonsense but the win for them is it does allow them to boldly stake $10k against your $1k as if that somehow proves their point.

I think if they were to conduct a proper blind a/b test, swapping equipment in the chain and room the observation was made I am sure anyone with a pair of functioning ears would be lining up to collect their $10k bounty.

Hats off to goldenone for calling their bluff and being ballsy enough to take them up on their flawed, blind a/b test. It was satisfying and certainly speaks volumes that even with a test designed for them to win they ended up making excuses to not go through with it.

Again, despite all this I am a huge fan and lurker on ASR, as I will remain as I am there for the measurements and have no interest in engaging w the echo chamber. Despite chuckling at their rhetoric Amir’s measurements have saved me a ton of money, any gear they found could not demonstrate improved measurements I only tested if I could easily return it.

2 Likes
15

I have also been a lurker on ASR for many years and I find it interesting as a source of ideas. I once posted in a thread about a three weekend shootout we did with several DACs, which led to my purchase of a Rossini and Clock.
The reactions were interesting. The very dismissive “you don’t know what you are talking about” the OP mentioned, but also some truly helpful comments from knowledgeable and helpful people that led to a significant improvement in my friend’s system (removing a passive attenuator).
I have had several according to ASR “completely transparent” cheap chinese / eastern european DACs over the years (Aune S16, Octo, SMSL m500 Mk3). I find them very neutral in the bad sense of the word. Nothing wrong but also nothing to write home about. Like yoghurt without any sugar at all. Some people probably like that, I prefer my yoghurt with a bit of sugar.
In my view there is more to a music system’s ability to reproduce sound in a pleasing way than just stellar steady state measurements (not that dCS products would fail the ASR measurement criteria).

16

One should not add sugar to yogurt. Properly made yogurt tastes great without sugar. :wink:

Anyway, I also find ASR “informative,” and Amir almost always makes me think, which I find to be a good thing. Like everything else in audio, it’s only a matter of keeping sufficient grains of salt at hand.

4 Likes
17

The sugar level needs to be less than -125db in order for the yoghurt to be transparent …
:clinking_glasses:

1 Like
18

Heh, but sugar in the champagne makes sense.