Qudelix and humans are not capable of differentiating any resolutions above 16 bit 44.1khz. No human. Ever. On any gear. You can’t even hear half of 44.1khz. High res has no purpose whatsoever for playback.
- 0 Posts
- 46 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
Cake day: October 23rd, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
1·10 months agoWhy are you watching any of the idiot YouTube affiliate marketing audio scumbags in the first place? Are you having trouble interpreting measurements, hearing headphones for yourself or developing your own opinions on them?
You can’t even hear half of 44.1khz unless you’re not human. Differentiating bit rates above 16 require lab conditions, being a professional trained listener and being blasted with severe hearing damage levels of audio in 1-2 second snippets - That gets better than a coin flip. Sometimes. There is no exception to this. None. You do not hear anything different because it’s impossible. The human ear has limitations regarding frequencies and resolutions and these would be within those limitations.
I think it’s definitely worth it for just about anyone who’s really into audio to go to a show or a shop and hear one or a few even if there’s no chance in hell they’ll ever own one. It gives you a point of reference for what elite metrics are and you can evaluate the gear you can afford better, and you may be surprised how close you can get in some aspects with much cheaper gear.
Just ask people who post the truther stuff to explain to you how it does it. That’s not trolling, it’s asking for information so you can be as informed as they are. I’m like 0/30 in anyone even trying, they usually just get mad and throw a tantrum and ask what gear you own and tell you you’d understand if you heard the stuff they had.
I mean, I probably went through the totality of their life to date gear in like a average thirty day demo rotation at some point but it’s a lot more fun to pretend I’m new and ask questions until they run out of answers.
Can you explain how? I’m new and I want to learn.
Unless you need more volume with headroom or there’s noise in the signal from an inadequate existing DAC (there isn’t) it won’t make a difference. They’re designed to be audibly transparent, just about every modern amp or DAC is so if they did do anything to the sound, it would be a flaw more than any sort of improvement.
No human on earth can differentiate anything over 16 bit 44.1khz regardless so it doesn’t really matter. There is absolutely no benefit whatsoever for high res. None.
High Res vs 16 bit 44khz - Summarized Citations & Data
Frequency Range of Human Hearing
Yes.
YES.
No human on earth can differentiate anything above 16 bit 44.1khz outside of tiny samples being blasted at brain damage levels in a lab, we can’t even hear half of that as adults so you’re not missing anything in terms of better quality going with CDs. High res has absolutely zero value for playback. No, the mastering isn’t better at any higher resolutions than non-high res files, that’s also been run into the ground. Of all the assorted audio snake oil debates out there, that one is easily the most open and shut case. There’s not even fringe copes for it, you can’t negotiate biology and change how sound works.
If SACD was cheaper and Apple Music didn’t have mountains of new spatial audio, I’d probably own all of them as I really enjoy music mixed for surround sound and Atmos, I have a 5.2.4 system and it’s really been a fun genre to explore. I have some SACDs and some files and like them a lot.
I primarily stream but the ease of it and instant gratification involved has me listening to a lot fewer songs, a lot fewer songs in totality, no full albums and I’m not exploring albums in their entirety because I have whatever I want in the moment with a click. I hate it. I’ll likely be doing CDs in the near future to combat this, requiring that I get up and load new CDs and relying on my laziness to spend more time with a particular album or artist.
The other adventure which isn’t related to media meant to expand my listening back to where it should be is going on a decade by decade by decade trip through eras of music and spending an entire month just listening to songs from those ten years going waaaaaay back. Streaming music giveth and taketh away, I think using any physical media can be a good way to slow it down and appreciate the experience a little more if it’s become a detractor.
The dongle has a SINAD of 99 and it’s other measurements add up to be as transparent and clean as any modern DAC, it’s in the upper half of DACs on earth. They’re all designed to be transparent and flat, they are universally flat and clean have been for like 30 years, the problem of “the perfect DAC” in terms of its intended purpose has been solved for $8 or less than $100 if you want something more luxurious or with other features. a lot of what a person thinks they hear (and yes, we are all susceptible to this, I am, the most “golden ear” on earth is as well) is very, very minor differences that don’t equate to “better” amplified by some confirmation bias or / or placebo. It’s okay to have this, it means a person is human and you don’t have to worry about being a KGB cyborg sleeper cell.
There won’t be noise from an Apple dongle because that’s not really possible, at least not in terms of the digital to analog conversion, there could be some other reasons for noise. The dongle is like 60-70 SINAD clicks above the closest DAC thats even borderline approaching levels where it wouldn’t be transparent and clean conversion. You can’t make something that’s audibly transparent more transparent, it’s just transparent or it isn’t transparent and there’s no signal or source the dongle won’t make transparent. You can reliably use it as the control and benchmark for clear conversion of other devices from that. You may have some small differences DAC to DAC but these are going to be quirks or flaws in the DAC, they do have sort of “a sound” in a lot of use cases but it’s more dependent on the chain in totality than it is just the DAC.
I’d consider looking at your EQ stuff before I’d attribute noise or distortion or deficiencies to the DAC, if you haven’t already I’d evaluate them without EQ on and then see if the EQ causes or worsens any differences you don’t like. It’s incredibly rare for a motherboard to have a “better” DAC but if it wasn’t an afterthought in design they’ve been putting more of an emphasis on them.
We’ll try to get one iconic rep from different genres:
Denon AH-9200
Sennheiser HD600
Hifiman HE1000 V2
Koss Porta Pros
Don’t even try me on the Porta Pros. If you’re still relevant after 40 years, you belong on the mountain.
Well, at least it’s the holidays so it’s more reasonable for adults to insist that Santa Claus is real.
The 6XX at its price (I’d throw the 600 in as well) and Sundara at any of its prices just wipes the floor with everything else in Mid-Fi as well as a lot of headphones higher up the ladder.
There’s some other notables like the Audio Technica ATH-R70x which is just a warmer 600 and the Shure headphones being textbook technical examples of their respective types, but outside of that you can skip everything else up through maybe the Aurorus Borealis, Focal Clear and not miss much. I have yet to hear a Hifiman headphone outright better than Sundaras minus the Susvara I haven’t heard though the Edition XV2 was close. I like the X2HR when it’s $100, the 599 when it’s $80 but for another $100-$200 you can get a headphone a person could easily retire on.
The 6XX at its price (I’d throw the 600 in as well) and Sundara at any of its prices just wipes the floor with everything else in Mid-Fi as well as a lot of headphones higher up the ladder.
There’s some other notables like the Audio Technica ATH-R70x which is just a warmer 600 and the Shure headphones being textbook technical examples of their respective types, but outside of that you can skip everything else up through maybe the Aurorus Borealis, Focal Clear and not miss much. I have yet to hear a Hifiman headphone outright better than Sundaras minus the Susvara I haven’t heard though the Edition XV2 was close. I like the X2HR when it’s $100, the 599 when it’s $80 but for another $100-$200 you can get a headphone a person could easily retire on.
Neutral open back headphones can take some getting used to, it’s a whole different world than the mainstream staples which tend to be V-shaped, sort of overbearing sometimes bloated bass and very forward highs to compensate which can leave the mids mostly inaudible or bled into. These aren’t BAD headphones, they’re just different and the hobby is all about neutrality these days. The downside of V-shapes is that an enormous amount of detail and separation, imaging, etc is in the mids and you don’t get much mids I’m from them.
You might like the 599 SE, it’s inexpensive and has a V shape signature that’s less neutral than the 560. The emphasis is on mid bass and treble in an open back which is sort of unique.
The Philips X2HR is another option to consider, it’s a neutral listening headphone but emphasizes high bass with impeccable mids to give a sense of a stronger low end. Great musical headphone, it’s a popular choice for people transitioning into neural listening because it retains some “fun”.
You can check Crinacle’s rankings here and look for cans noted as a V-shape or U-shape, or ones he complains about it being too bassy because he’s a neutrality and Harman diehard. I wouldn’t pay attention to the actual rankings as much because of this if that sound just isn’t for you at present time. If you strike out on open backs, there are many closed back options that are more dynamic without the primary focus on being flat or on Harman.
I don’t know, those are pretty audiophilish takes that match up with the signatures and characteristics of those headphones. The 599 is a V-shape headphone or “fun” headphone at its core and it’s not necessarily as appealing to neutral listening type hobbyists who gravitate toward open backs. It’s still a really good pair of headphones, there’s a lot to like about them.
If you take the measurements and attributes of the 600 and the 599, go through them comparing one by one, there is not $200+ worth of differences there. There’s some metrics it’s better in. They are both very proficient headphones at what they’re designed to do.
Just another reason why the hivemind opinions on headphones aren’t always going to match up with a person’s listening preferences. It’s a great starting point but trusting then verifying is a good audio practice. There’s no headphone I’d want to listen to less than a Beyerdynamic and plenty of people absolutely love them. I would rather listen to the Sundaras over every other Hifiman headphone excluding the Susvara which I haven’t heard. Having contrary takes is a good thing in audio, it means you’re listening with your ears and not the influence of others which is an easy trap to fall into.
My most listened to headphone at present time is the Fostex TH-600. I know what it measures like. I know it’s a dated type that’s been eclipsed twice over. That’s just what I want to hear right now. I’ll circle back and go through my neutral listening cans when I’m tired of them.
It’s a neutral reference headphone, an open back headphone that’s meant to play the audio with very little change to the sound as it was recorded. This is the trend of open back headphones and what makes up the majority of “audiophile” style headphones these days, they’re primarily judged on their neutral listening chops, how adherent to the Harman curve they are or can be, tuning and technicals. Rather than accentuated bass and highs like a V-shape or a Harman-tuned pair, it aims to represent bass, mids and highs accurately with their intended prevalence. For the purposes of a neutral listening reference audiophile headphone, the HD600 is among if not the best in the world.
The Porta Pros are a warm bass-rolled open supra-aural headphone. They’re doing two very different designs meant to do very different things. They are not known for being neutral and instead have a throwback sound you’re unlikely to find duplicated elsewhere as supra-aurals are few and far between. If you’re looking for something with less highs and more bass, you could look at headphones with a V or U shaped signature, or something balanced that isn’t as dedicated to neutrality.
You can try using EQ to adjust the 600 to taste but it will never have a bassy sound nor will it shy away from the sort of sterile and clinical reference vibe unless you really lean into changing it up and at that point, you’re better off getting a different pair of headphones. The 600 costs what it costs and has its reputation based on what you’re hearing, its ability to do that type of sound. You could likely sell or return them, research headphones that may have a signature and style more to your liking - AKA not an open back neutral listening headphone or a blind buy based on generalized reputation but from its measurements compared against your preferences - And get better results than trying to change the 600 beyond what some reasonable amounts of EQ can do for them.