opaqueice;229907 Wrote: > Could you describe the DBT you mentioned earlier in which you heard the > difference between S/PDIF and AES/EBU? What was the source, and what > was the DAC? How well did you score?
Can't possibly enumerate all the systems in which I was shown differences between connections and/or cables in sighted comparisons (note that "difference" with me does not automatically imply that it's worthwhile, let alone from a quality-price-ratio perspective). But *feel free to have a good laugh* at me trying to remember a handful key moments that either made me reconsider my scepticism/prejudice, ordering them (I hope correctly) historically: 1) Perhaps the first single blind listening "forums" (basically an open afternoon announced in a flyer) dedicated to "digital connection" (as they called it back then) I remember attending was thanks to an audio dealer I remember fondly for organising events like it once a month in the early to late nineties, but who at some point turned his attention completely to car audio (doing so much better there financially). A comparison of AT&T optical twice (one short, the other run through a huge coil the size of a truck wheel, i.e. several hundred feet worth of optical fibre) versus S/PDIF coaxial twice (three cables, antenna plus two a so-called audiophile ones by a well-known cable maufacturer whose products I never learnt to appreciate) using a Krell MD-10 transport and Krell X-64 something (help, can't recall model) converter. It was revealing insofar as one could tell which was which 100% of the time with different kinds of music, but I remember being perplexed that the point of the whole thing should have been to prove the superiority of the AT&T connection - I basically found something not to like with every single option. But indeed, that extra long AT&T sounded almost identical if reliably a fraction duller/less dynamic. Apart from the fact that the 75? antenna cable coax, which barely to fit into the heavy duty WBT RCAs of that era, sounded noticeably worse, I couldn't pick a winner (others their favourites), and ended up leaving with mixed feelings after a few hours (I believe I'm patient - some say stubborn). 2) One of the first times I could compare AES/EBU blind was at a forum I attended in the mid-nineties as part of the Swiss HighEnd exhibition, when Micheal Elliott (introducing his Counterpoint DA-10/DA-10 combo) did a double blind comparison plugging in several DAC chip boards (AD 1862, Crystal 4328, BB PCM69AP and the then much talked-about Ultra Analog UA20) and preceeded to confuse everyone adding a comparison of BNC direct versus BNC isolated versus AES/EBU cabling in a second round. We were asked to hand in a score card and discuss our impression before he told us what he'd done (which included well-placed and acted-out red herrings such as plugging the same DAC back in etc.). It was relatively easy to tell apart and re-group what one had heard in the first round, and chaotic once he started jumbling together a few DAC and cabling options (I noticed a number of people gave up filling in their score cards after the first round). The importer had offered some audiophile CD to win, and in my youthfully competitive I tried on, still got all the DAC board pluggings right, but got confused and lost track of cabling switches, the situation making me feel as if I were back in highschool taking an exam). Was really miffed that several guys got 100% right. Did I mention I hate loosing? ;^) I came away thinking I would have preferred a virtual combination of the virtues of his AD and UA boards, and that contrarily to what Elliott tried to prove, the AES/EBU connection sounded more realistic than his preferred isolated BNC (referring back to the consistent results in the first round). In the aftermath discussion, people referred to one of the S/PDIF (the one tagged "direct", if I remember correctly) as "punchier", "more colourful" etc. (the other, if memory serves right, "isolated" BNC was only being referred to in "better is the enemy of good" type sentences) - it was one of those times that I realised that the average audiophile may not literally want "high fidelity". The AES/EBU, albeit in hindsight perhaps not even as well implemented as it could/should have been, simply added less coloration in the midrange. It may have been on that day that I first started wondering if there is a correlation between a wider band energy spread (sound pressure across the spectrum, versus less at the upper and lower end, and quasi-analogue overemphasis in the middle that some like to call "warmth") and faster onset and settling. Some referred the S/PDIF's spatial forwardness, and indeed, I also found the spatial presentation of the AES/EBU connection noticeably wider and deeper, of the S/PDIF narrower and more forward (and secretly agreed with one person who remarked that the soundstage seemed to extend behind the speaker with AES/EBU, finding the comparative coplanarity with the speakers in S/PDIF mode "clustered"). In all this, I'll admit the concept of "spatiality" (versus spatiousness) is highly debatable in stereo, although I'll go with legendary conductor Ernest Ansermet in preferring what he called the "imagined" (not imaginary) spatiality of stereo to none (which is what mono offered to him) - one might wonder if we should consider him lucky he didn't live to hear modern surround sound ;^) 3) Another S/PDIF BNC (plus RCA using adaptors, simply read on) versus AES/EBU single blind comparison at the same show but a year or two later, this time by the importer of the Camtech transport/DAC combo, proved two things: firstly, to plug on a BNC-to-RCA adapter on the sockets on each side, so the mickey could be taken out of some competitor's ever-so-costly RCA cable came across as infantile and was, sonically speaking, a waste of people's time; secondly, contrarily to what the man tried to make everyone believe, the AES/EBU connection did not just sound better, the reason it could be reliably singled out consistently again was the same as mentioned above (cf. 2). But then, I knew what to listen for (so much for "single blind" comparison). 4) The lengthiest or most extensive double blind test apart from ones in my own "music chamber" was with someone who owns a Madrigal No. 36/No. 37 combo, comparing S/PDIF RCA (two cables, one from another brand than the other three) versus BNC versus AES/EBU, and who invited me over curious if I'd confirm his own sighted findings. Interestingly the odd man out RCA cable stuck out more than the "same brand" RCA cable, which was close enough to the BNC version I continually put down a question mark behind my numbers (got it wrong three times out of twenty the first three times, until I knew what to listen for - again, one think of that happening as statistically suspect). No use explaining why the AES/EBU connection could be identified reliably (cf. 2 and 3 above). Guess which type of connection the host uses... 5) Three sessions with a friend doing blind comparisons of AES/EBU versus S/PDIF RCA, each time using a two different out of three transports (Sonic Frontiers SFT-1, C.E.C TL-51 something and Madrigal Proceed PDT something, i.e. Mk2 or 3, don't remember), into a dCS Purcell/Delius combo. 100% consistency for both of us, never a doubt which connection (nor even which transport) we liked best. My friend said he really expected the differences to be less demonstrable, and ended up quipping about our "misspent effort and youth". 6) Have since then "forced" to listen (double blind!) a number of audiophiles as well as unsuspecting people who merely wanted to listen to a song or two on my stereo at home, to a comparison of same brand AES/EBU versus S/PDIF coaxial cabling using WBT Nextgen plugs (curiosity killed the cat). Success rate with single, double blind plus sighted test victims so far: 100% pro AES/EBU if they paid any attention at all, no difference if the didn't (want to) listen to the sound quality (or were simply overwhelmed by it compared to their iPod), zero in favour of the (great-sounding!) S/PDIF mode. Rather one-sided given the fact that the Nextgen are really an improvement over what other RCA plugs I've tried/used over the years. Haven't yet had an opportunity to compare a Nextgen-terminated cable to a BNC-terminated one, though, but back when I still had one of those, no one preferred it to the AES/EBU connection. To think that none of these comparisons take long-term effects (obviously, I could only do that sighted for myself) into account. Guess which in my experience is at once more relaxing and engaging to listen to, for hours, and hours, and hours... :-) Oh, and ere I forget, let me remind us all, myself in particular, of the obvious: what does all of the above prove? Nothing! Greetings from Switzerland, David. -- acousticsguru ------------------------------------------------------------------------ acousticsguru's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13298 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38637 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
