Submitted by disco_g t3_10mv5qy in headphones
D00M98 t1_j65q5d4 wrote
I agree with you. There are so many misconception and just flat out wrong info, floating around on this forum.
Audiosciencereview measured Apple dongle and found that it has good SNR and THD. SNR and THD can be measured. But there are other even more critical factors, like how the device sounds.
People claim DAC and Amp are (or should be) transparent. So that every DAC and Amp should sound the same. Apple dongle is as good as any other DAC/Amp.
Look, Apple dongle is $9. If someone needs a dongle for their phone, just get it. But don't BS that this dongle is a great replacement for $100 entry level desktop DAC/Amp.
Every DAC and Amp I have tried sound different. Most are so close that I cannot say which is better or worse, just different. Apple dongle is no comparison vs >$30 dongles and also desktop DAC/Amp. Thin, lacks dynamics, less punchy, muted treble, less open/airy. And it lacks power. It is measured to have 31 mW at 32 ohms and 3.6 mW at 300 ohm. Not sufficient for some headphones, like Hifiman's Sundara. Not enough volume even at 100% volume; and sound is compressed (because it is clipping).
disco_g OP t1_j65sbr8 wrote
Every single aspect of how an audio device sounds can be measured, it's just that not all those aspects are measured or published. They are instead oversimplified into marketing statistics that are easier to understand (and hide inconsistencies).
For example, I was using a very nice sounding audio recorder (Sound Devices MixPre 10II) to measure the performance of a mic preamp I had built, using a loopback with REW. It showed unexpected distortion in the sub bass. I measured again with the mic pre out of the loop and the rise in distortion was still there. I sent my graphs to Sound Devices asking if my recorder was broken, but they confirmed my results. The device was in spec (and sounds "good"), but it has significantly more distortion in the sub bass than most modern audio interfaces. So while it has excellent THD spec, that is not telling the whole story.
hyde0000 t1_j65zlg9 wrote
Yeah I don't know that much about dac but say headphone for example. People look at response graphs which shows how much amplitude at this frequency.
So it's like saying Honda driving at 40 miles/hour measures the same as Porsche driving at 40 miles/hour, and the same when both car are driving at 60 miles/hour. Therefore Honda and Porsche performs the same lol.
And as you said the response graph people read are the oversimplified version of a very complex matter that needs much more other measurements to compare. Like how fast does it react to change in load, how well does it handle complex signals.... Etc.
But yeah I'd imagine dac is probably similar in that regard.
blorg t1_j67nmwq wrote
I don't think many people are saying the Apple dongle is all you need for hard to drive planars. You do need something that has enough power. But IEMs need nowhere near as much power as a low sensitivity over-ear planar and 31mW @32Ω is actually plenty for almost any IEM.
Leach_ t1_j66cg4y wrote
You mean the audiosciencereview that reviews multiple 100$ cables?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments