Message Boards

Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

clearsignal, modified 11 Months ago.

Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

Padawan Posts: 35 Join Date: 3/2/18 Recent Posts

There’re two truisms to Genelec monitors: no SQ difference between analog and digital input; going digital avoids double conversation.

 

Still, I can’t wrap my head around why analog and digital result in the same sound quality.

Would streaming off my computer (USB -> SPDIF -> Genelec) sound just the same as when outputting from a fancy DAC with a high-end dual DAC chip? My logic says the high-end DAC would deliver a better signal. But being wrong is quite common....

 

Can anyone enlighten me? I really can’t square my logic with Genelec’s proclamations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

daiyama, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

Padawan Posts: 68 Join Date: 1/4/16 Recent Posts

It is all about what is audible and what is not audible.

Clearly both connections will end up in differences because of the different pathways, but is it audible?

That is were the discussions start. Some will claim they can hear the difference some may say it is not audible.

If you are performing scientific correct blind A/B one would be astonished what is not possible to. A lot of people will not hear differences between 320kbit MP3 and and 44.1kHz/16bit Flacs.

DACs are on such high levels nowadays and I am pretty sure the DAC used in the Genelec speakers are of very high quality so what should a highend DAC may make better? I belief it is more psychological need that there must be something better out there than real differences. ;-)

lukester, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

Jedi Knight Posts: 128 Join Date: 4/22/10 Recent Posts

you logic is off

 

highend DA-> analog cable -> midrange ADA inside speaker

 

... this makes no sense

 

digital cable -> midrange DA inside speaker

 

... less is more

 

that being said, i a/b ed my digital 8351 with a 4000€ DA.

the very expensive DA came out slightly on top. that got me scared because illogical and i sold the DA.

clearsignal, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

Padawan Posts: 35 Join Date: 3/2/18 Recent Posts
lukester:

you logic is off

 

highend DA-> analog cable -> midrange ADA inside speaker

 

... this makes no sense

 

digital cable -> midrange DA inside speaker

 

... less is more

 

that being said, i a/b ed my digital 8351 with a 4000€ DA.

the very expensive DA came out slightly on top. that got me scared because illogical and i sold the DA.


I don't know if my logic is off, but in this case "less isn't necessarily more" as you former 4,000 euro dac attests. 
 
Inevitably, whatever signal enteres the speaker will be handled by Genelec DAC. Whether that sounds turns out more pleasant if the origina signal is digital or analog is the question. The digital signal will adhere to the original recording; the analog is more likely to be manipulated. As daiyama pointed out, at that stage, the listening experience becomessubjective. Appeantly, you had a preference to your old dad...  nothing illogical about it. 
 
In terms of the Genelec DAC, I'm not sure on what grounds you refer to it as 'midrange'. Dac chipsets are  relatively inexpensive, made by a handful of companies: AKD, ESS and Burr-Brown, to drop some names. They all have top notch offerings and less so. I don't see any convincing reason for Genelec to save a few dollars and get a less than staller chip when so much hangs on the line for them. 
 
lukester, modified 11 Months ago.

RE: Can’t Wrap my Head around AES/Analog

Jedi Knight Posts: 128 Join Date: 4/22/10 Recent Posts

I called the genelec DACs midrange because they're obviously not 1000 a piece, otherwise the speakers would be more expensive.

but i have full confidence in genelec's engineering to provide a well balanced package of components.

 

that my tests with high end DA favoured that DA might not mean much. Also the difference was very, very small.

i see it as an extension of the mastering process, the mastering engineer could have added a bit more flavour with that machine too.

 

we all could extend the mastering chain right into our living rooms, but it's not an effective use of ressources.

adding two subs or going from like 8351 to 1237 gets you a clearly better result without discussion. takes seconds to hear the difference and it's not "very very small".

let's not deal in esoterics as long as there's obvious stuff left?