PT-100: Comparing digital coax input to analog inputs

[dsonyay]

I received my PT-100 and have it running to the Kenwood Basic M2A amp and the Klipsch speakers.   

I wasn't sure how to connect my CD-100 (cd player),  so I rigged it with both digital coax and RCA analog to compare back and forth while a CD was playing (Steely Dan's Two Against Nature)

Cables used:  Monster Cable RCA (3ft) for analog and Emotiva X DRCA (0.5m) as the digital coax connect.

I know the CD100 and PT100 use different DACs .. PT100 is supposed to be the better of the two, so I thought it would be interesting to compare. 

After getting the CD started, I listened to Coax input a few moments, then would quickly switch to CD input on PT100.

I'm 56 and my ears are not as capable as a young kid, but I swear there is a sonic difference and to me the analog inputs going into the PT100 sounded better... And maybe not better.. Just different.

Eveytime I'd switch fron Coax to CD the volume seemed a tad louder; There seemed to be a "more live" or more of a "stereo seperation"- A more "open" sound.

Also, the bass was a bit different.. Seemed through CD it had a little more of a boomier sound, while through Coax , it was a bit flatter.

Excuse my choice of words to decribeall this.. It's a bit tough describe accurately.

I thought about swapping the cables around, but then I'd have to route the digital feed through regular RCA audio cables, so that may not be a good experiment.

Anyway, the sound between the 2 is very very close regardless. Both sounded very good, and it's possible someone else may have the opposite opinion if they're here with me.

Wanted to add.. I also used headphones (AKG M220 Pro) and the results were different.. I could not really hear a difference.. If anything, I would say digital might have sounded better.. But with these headphones, it was just too close to the same sound.

[Gary Cook]

As you noted the volume is different and just that alone makes comparisons difficult. Volume matching is the holy grail in AB testing, it absolutely has to be exactly the same to make any comparison meaningful.

Cheers
Gary

[dsonyay]

I agree.. The sound is really so close it's just very hard. And my ears have lost of high freq over the years.

But I could easily detect a difference in bass. That and a detectable stereo difference.

But yeah.. This was very subjective.

[garbulky]

I disagree the volume on it has to be the same to be meaningful. I think it's a detriment because of masking. I think there is too much information that is exactly the same for you to pick out small differences. I think of it like if there is a painting with 50 different shades of blue on it. Then you change 5 shades very subtly. Now this shade is absolutely visible to the human eye. But put the two exactly side by side under the same light, you probably won't be able to tell. Too much information is exactly the same. However it is definitely visible.

I prefer to just listen to it over time and make my impressions over which one I think sounds better or which one I'd rather use more. Because that's exactly how I would normally listen.
But I'm probably in the minority on that subject

[novisnick]

Apr 27, 2018 15:49:43 GMT -5 Gary Cook said:

As you noted the volume is different and just that alone makes comparisons difficult. Volume matching is the holy grail in AB testing, it absolutely has to be exactly the same to make any comparison meaningful.

Cheers
Gary

Most definitely, a SPL meter should be used to match volumes.

[pallpoul]

May 2, 2018 11:28:47 GMT -5 garbulky said:

I disagree the volume on it has to be the same to be meaningful. I think it's a detriment because of masking. I think there is too much information that is exactly the same for you to pick out small differences. I think of it like if there is a painting with 50 different shades of blue on it. Then you change 5 shades very subtly. Now this shade is absolutely visible to the human eye. But put the two exactly side by side under the same light, you probably won't be able to tell. Too much information is exactly the same. However it is definitely visible.

I prefer to just listen to it over time and make my impressions over which one I think sounds better or which one I'd rather use more. Because that's exactly how I would normally listen.
But I'm probably in the minority on that subject

A bit off topic here, but does the analog input on the pt-100 gets any processing ?

[garbulky]

May 2, 2018 13:31:37 GMT -5 pallpoul said:

May 2, 2018 11:28:47 GMT -5 garbulky said:

I disagree the volume on it has to be the same to be meaningful. I think it's a detriment because of masking. I think there is too much information that is exactly the same for you to pick out small differences. I think of it like if there is a painting with 50 different shades of blue on it. Then you change 5 shades very subtly. Now this shade is absolutely visible to the human eye. But put the two exactly side by side under the same light, you probably won't be able to tell. Too much information is exactly the same. However it is definitely visible.

I prefer to just listen to it over time and make my impressions over which one I think sounds better or which one I'd rather use more. Because that's exactly how I would normally listen.
But I'm probably in the minority on that subject

A bit off topic here, but does the analog input on the pt-100 gets any processing ?

Edit: hard to say as I don't know what type of volume control it uses. But I think it stays analog.

[Gary Cook]

May 2, 2018 11:28:47 GMT -5 garbulky said:

I disagree the volume on it has to be the same to be meaningful. I think it's a detriment because of masking. I think there is too much information that is exactly the same for you to pick out small differences. I think of it like if there is a painting with 50 different shades of blue on it. Then you change 5 shades very subtly. Now this shade is absolutely visible to the human eye. But put the two exactly side by side under the same light, you probably won't be able to tell. Too much information is exactly the same. However it is definitely visible.

I prefer to just listen to it over time and make my impressions over which one I think sounds better or which one I'd rather use more. Because that's exactly how I would normally listen.
But I'm probably in the minority on that subject

That methodology works just fine and gives a reasonable comparison, but it takes time, something that is not always available. With a limited amount of time to make a decision on this piece of gear or that piece of gear removing the variables is essential.


Cheers
Gary