Version: Firmware 13.1.3 + DOS 2.2.4 Date: 2019-02-12

[David A]

I'll have to explain a bit better how I did this blind test. As I said I didn't know which icon was which so I just switched from one to the other. After doing that for a while it just turns into a habit and I wouldn't even remember what icon I was listening to. That might be sighted because I could see it but from a practical point of view it's totally blind. 

I swapped zones after small parts of songs and after whole songs, playing the same parts/songs over and over. There's only one zone playing at any time so there's only one set of data going over the network at any time. When swapping zones, the volume stays the same so there's no problem there. 

I also chose intricate details in songs. Tiny details that are very hard to hear. People in the background talking ect. I would swap to and fro, listening to only a few seconds of the song and listening whether those minute details were easier or harder to hear. Nothing changed.

The most important to me when I'm listening to differences in sound quality is voices. There was no difference in naturalness of voices either.

Now, this might not prove there's no difference in sound but what it does do is tell me that even if there was a difference, it's not enough to worry about. To be honest, I'm a little disappointed there is no improvement but it is what it is. I know I can get plenty of improvement elsewhere.

As for is my test any good or not; It is pretty accurate. I own a Devialet 200 as well as the Od'A. Even though the room I'm in at the moment doesn't sound great, It was clear as daylight that the D200 isn't as good as the Od'A. There's no contest. And to me, a bloke on average wages, it's worth the extra $25,000. Anyone who knows how to listen would hear it too. That's the kind of difference that I consider a proper sound quality increase / decrease. If I have to concentrate and search for differences, it's either not there at all or it's not worth worrying about.

So the question to ask is this. Is the increase in sound quality you're hearing so large you would pay money for it?

Pim,

Thanks for the description of your process. It's better than I thought based on your screen shot but still problematic because of the delays involved in shifting back to the start of tracks and the like. I did something similar at one stage and heard a difference but mainly I just started playing stuff with RAAT, used it for a few days noticing what I was hearing which was different to what I remembered from before the change, and then swapped back to AIR. I quickly swapped back to RAAT and it's stayed there.

"So the question to ask is this. Is the increase in sound quality you're hearing so large you would pay money for it?"

Wrong question. I'd pay money for it but the question is how much? The simple fact, however, is that I don't have to pay anything for it so I've got nothing invested in whether its better one way or another and neither do you. In the end, however, the thing I keep noticing with RAAT is that my system simply disappears. With AIR I've always got a very slight s sense of the system somewhere in what I'm hearing and the system just seems to disappear for me with RAAT. If I list the differences in the sound that I hear, they're all small, Ive got a preference for RAAT but AIR is very good also and I could live with either. I'd pay for that but I wouldn't pay much. On the other hand when I notice the way the system just seems to disappear with RAAT and how I find it easier to focus on the music and how I simply enjoy it a bit more, the difference isn't so subtle and I wouldn't want to go back to AIR. I'd also pay a bit more for the difference but once again I don't have to, there's no cost involved, and once again I don't have anything invested in the process to make me want to think RAAT is better in order to justify the cost.

And I'll freely admit that while I believe there is a difference I can't think of a way I or anyone else can prove that with a home test. As I said, I think we're all stuck with what we hear and we either accept that or not.

What I do think does lend support to there being a difference is that we've got a lot of people reporting hearing a difference but while most are reporting a preference for RAAT, some are reporting a preference for AIR. It's normal to find differences in preference where there's a difference in sound. If everyone reporting hearing a difference preferred the same thing, that would be suspicious and would cast doubt on things in my view. The fact that we have some people preferring RAAT, sone preferring AIR, all of them reporting a difference in what they hear and  in some cases people with different preferences describing what look like similar differences in what they hear is something I find supportive of their being a difference but note that I said "supportive", it doesn't prove there is a difference.