Yeah... you noticed that too. The MFSL mastered stuff is a little bit too clean and bright. I consider a lot of their stuff "marginal" for that reason. It's good for testing treble issues.

These debates usually go nowhere and only P people off. 

Everyone should feel free to test on their own way and have to admit that I may not do it in a similar way as the 'pirate guru's' but in their defence they always mention HOW they tested and it is up to the reader to decide how valid they think the test is to them.

I feel the gurus here are genuine and have a big heart for audio and what they do, they do out of conviction.
So do hydrogen people and the 'Harolds' in this world.

Heard all the pro and counter arguments of all test methods by now...
IMO: if you like to test as objective as possible you should reach statistical relevance (test long and often enough) and blind (doesn't have to be double blind at all) preferably level matched within 1% (extremely difficult).
One should use revealing transducers and amps that can drive them and use familiar recordings and only change the DUT.

When using crappy recordings and listen out for least 'crappyness' and/or well made recordings and listen out for quality doesn't make much difference.
You NEED to have established a 'reference frame' of how it could/should sound in other words be very familiar with it and having heard it in many different qualities.
It generally helps if you have tested a LOT of equipment with various 'test methods' and then stick to the one(s) you trust most.
That's called experience 


 

For me, there are different ways in...

I might be trying to find a component for my system that "fits" or "does what I need" within the context of my systems.

Or: I may do a comparison to a "known" entity and if that is a piece of gear that enough people have, I may share my impressions and they might be extra data points for others.  (In this case, I probably go through a check-list of aspects that follow my priorities at the time.) 

I'm not going down the "reviewer" path.  I'm going down the path of building home and portable systems for my own use PLUS keeping ears out for values/recommendations to others. With regards to values and recos- here I might consider the "overall quality" of a single piece of gear...not necessarily how it would fit into my systems.

Just don't have enough time for putting everything that I have access to through "all the paces".

Those are also reasons to re-visit gear...from a different perspective of experience as well as system/personal priorities.

For those that do any exhaustive comparisons, thank you.  That's a bunch of effort to me.  Sharing it is another thing and following it up is even more.

I was originally planning on doing just 1 day of solo comparing and then another day with my friend w/ speakers. But after reading this thread, I may just add another day or two of comparisons, but with different methods to find which one works the best for me. I'll be sure to keep you guys posted on what I find!

I wish I had more DACS to compare with. ALl I have is the Titanium HD soundcard, which has a pretty good DAC for a sound card, and the Bifrost Uber. But i have no idea how to compare them. As of right now, I cannot notice too much of a difference between the two, but the Bifrost Uber is only about a month old so maybe it needs some burn-in time to reach it's full potential.