It is possible to know how an equipment sounds like if you have enough data

...this is what I believe. I'm a supporter of Laplace's demon,

But without sufficient data one can only make intelligent guesses.

And here I stand to test myself. My hypothesis, my knowledge, my experience, my intellect.

I am going to guess the difference in sound signature between the Matrix mini-i and Dr. DAC2 DX before a reviewer posts comparison.

The mini-i sounds "thinner"/wider/airier/smoother/"sandier" but lacking details (though the "thinner"/wider/airier sound may be mistaken for so) and attack (now this cannot be compensated for by a wider sound) and slightly laid-back/veiled at the highs, the Dr. DAC2 DX's highs are sharp with good attack but smeared; the mini-i's highs are also smeared but more bearable because its highs are less prominent on the whole.

For the bass, mini-i hits lower and with more control but may be less in quantity, Dr. DAC2 DX may have more but definitely boomier either way. As for the midrange, mini-i sounds wider as with the highs but may feel lean, Dr. DAC2 DX will be fuller. mini-i would handle bass instruments better.

Overall, mini-i gives a smoother, warmer, wider sound while Dr. DAC2 DX gives a more impactful one that is balanced and also more analytical/studio-like.

I would only reveal the reasons if I turn out to be correct - no point spreading wrong information.

Now the interpretation of the outcome - even if I somehow got them all correct due to loose definitions like Nostradamus, this only gives me 50% credibility since I could've guessed correctly by coincidence. If I got it wrong, well that doesn't make me a liar, but this will teach me not to trust myself.

I can only lose. But I dare to test myself. Do you?

Science advances by suspicion and analyzing. Without challenging the known the Sun would still be orbiting the Earth and the Earth would still be flat. So stop following blindly and start questioning your beliefs.