adamdea;656532 Wrote: > I am with you on this Tim. Not having a profession background in > electronics nor an academic qualification, I have had to spend a lot of > time catching up to a basic level. Now there are no incontestable > statements in subjective hifi forumland, but there is I think > mainstream electrical engineering/ information theory opinion on a lot > of this. > I believe that the preponderance of opinion in those circles including > technical professional digital recording manufacturers such as dan > lavry, Daniel Weiss etc would be that a decently designed dac does not > require special cables or special transports with mil- spec aluminium > faceplates [or for that matter fancy mains cables. ] > the reasons for this are not that difficult to understand, because the > sampling rate of the data is not a secret. If you can read the bits, > then you can decode them. There is a problem of matching the data rate > in and out over a period, but a smaller buffer and a gentle tweak of > the output clock rate is all you need. > > Now there are people on this forum who can apparently tell the > difference between digital cables, power cables, and for that matter > the operating system of the server running sbs streaming to a touch > playing via digital out to a dac, perhaps even a dac which was designed > by someone with an engineering qualification not a shed dwelling > enthusiast. > All very confusing. > An awful lot of crap is in circulation about audio and especially > digital audio. > For my own part I had q bit of a surprise recently when I tried out an > m2tech young dac over q couple of weeks. This has had a lot of good > reviews and is very popular with forum dwelling hobbyists. As against > my existing dac, with which it appears to share no components at all, I > reluctantly concluded that I could hear no difference whatsoever. None. > And that was with one on coax and the other on optical. > I think I just realised I may not be an audiophile.
1. Just remove all "information" provided by audiophiles, then the situation becomes much clearer :) 2. Thats the expected outcomme of your experiment both DAC's you tried are probably better than any human's hearing abilities . 3. We need a new name for Audiphiles , who are not members of the stagnant cult many audiophiles subscribe to ? 4. technical improvements beyond human hearing are absolutely worthwhile anyway, it's a long chain from microphone to listener, with 100's of gadgets and gizmos on the chain. Imho they all add up to the total sound eventually, a good example is noise levels. A more scientific approach is to be used, to evaluate these improvements. As been said both placebo effects and cognitive dissonance must be out of the process, I suspect both effects are rampant i diy audio, everyone seems so pleased with what they built in their garage ? maybe not a first, but after "burn in" and tweaking it is , how fortunate . -- Mnyb -------------------------------------------------------------------- Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3 sub. Bedroom/Office: Boom Kitchen: SB3 + powered Fostex PM0.4 Misc use: Radio (with battery) iPad 64gB wifi +3g with iPengHD & SqueezePad ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84742 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
