Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Too bad it is just after christmas..
Julf wrote: > The ultimate vinyl-o-phile record player, for the truly hipster > audiophile. We all know steam gives more solid bass. > > 'steam powered record player' > (http://www.asciimation.co.nz/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=877). While the bass may be solid the highs are very sibilant with lots of hiss. Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104917 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Squeezebox Touch + Toolbox 3 + EDO = XRUN Buffer issue
sckramer wrote: > > I suggest the usb output only if you have an *asynchronous* usb DAC, > else use the coax. This varies of course, you should try each. > Yes, it depends on the DAC. Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/ SB Touch darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103153 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Too bad it is just after christmas..
The ultimate vinyl-o-phile record player, for the truly hipster audiophile. We all know steam gives more solid bass. 'steam powered record player' (http://www.asciimation.co.nz/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=877). "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104917 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] MUSINGS: The Wisdom of Simplicity? Another take on recent Stereophile "As We See It".
arnyk wrote: > It appears that the articles contents were thoroughly misrepresented by > Mr. Atkinson for fun and profit. Gee, what a surprise! To paraphrase Claude Rains (as Captain Louis Renault): I'm shocked to find lying going on in these magazines! Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. & sub Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Energy sub Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0 Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar Garage: SB3-JVC compact system Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104904 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] MUSINGS: The Wisdom of Simplicity? Another take on recent Stereophile "As We See It".
ralphpnj wrote: > Nicely done, Archimago. I can never manage to keep my tone even remotely > civil when discussing anything written in one of the high end audio > magazines. > > I also found this "As We See It" column from November 2015 to be equally > funny: > http://www.stereophile.com/content/we-dont-get-no-respect#PtOAgYWHfZzYmCm6.97 > > Classic straw-man argument. For example: Atkinson's misrepresentation: http://www.stereophile.com/content/simple-everything-appears-simple#qTOJfKoF1IRTqTmK.99 "Harper was referring to a 2007 paper by E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran that "proved" that there was no sonic advantage to high-resolution audio formats (footnote 3) Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/simple-everything-appears-simple#qTOJfKoF1IRTqTmK.99 Actual article abstract: "Claims both published and anecdotal are regularly made for audibly superior sound quality for two-channel audio encoded with longer word lengths and/or at higher sampling rates than the 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard. The authors report on a series of double-blind tests comparing the analog output of high-resolution players playing high-resolution recordings with the same signal passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz bottleneck. The tests were conducted for over a year using different systems and a variety of subjects. The systems included expensive professional monitors and one high-end system with electrostatic loudspeakers and expensive components and cables. The subjects included professional recording engineers, students in a university recording program, and dedicated audiophiles. The test results show that the CD-quality A/D/A loop was undetectable at normal-to-loud listening levels, by any of the subjects, on any of the playback systems. The noise of the CD-quality loop was audible only at very elevated levels." Actual article conclusion: "We have analyzed all of the test data by type of music and specific program; type of high-resolution technology; age of recording; and listener age, gender, experience, and hearing bandwidth. None of these variables have shown any correlation with the results, or any difference between the answers and coin-flip results The previous work cited, some of it at the very beginning of the CD era and some more recent, pointed toward our result. With the momentum of widespread high-rez anecdotes over the last decade, culminating in the Stuart assertions, we felt the need to go further and perform a thorough, straightforward double-blind level-matched listening test to determine whether 16/44.1 technology would audibly degrade the sound of the best high-resolution discs we could find. We used a large and varied sample of serious listeners; we conducted our tests using several different types of high-quality playback systems and rooms; and we took as much time as we felt necessary to establish the transparency of the CD standard. Now, it is very difficult to use negative results to prove the inaudibility of any given phenomenon or process. There is always the remote possibility that a different system or more finely attuned pair of ears would reveal a difference. But we have gathered enough data, using sufficiently varied and capable systems and listeners, to state that the burden of proof has now shifted. Further claims that careful 16/44.1 encoding audibly degrades highresolution signals must be supported by properly controlled double-blind tests." It appears that the articles contents were thoroughly misrepresented by Mr. Atkinson for fun and profit. arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104904 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] MUSINGS: The Wisdom of Simplicity? Another take on recent Stereophile "As We See It".
cliveb wrote: > As usual, generally insightful comments from Archimago. I do however > have one minor nit to pick... > > I suspect your definitions of tier1 and tier2 would encourage the > continued use of excessive dynamic range compression for tier1. > Meanwhile, if a mastering with natural dynamics is made for tier2, why > shouldn't it also be made available at 16/44? > The average Joe is going to buy the cheapest version, regardless of > mastering quality. So if we had a "tier1.5", (where the tier2 mastering > is used but downsampled to 16/44, and priced the same as tier1), with > luck it might actually help in some small way to drive hypercompression > out of the marketplace. You have to remember that there is (often) a reason producers and artists use "excessive" compression (and often it is an "artistic choice") - both the artists/producers and the average Joe actually prefer the compressed sound. Yes, it might be because by now, it is what they are used to, but it is still their preference. "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104904 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] MUSINGS: The Wisdom of Simplicity? Another take on recent Stereophile "As We See It".
As usual, generally insightful comments from Archimago. I do however have one minor nit to pick... I suspect your definitions of tier1 and tier2 would encourage the continued use of excessive dynamic range compression for tier1. Meanwhile, if a mastering with natural dynamics is made for tier2, why shouldn't it also be made available at 16/44? The average Joe is going to buy the cheapest version, regardless of mastering quality. So if we had a "tier1.5", (where the tier2 mastering is used but downsampled to 16/44, and priced the same as tier1), with luck it might actually help in some small way to drive hypercompression out of the marketplace. Transporter -> ATC SCM100A cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104904 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
