Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Touch with EDO
netchord wrote: > pleased to meet you, i think we've guessed your name; but what's > puzzling me is the nature of your game? I am sorry, but I am not at liberty to discuss the nature of my client. "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=110942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Touch with EDO
sgmlaw wrote: > I think I gave you a clue why. And I think I also identified > specifically where in the TP corners were cut. Can you remind me, and explain what specific aspects of audio quality they affect, and how? "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=110942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Touch with EDO
iwalker wrote: > I have no idea! I expected the Touch and TP to produce identical results > when their digital outputs were connected to the same DAC. > They certainly don't and I can very easily tell the difference. To the same input on the DAC? > Transformer coupled outputs? Lower jitter? I have no idea, but I never > use the Touch. The jitter from a Touch is below audible levels. "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=110942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Touch with EDO
iwalker wrote: > This suggests that the digital output stage of the TP has been better > engineered than the Touch, which is hardly a surprise give the price > differential! What actual properties of the digital output of the TP do you think would be better? "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=110942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Transporter vs Touch with EDO
sgmlaw wrote: > If you are using either as a digital head end, the TP is a bit better in > that role than the Touch. In what way? > For instance, a TP on a $250-500 DAC is likely a downgrade. But the TP > soars to another level with a $4,000 one. In what way would a $4,000 DAC be audibly better than a $250-500 DAC? "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=110942 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] SPDIF is evil
sfraser wrote: > I never understood why they just can't put a decent clock and jitter > buffer in the DAC . If they did , the jitter and clocking issues should > disappear. A decent size jitter buffer will remove any jitter which may > occur during the unidirectional transmission of the data stream from the > transport device/LMS server etc. Reclocking the jitter buffer playout > to the DC chip locally would also help solve the problem. Most modern DACs do, and use an ASRC as well. "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=71464 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] More info on the intona
foxesden wrote: > I suspect that it is because the old ESI device which is quite old has a > ropey USB interface. I find it very strange that even stereo crosstalk would be affected. "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=108347 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 20 interesting facts about MQA
drmatt wrote: > So, someone needs to add a checksum field to flac headers and then you > have "authenticated" audio of a higher standard in a smaller package.. The FLAC header already includes a MD5 checksum... "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=108280 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Final MQA Round-Up...
That is a pretty good analysis. I always wonder if audio subjectivists ever use a measuring tape, spirit level or even a car speedometer - after all, aren't their senses perfect and absolute? "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=108132 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Unused Transporter SE's on eBay.com
ralphpnj wrote: > And I stand by my assertion that a wired connection, aka Ethernet, beats > a wireless connection, aka Wi-Fi, for any and all purposes, any day. I think that is a bit too much of an absolutist statement. If wifi provides enough reliable bandwidth, the portability it provides is a major asset - so for music at a garden party, Wifi beats a wired connection any (sunny) day. "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=107045 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Unused Transporter SE's on eBay.com
bluetdi wrote: > Only drawback: they constantly draw some current. And put a lot of HF noise into the mains. "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=107045 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
drmatt wrote: > I was assuming the volume was operated similar to Squeezebox, i.e. by > modifying the input stream to the DAC and using its output as-is. Is > that not what you're referring to here? I believe that's how the > transporter works. > That is what I am referring to. There are two separate noise mechanisms at work here. On one hand you have the noise floor of the analog buffer and output stages (that will be just the same independent of whether the volume control is digital or analog, so that is why I wasn't discussing that part, and on the other hand quantization noise that is dependent on the resolution/bit depth of the DAC. The effect of the volume control on that depends on the number of bits used internally to calculate the scaling (normally 32 or more bits), and number of bits in the output stage once you get down to levels when that starts to matter (as I wrote, about 10 bits attenuation with a 24-bit output stage). "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
drmatt wrote: > Further, noting that the SNR of even a top end 24 or 32 bit DAC is > rarely much greater than about 20 bits (making the high bit count > designation totally pointless), it seems likely that you really only get > about 6-8 bits digital attenuation before you lose something into noise, > right?[/i] Don't confuse the SNR of the DAC with resolution of the volume control. They are independent. The SNR of the DAC is irrelevant as long as it is reasonably higher than that of the source material. If the volume control is done at 32 bits, you still have 16-18 bits of attenuation until you start losing anything. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
drmatt wrote: > More comments when I have more time, but iirc the digital volume control > is only "bit perfect" when volume is reduced by less than 8 bits. If you > lower it further it truncates even 16 bit sources. (I forget what this > translates to in dB.) Yes. No. Maybe. But mostly No. Digital volume control, by definition, is never "bit perfect" - any attenuation in the digital domain changes the bits. But likewise any volume change in the analog domain changes the signal voltage, and normally decreases signal-to-noise ratio. Thus what you should look at is SNR, both for analog and for digital. The SNR for typical commercial source material is around 13-14 bits, so if you have a 24-bit volume control, you can attenuate by 10 bits before you start decreasing the real SNR. With a 32-bit volume control (typical of modern DACs) you have 18 bits of attenuation before reducing SNR. A completely different matter is the fact that if you get your gain structure right, the decrease in SNR doesn't matter - if something is too quiet to hear, it is too quiet to hear, no matter what the volume setting. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
So clearly there is a reason for the audible difference. Did you make sure the levels were matched? "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
drmatt wrote: > Tbh there are other reasons people want to do this; programming with a > 32 bit word length on all your data is in some ways better and certainly > intrinsically more efficient inside the CPU itself, though of course it > doesn't add anything of any benefit to the content. That definitely applies for 32-bit integers, but with floating point it depends on the FP capabilities of the processor - and going floating point requires care in handling rounding errors. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
M-H wrote: > That is something I will explore too, It might not give me the OGG > format I love, but the few extra bits of MP3 storage do not cost much > anymore , so is not really an argument. Haven't looked at the code closely enough, but it should be pretty easy to make mp3fs to use whatever encoder/codec you want. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
ralphpnj wrote: > That may be the correct from technical viewpoint but to me 32 bit files > are just pure marketing BS. Definitely. They are basically an unnecessarily complicated way of storing 24-bit data in a 32-bit container. Floating point makes sense for data with a widely varying range, but not for well-constrained audio data. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
ralphpnj wrote: > Quick question: > > What would you do with 192kHz, 176.4kHz, DSD and 32bit files? > I assume the 32 bit files are 32 bit floating point - so they are actually 24 bit files with an unnecessary 8-bit exponent field. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
drmatt wrote: > I wouldn't argue anything like that, personally, but I would argue that > I can't be arsed to resample a bunch of files just to save a few MB. Fair enough - I normally don't worry about storage space (except for the car stereo), but I am concerned about network bandwidth. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
darrenyeats wrote: > Generally, I wouldn't touch a higher rate file - it isn't always a good > idea. Just feed to the DAC as it is. So you would argue that the downsampling (using a high quality algorithm) is audible? "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
M-H wrote: > What software and method would you recommend to bring this back to from > 24 bits to 16, and from 96 or 192 KHz to 44 , and maintain the audible > improvements I got over the original ? > I would not need any post recording filtering like RCA compensations , > but do not want to introduce new conversion flaws that could become an > argument that more bits + Khz are better. > Perhaps dividing sample rate in 2 or 4, and maintain a rate my DAC can > handle is the best ? > SoX/Audacity. The default downsampling algorithms are pretty good, and won't degrade the quality. Don't worry about the factor of 2 - it was an issue with ancient algorithms and processors, but doesn't make a difference these days. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
ralphpnj wrote: > Smells like MQA and DSD to me. MQA definitely. DSD at least made some technical sense 20 years ago, when digital audio processing and storage was less capable than it is today. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
jarome wrote: > 16 bits gets congested. I still haven't come across a commercial recording that uses more than 16 bits of dynamic range. > In principle, by doing some slights of hand (interpolating -randomly- > between bit levels) CDs claim to be able to get 19 bits, which might be > sufficient. Tell us more - how does that work? Sounds like you are talking about dither - that applies to any digital signal, not just CD. The only slights of hand that a CD does is error correction when you get read errors. > Remember that with 16 bits, there are only 65,000 levels (half > negative), so there is a inherent 1/325 % distortion due to imperfect > representation of the sample height. Not distortion, but quantization noise. And the "1/325 %" (0.3) is also misleading, because you also have to look at the frequency distribution of the error. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Great job - as usual! "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
darrenyeats wrote: > FWIW, SoX uses 32 bit integer internally when passing data between each > process step you specify. Sure, and most DSP chips also use 32 bit (or more) *internally*. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > P.S. As I understand it, it's got 4 Sabre DAC chips in it The ENOB (effective number of bits) of the sabre is 22 bits. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Since the DAC will accept up to 32 bit 384kHz PCM (via USB input), I > think the latter... Or not. "32 bit PCM" most often means 32-bit floating point (that has a resolution of 23 bits), not 32-bit fixed point. Anyway, 32-bit fixed point would not make any sense, as there aren't any practical DACs with linearity and SNR that would exceed 24 bits. And, of course, good luck finding a commercial recording with a SNR exceeding 16 bits. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Of course back in 2008 Sean was still singing the praises of the fixed > point 24 bit DAC chips inside the Transporter (which were famously > marketed as "magic") & its 20ps jitter internal clock - but then there > weren't any 32 bit DAC chips back then. Are we talking about 32-bit floating point (that has 24 bit resolution) or something with a resolution that is higher than 24 bits? "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] By-passing SB Touch DAC?
Recoveryone wrote: > my first clue about his status was his remark about the Hi Rez files not > sounding Audiophile quality. How many years have this board and many > others had this debate on audiophile quality, when we all know or should > know it all starts at the master recording. Just because a file is in > FLAC of some other Hi Rez format does not mean it automatically can pass > as audiophile. That just my 2 cents Good points - and your 2 cents are probably equivalent of quite a bit more in the audiophile universe. "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=107474 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] By-passing SB Touch DAC?
Wombat wrote: > Didn't we have something similar lately with a Brokkoly DAC? I guess the placebophile snake oil pushers are getting more desperate... "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=107474 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] By-passing SB Touch DAC?
ralphpnj wrote: > My guess is that the OP is/was a troll trying to cast doubt on the sound > quality of the SB Touch while building up the wonders of the "great" > FiiO X5 Gen II > > Just saying. Considering it was his only posting, I think you are right. "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=107474 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] By-passing SB Touch DAC?
output555 wrote: > The main reason I bought the SB Touch was to use it as a music server > for my Flac and AIFF high-res audio files. As others have pointed out, the Touch was never intended as a server - the server functionality was an afterthought and a crude extra. It is a great streamer, so use it as such, and use any old PC, laptop, NAS or raspberry pi as a server. "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=107474 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hifiberry Digi+Pro + RPi3?
celo wrote: > I thought that RPi3 with Digi+Pro would eliminate the connection of the > SBT to the server (RPi3) over the network. Thus, giving me better sound? What makes you think it would? The network connection is a buffered, bit-perfect path, and actually might pose less of a load on the RPi than the USB connection. As long as you don't get bad network congestion, resulting in clearly audible dropouts, the network doesn't affect the sound. "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=107443 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hifiberry Digi+Pro + RPi3?
cliveb wrote: > All of what you say would make sense if the OP were talking about the > Hifiberry DAC+. > But he's referring to the DIGI+, which is an SPDIF output board, which > would then be used to feed an external DAC. > Given the known flaws in the RPi's USB system, I think using a DIGI+ to > feed SPDIF to an external DAC may be preferable to using the RPi's USB > to feed a DAC. That would make sense, except that the OP states "I thought that RPi3 with Digi+Pro would eliminate the connection of the SBT to the server (RPi3) over the network. Thus, giving me better sound?", so it is all about the network, not the connection to the DAC. "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=107443 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Hifiberry Digi+Pro + RPi3?
celo wrote: > I thought keeping two units together all-in-one ( Digi Pro and > Raspberry) would be better than SBT connecting to Rpi3 via local > network. No reason why it should be better - the higher clock rate processor in the RPi probably generates more noise than the one in the SBT (for those who worry about that). "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=107443 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
cliveb wrote: > We know that the LP system is a complete dog's dinner compared to CD, > and yet it can give just as much enjoyment. I think this probably says > more about the limitations of the human auditory system than it does > about the engineering achievement. Indeed. Under the right circumstances, the sound of FM radio or even cassette can give wonderful enjoyment. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I hear that. I took it to imply that there *-might-* be an advantage > going further than 16/44.1, although Nyquist-Shannon would still apply. And if Nyquist-Shannon does apply, there is no advantage of going further than 16/44.1 from a *timing* point of view. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > True, but I thought the Sony engineers enjoyed a challenge! You could > say that 44.1kHz is an odd choice of sampling frequency, but they stuck > with that one... Well, yes... The 44.1 kHz stems from video technology, especially Betamax. 44.1 kHz happens to be a convenient rate for both 50 Hz (3 samples per scan line) and 60 Hz video frame refresh rates. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I thought that there was an implication that human hearing might have > more discriminatory ability than previously suspected. Yes, that is a possibility. But my point is that there is nothing really mysterious (or anything that breaks current scientific understanding) about it. > Ears have a very curious design & the human brain is simply the most > complex object yet discovered. So I think it's reasonable to suggest > that psychoacoustics is not as well understood as (say) Nyquist-Shannon > sampling theory... Absolutely. The problem is that audiophiles have used that paper to argue that Nyquist-Shannon doesn't apply - but they are also the ones arguing that a sampled signal supposedly can't represent time differences smaller than one sample interval... "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Morning, Dave, Golden Earring wrote: > This is presumably why Sony increased the projected resolution of its > new CD format from the originally proposed 14 bits to 16 bits during the > development phase... Might also simply be because of the easier processing of word lengths that are a multiple of 8. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > > It was this paper > https://phys.org/news/2013-02-human-fourier-uncertainty-principle.html > that I was seeking your view on actually... > I think all that that paper shows is that the human ear doesn't perform a fourier transform, but uses discrete, parallel sensors (hair cells). "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I'm a little surprised by the dynamic range you ascribe to an orchestral > concert performance, but again you've probably got more experience of > measuring it than me. I'll put it down to the bloke with the cough 3 > rows back. Why they don't issue cough pastilles at the box office has > always baffled me. All I can say is that I've heard some pretty loud > crescendos at the orchestral concerts I've attended to listen to (as > opposed to record & hence measure in the process). > Some simple numbers: If we ignore dither, 16 bits gives you a dynamic range of 96 dB. I really don't think even the loudest crescendo of any acoustic concert exceeds 120 dB (an amplified concert of a band such as Manowar is a different issue, but I would never attend one of their concerts without professional hearing protectors). The background noise in even the quietest concert venue is more than 35 dB. That still leaves 11 dB of margin. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
arnyk wrote: > About 10 years later, this guy did an even better job of it: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ > > Actual files to download and use for software ABX: > > http://ethanwiner.com/aes/ Yes, Ethan's stuff should be mandatory reading/viewing for all audiophiles. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > This does not necessarily imply that high sample rates are bad per se. > I'm still trying to catch up on the theoretical stuff, but I've had a > hint that there may be frequency domain vs. time domain issues in > establishing the best size box to stick a genuine recording into. Frequency and time domains are just different aspects of the same thing. > Whether any such considerations would be audible in practice cannot be > determined when only "fake" examples are currently available. mark Waldrep (of AIX Records) is producing a book and recording with genuine recordings in different formats and sample rates to allow for a fair comparison. 'Link here.' (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1856656547/music-and-audio-a-user-guide-to-better-sound) "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
arnyk wrote: > I've examined a number of high sample rate recordings from vendor's > sites and they all appear to have been upsampled from lower sample rate > files. IOW, they are fraudulent. Yes, I have made pretty much the same observations. The worst ones are CDs resampled to DSD, and then converted to "hi-res" PCM, with the DSD HF noise intact... "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I was however under the impression that some amplifiers don't like > ultrasonic frequencies & that sticking them in can induce non-linearity > audible as IM distortion. Is this not correct? Yes, that is correct. Also applies to loudspeakers. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Well I haven't got one so I don't know, but I suppose some electronic > gizmo capable of summing a fundamental tone with specific amplitudes of > its odd harmonics up to the 9th would get close in practical terms if my > textbook is correct. My point is that 9th harmonics can be pretty high > frequencies to chuck into some amplifiers. Or am I wrong about that? Again, the "9th harmonic" is a totally arbitrary limit that results in a *visually* nice square wave. For *sound*, what matters is *audible* harmonics. There is no point in feeding the amp frequencies above 20 kHz or so. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > OK, but what are you subjecting your amplifier to if you stick an actual > square wave from a signal generator through it? A slightly rounded square wave. > BTW, I don't actually like the sound of square waves myself! Does it matter? You never find a pure square wave in nature. > What is the significance of that? I read that if the waveform didn't > actually complete a cycle it was essentially undefined. Perhaps I'm > reading the wrong book? Well, yes, a fourier transform is only defined for a cyclical waveform, so you have to have at least one full cycle. > I've been creeping around under my car putting rust converter on rusty > bits, i.e. pretty much everything, & my back's screaming... I feel your pain - it is messy too. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > So far I've learnt that you can regard a square wave in terms of the > fundamental frequency sine wave + an infinite number of odd harmonic > frequency sine waves each at a defined amplitude. And that for an > acceptable working approximation you need to go as far as the 9th odd > harmonic. Only if you care about how the square wave *looks* on the screen of a scope. If what you care about is how it *sounds*, you only need harmonics that are in the audible range. > I've also learned that you can analyse any complex waveform into an > equivalent set of sine waves using Fourier Transforms but the ability to > do this on the fly may be compromised by lower frequencies and shorter > durations of said waveform. The precision is always finite, but that is the only way it is compromised. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I don't know myself but he's been at it since 1992 & apparently his > professional range sells well to studios. His studio design prototypes > were used to record artists including Bowie, Lou Reed & Maria Carey, so > I suspect that at least he's not inept. He certainly isn't inept, but you also don't need to be extremely adept to make a DAC that sounds good. I surely hope scientific truth isn't determined by commercial success or celebrity endorsement. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I would entirely agree with you that it is not obvious how any quantum > effects would manifest. My point is that taking "objective" measurements > inside the electronic processing chain may not be a completely reliable > guide to determining what is happening when you actually leave the box > alone to do its stuff. It might not be completely reliable, but the sources of error are not really related to quantum uncertainty. The measurements we need to take are way above quantum level. Taking the electric signal and measuring the average voltage over a sample interval is no different (in terms of quantum observations) than taking the same signal, converting it into air pressure variations, and analysing the pressure variations with the hair cells in your ear. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Whether any of the above will have a significant effect at a real-world > level will depend upon the precise circumstances of each "objective" > measurement we seek to obtain, but when we are dealing with gear that's > purpose is to apply a significant amplification to a low-level > reconstruction of a complex waveform consisting of multiple simultaneous > frequencies each of different amplitude & duration, I think that the > possibility of these matters beginning to intrude should not be > dismissed out-of-hand. > Quantum effects matter in stuff like semiconductors and thermal noise, but considering how ignorant of the functioning of even basic electrical circuits the average audiophile is, we are pretty far from having to look at quantum effects when *applying* the results of the research work of semiconductor engineers and physicists. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Doesn't this mathematical theory enable you to predict how many > lampposts you may expect a "close encounter" with on your journey home > from the pub? :D > > It's been a while, sorry if I've got that wrong... See 'Mark V. Shaney' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_V._Shaney). "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Before anyone jumps to a prejudicial conclusion regarding my > rationality, may I respectfully suggest the application of a "Turing > test" to the content of my previous posts? > Didn't I make a comment about markov chains quite a while back? :) "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
arnyk wrote: > Trouble is, this good effort does not address the other problem, which > is that the audibility of various differences varies tremendously. Sure. Just because nulling shows differences doesn't mean the differences are audible - but if the nulling shows no differences we can be pretty sure there aren't any. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
arnyk wrote: > My own take is that measuring gross differences is, well gross. One > serious problem with gross differences is that their size can be huge > when there is actually no audible difference, just a slight difference > in timing. Indeed. Bill Waslo's 'slides' (http://www.libinst.com/Detecting%20Differences%20(slides).pdf) actually point out that a timing/phase error as small as 93 ns turns a perfect null into a 55 dB one at 1 kHz, and a 0.03 dB level error makes for a 50 dB null instead of a perfect one. This is why programs such as audio diffmaker do is apply crosscorrelation to time align the signals, as well as gain equalisation. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Does this directly impact on the problem summarised in my previous post? Yes. It provides a pretty good tool to determine what, if any, differences there are between two recordings (that could be recordings of the output of two different devices). It allows you to hear *only* the difference. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Don't leave us yet! This topic is the precise point of the ABX test that > I'm attempting to organise! Are you aware of 'Audio DiffMaker' (http://www.libinst.com/Audio%20DiffMaker.htm)? There is an interesting 'AES paper.' (http://www.libinst.com/AES%20Audio%20Differencing%20Paper.pdf) "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
drmatt wrote: > If it means anything to anyone here, despite the rage and the bitching > directed at me (and that I've responded with) I have changed my approach > to some audio aspects. I would not have ever described myself as a > hard-core audiophile (despite what some people here probably think), > that just doesn't make any sense to me, but I have stopped thinking > about the system so much and spent more time just listening into the > music. Given that I don't listen to a pure diet of high-quality > audiophile-mastered obscure jazz or classical music I inevitably find > huge variation in the SQ of individual recordings. Hanging out here > means I now put that down to the source master, not my system, and > that's a relief .. :) Reading that makes me happy - have seen too many "why keep ranting about all that double blind stuff, nobody will change their mind anyway" comments lately... "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > I have never encountered any discs cut from inside to out Long ago the band of the student union at my university did one with the groove going from inside out. If you started at the outer end, the needle got stuck in the secret backwards-recorded message "you are playing the wrong way around". "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > If this is true, why do stand-mount loudspeakers not include a steep > high-pass filter at 30Hz or so, to divert this power from the drivers > unable to turn it into sound, and presumably simultaneously reduce the > load on the power amplifier by increasing the impedance it is loaded > with below that frequency point? Unless the filter was very steep, it would not do much good - it would either affect frequencies well above 30 Hz, or mostly affect frequencies where there isn't much signal in your average recording. Making a very steep passive filter is very tricky, and you would probably end up burning the same amount of power anyway, just that it would heat the filter instead of the speaker voice coil. "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
arnyk wrote: > Knowing when to be loud and when to be quiet was a survival skill in > those days. My children learned some things about that in modern times, > if you catch my drift! ;-) I hear you... :) "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
cliveb wrote: > People are always banging on about how evolution has operated to protect > humans from predators, but it has always struck me as a somewhat lazy > assumption. It is of course a gross simplification. Evolution has operated to ensure human survival and reproduction. Whatever specific forms it takes is harder to figure out. > If avoiding bloodthirsty predators was so important to the survival of > the human race, why hasn't natural selection eliminated the gene(s) that > cause children to make a lot of noise? :) Do children make a lot of noise when they get scared? Perhaps they mostly make a lot of noise when they want the attention of their parents (as when they get lost/separated from their parents), and that has proven to be a more sustainable trait? "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > I'm most interested to hear Arny's take on solid-state Class A with > regard to IM. I know that most recording studios use Class A amplifiers > in their monitoring chain. As one part of the monitoring chain, yes, but it is becoming less common. For near-field monitoring, studios use active monitors that have class D or A/B amps built in, and for listening room use class A amps don't have enough power for modern, power-hungry speakers. IM distortion, just like HD, is caused by non-linearity. A badly designed class A/B amp can have nonlinearity caused by the (gradual) transfer from class A to B, and push-pull designs can have crossover distortion. Neither are an issue with most class D architectures. "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > Still catching up here. I hear you about Bell Labs, they were a big > outfit. I believe it was 2 of their engineers who inadvertently > discovered the Cosmic Background Radiation that resulted in the general > acceptance of the Big Bang hypothesis for the origin of the universe, > although they were trying to eliminate what they initially perceived as > interference with equipment they were using for a different purpose > altogether. Part of Bell Labs remit may well have included high quality > sound reproduction, but I should imagine that in those days the focus > would primarily have been on cinema sound systems rather than domestic > ones. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this. As I recall the DIY > approach to quality home sound reproduction was much in vogue through > the 50's & 60's with many people building their own amplifiers & > loudspeakers based upon freely available designs. Times have changed. > Bell Labs in their glory days was a great place. I have had the pleasure and honour to visit a number of times, and to know and work with some of the research people there - and having grown up and worked in the technology industry in Finland, I still can't get my head around the fact that it is now "Nokia Bell Labs". There were two standard jokes about Bell Labs - one was "even the janitor has a PhD", the other, from the AT business people, "hundreds of wonderful technologies, not a single successful product". One has to remember that a lot of the research at Bell Labs was basic research, not directed at any specific product or business. So no, they didn't focus on cinema sound - they focused on things like the science of sound and hearing. Shannon's work was basic information theory. Bardeen, Brattain and Shockley's work that led to the transistor was basic semiconductor physics research. The original Bell Labs was split up, most of it becoming Lucent Technologies (and retaing the Murray Hill location), but the voice-oriented stuff (including JJ Johnston's perceptual compression research that led to mp3) ended up in AT Labs in Florham Park "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > I know that there is a small contingent of technophiles who actually > have little appreciation of music & select their recordings to "show > off" the capabilities of their equipment. I am firmly in the opposite > camp, I would prefer not to "hear" my system at all, just the music. And > I hope that the vast majority of this forum's members would agree with > me on this. Except for those of us who play electric/electronic instruments (where the equipment is responsible for the sound to a high degree). > I am old enough to remember Peter Walker I also remember the days of Wireless World proper, when people like Baxandall and Linsley Hood not only shared their designs, but also the design rationale behind them. I guess the closest modern thing was Linear Audio - unfortunately the most recent issue was also the last one. :( "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Golden Earring wrote: > All that I am trying to point out is that our appreciation of music is > itself subjective - otherwise we would all like (& dislike) the same > things. Appreciation of music is subjective. Even appreciation of various form of coloration and distortion is subjective. But laws of physics aren't. There is no problem with someone saying "I prefer the sound of tube amps", but if someone says "green ethernet cables distort sound more than red ethernet cables when transmitting streaming data", then we can (and should) call "foo". "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
darrenyeats wrote: > I would have voted Hilary, and I voted Remain, but I'm worried about > polarisation in society. So am I. And it is a polarisation in multiple axes. One is that technology has increased our productivity immensely, but the benefits go to a very small minority, while an increasing number of people find that their work (and thus their livelihood) has been structured away. The other is between the small group of people who use all the wonderful tools we have to find information and learn about stuff, while a large group uses it to entertain themselves - and sustain an echo chamber bubble of like-minded opinions (and false news). "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
Mnyb wrote: > Well I think the hostile aproach drives up to much tension and personal > prestige it locks everyone involved into their trenches. See my comment in the Holy Wars thread... "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Some thoughts on the Audiophile Holy Wars :-).
But then there is this: 'Why the Flat Earth Movement is the Best Symbol of the Increasingly Diminished Value of Truth and Intelligence' (http://news.nationalpost.com/life/why-the-flat-earth-movement-is-the-best-symbol-of-the-increasingly-diminished-value-of-truth-and-intelligence) "Its the same quick-fix attitude thats besieging our political landscape: information that doesnt accord with your carefully manicured world-view is fake news, opinions that dont cohere with your own are offensive, everything you dislike or that frightens you can be wedged between scare quotes and rejected out of hand. Never mind the expertise of professionals and elites. You still matter. You know everything you need to know." For many audiophilia is a way to escape from a modern world full of knowledge, science, technology and expertise into a simpler, gentler word where you count simply for having been around long enough to read enough audiophile magazines and but the right boxes. But because you are Special, with better ears than the ears of all those know-it-all engineer types, your Truth trumps (pun intended) all their formulas. Unfortunately proving them wrong just strengthens their resolve. "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=107343 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
ho_kuku wrote: > I did experienced the same thing - but with IFI Audio IUSB > Volume became louder - at the same time improved separation. The noise > floor also was greatly reduced. > It just goes to show how "noisy" USB audio is - and those noise have a > negative impact on sound. > Clearing the noise out greatly have a positive impact on sound. > > The IFI product was a 1) reclocker, 2) usb power regenerator etc It would be great if you could record the output with and without the IUSB, and post the sound files here... "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Golden Earring wrote: > Since all our "realities" are a construct by our brains from a set of > tiny electrical impulses, it is entirely possible that we are all wrong > :cool: Or if we only exist as a computer simulation... "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Golden Earring wrote: > I think anyone prepared to live in a major active earthquake zone (when > they could obviously afford to live elsewhere) needs a substantial > element of subjectivity in their psyche... > Ah, yes, or induce it chemically. :) With "CA", I was actually referring to a certain commercial web forum, not the state, but that forum is a state of mind too... "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > It's a 2002 Mazda MX-5 Great car, and also illustrates the difference between subjective and objective preference. I have a Morgan. I would be the first to admit that the MX-5 is objectively better in pretty much every way, and cheaper. > I presume you're expecting it to warm up in a few weeks anyway... "We get what we get..." :) "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > Just got my 14.5 year old sports car back on the road this year after a > couple of years off. I'm staving off the rust monster by treating the > underside to a serious burst of Ku-rusting + Hammeriting, but it's > turned a bit chilly in Blighty for my arthritic back today. Apparently > it'll warm up on Friday & next week, so I should finish the work then. A > trip across to Europe would be fun before Brexit turns us into unwelcome > foreigners! > What car is it? It is pretty variable weather in Amsterdam right now (8.2°C according to the weather station on my roof) and even colder here in Helsinki where I am on a business trip. I do have to say that I am extremely lucky in having something that is the ultimate luxury in Amsterdam - a garage. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I've always harboured a secret desire to visit Amsterdam. I've been told > that the music in the cafes sounds amazing... Cafes or coffee shops? :) There are some great jazz cafes - and great venues such as Paradiso (an old church, and way too small for major acts, but they still do it because... well.. it is Paradiso), Carre (an old circus), and for classical, there is Concertgebouw. All within easy walking distance. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I have all the necessary equipment (2 identical unused Transporter SE's > recently acquired from the same eBay seller in San Jose, CA, a DAC with > the capability to achieve exact signal level matching, an amplifier with > two sets of balanced XLR inputs and two sets of identical analogue XLR > balanced interconnects) to conduct a genuine double-blind listening test > designed to refute my proposition that using my DAC with one Transporter > slaved to its word clock output results in an audibly superior result to > using the other Transporter's internal DAC and its balanced analogue XLR > outputs, and unlike my detractors, I am quite open to being proved to be > wrong. Sounds good (apart from the uncalled-for "unlike my detractors"). Happy to help as much as I can. but physically travelling from Amsterdam is a bridge a bit too far... "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > At 14,000,000 to 1 odds or worse, your lottery statement is a fact. It is a fact because it is based on some reasonable assumptions. Just like my assessment of your observations. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > It's prejudice... So if someone ask me about the lottery, and I say "it is unlikely that you will win", is that prejudice? "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I was hoping that someone would be able to at least come up with a > plausible hypothesis for the phenomenon: I would be delighted to assist > in rigorously testing any decent suggestion. First we need to find out if there really is a need for a new hypothesis - and you have already rejected a priori at least one very plausible hypothesis. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I think that your second sentence justifies my comment. Ah, yes. So the fact that I know the physical reality of the situation biases me? > Properly conducted scientific enquiry frequently produces unexpected > results: this is how we gradually increase our imperfect understanding. > How else could there be any progress? > "Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out". The first thing yo do when you get unexpected results is verify them. Then you get independent replication of them. Only after that do you come up with theories - and ways to test the theories. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > However you have already persuaded yourself that the result would be a > foregone conclusion. Have I? Please explain... "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > With respect, I did ask for explanations which did NOT imply that I am > deluded. > Have I implied that you are deluded? All I can say is that the differences you report are unlikely enough that it justifies verifying them with controlled double blind listening. Unfortunately I live in the home country of Golden Earring (the band) so it is a bit impractical for me to come over and verify the observations. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
Golden Earring wrote: > I am not aware of any scientific principle that establishes a minimum > jitter threshold of inaudibility... > There is a scientific process - it is called double blind testing. But you can also analyse the noise/distortion that the jitter adds (very similar to intermodulation products) are and realise that it is so low that it gets masked by the noise in the source material. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
garym wrote: > That is what I was assuming as well. And if he is saying "I hear no > difference between the audio output of the Transporter's internal DAC > playing to my analog inputs versus the Transporter digitally feeding an > external DAC playing to analog inputs" then my response is of course you > don't hear any difference. Hearing such a difference would likely mean > something is broken. Most modern DACs sound the same (unless someone had > done something very odd in designing the DAC). Bottom line is you > shouldn't be hearing any difference between the Transporter DAC and your > other DAC I agree, but then "If I turn Spring DAC off the sound stay the exactly the same as if the Transporter was only playing through it's internal DAC and not external one. " doesn't make sense. "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] External DAC on Transporter: best output option
jazzyphile wrote: > Am I doing something wrong. How can I get external DAC to play through > Transporter digital outs? Am I correct in assuming what you want is to play the digital output of the Transporter through the external DAC (and not the other way around)? "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=106519 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Archimago wrote: > Many subjectivists are reasonable folks who I believe will acknowledge > the limitations of positions the "mainstream" audiophile writers take > and will appreciate when examples are shown to demonstrate the > fallacies. Whenever I start thinking that I just have a quick look over at CA... :) "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Oh, and just after I posted that I saw the World Health Organization warning about measles making a comeback in the western world due to people not vaccinating their children... "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
ralphpnj wrote: > for audiophiles this means one can believe in measurements when it comes > to bit depth and sample rates (as in digital audio) but not when to > comes to harmonic distortion (as in tubes versus solid state). And even for bit depth and sample rates, it becomes a simplistic pseudo-science application of numbers based on "bigger is better". "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] HIGHRESAUDIO to stop offering MQA
Archimago wrote: > I believe the path of the "subjectivist audiophile" is weak, ignorant, > and clearly rests on an unstable foundation based on nothing but -faith- > in false or grossly intellectually compromised idols and idiosyncratic > "high priests" I agree. Unfortunately that is a very popular path these days (not just in audio matters). Anti-intellectualism is doing all too well. "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=107118 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
pablolie wrote: > Based on my reading, even the best human platinum ears can not hear > beyond 20/44. And I would question the 20. Even 16 bits means hearing stuff that is way below the background noise level of your listening room while listening to music at 120 dB... "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Our Music Listening... in 10 years.
atrocity wrote: > I'm ripping my SACDs via one of the naughty methods that technically > isn't supposed to exist. Right - that is a curse that will probably stay with us for ever - silly attempts by the content industry to keep control of the material using misguided technical means. "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=106933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Our Music Listening... in 10 years.
atrocity wrote: > And HDMI to output gapless 5.1 FLAC and DSD! Considering DSD might have been a good idea in the 90's, we might now let it rest in peace... "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=106933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Intona USB thing
foxesden wrote: > May I humbly suggest that you review this and other responses that you > have made on this forum and then consider how they may appear to other > people? Arny has a somewhat aggressive style of communication. Nevertheless he is right about the answer from the isolator manufacturer being pure BS - there is no way that a data transmission error would affect only the gain information and nothing else. "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=106914 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
cliveb wrote: > On a good day and with a following wind, maybe :-) > IME typical vinyl is equivalent to more like 10 or 11 bits. I was trying to be charitable :) "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Our Music Listening... in 10 years.
To try to answer the original posting - I spent yesterday at ISE2017 - Integrated Systems Europe, one of the largest AV trade fairs in Europe. It filled pretty much the whole RAI exhibition centre, but only one hall was Audio. Even Harman International were mostly promoting their smart retail store concepts. Everything was digital. Audio-over-IP (AES67, AES70) seems a big thing, but audio is definitely seen as just one of the many integrated "smart living" components. I had a bit of overload of Jetsons-like solutions to run my life. So forget optical. Forget audio cables (even Belkin was displaying their cat5/6/7 cabling systems). It will all be over IP, and using common protocols (instead of the current multitude of proprietary solution), but all too oriented towards "lifestyle". "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=106933 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
d6jg wrote: > This is interesting to me as I have been considering upgrading the ADC > that I use for ripping Vinyl from the current 16/48 Behringer that I use > at the moment to something capable of 24/xx. > There is a massive price jump from 16/48 to anything capable of 24/xx. > Are you all saying that it would (as I suspect) be a complete waste of > money and that 16bit 1s & 0s are going to sound the same as 24bit > versions? Yes and no. You don't need even 16 bits for *storing* the recording of your vinyl, but 24 bits (well, maybe 20 in reality) gives you some extra dynamic range in case you get the levels wrong - once you have the recording on the computer, you can normalize the gain and it will easily fit in 16 bits. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
ralphpnj wrote: > I suppose that one could just compare the measured dynamic range (via > the foobar plugin or an equivalent) of a 24bit/44.1kHz audio file and > the same audio in a 16bit/44.1kHz file. if the dynamic ranges are the > same (which they absolutely should be) then a 24bit file is just > marketing BS. That is pretty much what I have done. Of course the dynamic ranges aren't always the same - I have come across a few examples where the 24-bit version has *less* dynamic range (clearly a newer "master" - or compressed to make the 24-bit version sound louder and thus "better"). "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Is 24bit/44.1kHz high resolution or marketing BS?
It is indeed high resolution - noise. And no, it doesn't matter - you won't hear a difference, at least not blind. I keep asking for examples of commercial recordings with a dynamic range exceeding 16 bits, and I still haven't found one. "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=106935 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
