magiccarpetride;684454 Wrote:
I agree. I am an audio aficionado, meaning I enjoy good, pleasant sound.
Toward that end I'm constantly upgrading and tweaking my audio system,
because I truly enjoy the changes these upgrades are bringing me.
Where things become illogical is when I read how
darrenyeats;683041 Wrote:
Spend a bit of time researching your favourite music to see if there are
alternative masters. SACDs are sometimes mastered better (the risk is
hybrids where the CD layer has just a standard master). Also MOFI
releases can sound good.
Darren
Last night I ripped the
Ambrose;683143 Wrote:
I don't really need a sub, the Neats dig quite low and have excellent
bass/punchy sound.
http://www.whathifi.com/review/neat-motive-3
I will look at ethernet cables however thanks.
Are you sure...?
It's entirely up to you obviously, but consider the following.
Human
Any cat 5e or cat 6 Ethernet cable will work and produce identical
results. Spending lots of money on audiophile Ethernet cable is
foolish.
I'm copying my music and video library from one server to another on my
network over generic cat 5e Ethernet cable. 1.8 TB of data. All of it
will be
evdplancke;684398 Wrote:
OK, after checking my source, a post at DIYaudio explaining how
Sigma-Delta DAC works
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/15439-how-does-delta-sigma-dac-work.html),
I see where is my confusion over here. The article is assimilating S/D
DAC to pulse
adamdea;684534 Wrote:
Entirely missing the point:-
People communicate for a purpose. On an audiophile website they wish to
exchange information as to how to improve the sound of their system.
When someone reports an improvement, others ask implicitly or
explicitly whether whether the
Ron Olsen;684561 Wrote:
Any cat 5e or cat 6 Ethernet cable will work and produce identical
results. Spending lots of money on audiophile Ethernet cable is
foolish.
You can buy terminated Belden cat 5e cable for around $1/ft. No need to
spend more.
guidof;684598 Wrote:
But if I could test the difference with a short run of cat6, as I did,
why not? It was only $15 and worth every dime to me.
Maybe there's a typo or something, but now I'm puzzled about the
results of your test. In post #6 of this thread you said -In my
system, even a
aubuti;684603 Wrote:
Maybe there's a typo or something, but now I'm puzzled about the results
of your test. In post #6 of this thread you said -In my system, even a
better (Monster, $15) cat6 Ethernet cable did cause a significant SQ
improvement. I know, tough to believe, but that has been
guidof;684598 Wrote:
Spending lots of money on ANY audiophile cable IS foolish. That was
NOT my suggestion.
While data transmission is not affected by choice of Ethernet cables,
that may not necessarily mean there is no difference in the audio one
hears. (See my previous post and Phil
adamdea;684534 Wrote:
Entirely missing the point:-
People communicate for a purpose. On an audiophile website they wish to
exchange information as to how to improve the sound of their system.
When someone reports an improvement, others ask implicitly or
explicitly whether whether the
rgro;684596 Wrote:
Since this is what this thread is all about, I'll interject. In
general, I tend to come down more on the objective than the subjective.
All the time, I think disagreements should be respectful and civil.
Only because it leapt out at me and not directed at adamdea as an
Ron Olsen;684610 Wrote:
I'd be more inclined to believe you if you could pass a blind listening
test with Cat 5e vs. Cat 6. If you're curious to find out if the
difference you heard is real or not, give it a try.
I've made the double blind test suggestion many times on this forum and
to my
magiccarpetride;684612 Wrote:
It must be nice to occupy a space where everything is simple and plain
and as easy as 1-2-3. You don't seem aware of this, but setting up an
audio system and then working on improving it/tweaking it is a game
that is many orders of magnitude more complex than a
Ran into an unexpected tweak yesterday, which in the end turned out to
be very helpful for improving the sound of my Touch. Decided to share
this with a few sympathetic ears on this forum, despite being fully
aware that this narrative will provoke all the unbridled hatred of so
many deranged sock
Ron Olsen;684610 Wrote:
In that same post, Phil says
'Generic advice such as Use Cat 5 not Cat 6 to avoid ground plane RF
transmission/coupling issues still stands.'
So it appears that Cat 5 is preferable to Cat 6 to avoid RF effects
that could influence downstream audio components.
garym;684617 Wrote:
I've made the double blind test suggestion many times on this forum and
to my knowledge, no one has ever reported back with any results. Plenty
of people report back their (often very mistaken) concerns about why
double-blind tests are not valuable.
Even suggestions for
aubuti;684621 Wrote:
Even suggestions for single-blind tests get the same reactions, or lack
thereof.
good point, I'd be very pleased to see some single-blind tests of
power cable A vs power cable B TT3.0 done vs not done. I'm very
willing to live with the person performing the experiment to
to close the final chapter of this saga
I coverted my rca-rca cables to xlr-rca cables so that the dac1 can
output via xlr, I can now use the inbuilt smc attenuators and have set
them to 30db. This gives an acceptable listening level with server at
100%, Volloc on and the DAC1 on calibrated
garym;684617 Wrote:
p.s. Guidof --I'm not directly this at specifically you, just all the
tweaks reported on these forums
I _am_ relieved. ;-)
Guido F.
--
guidof
MUSIC ROOM:
Marantz TT 15S1 Turntable, Virtuoso Wood Cartridge-Conrad Johnson
Motif preamp
Oppo BDP-83 Universal
guidof;684620 Wrote:
Yes, it makes me happy. ;-)
I'm not a technical person, but I thought Phil had provided some
technical facts that seemed plausible to me.
I was just as skeptical as you, as my OP makes clear. That skepticism
does not, however, render me incapable of noticing audio
aubuti;684621 Wrote:
Even suggestions for single-blind tests get the same reactions, or lack
thereof.
True. And this disinclination in an audiophile forum is surprising to
you?
Yes, yes, -Consumer Reports- does hold double blind wine tasting, but
how many enophiles do you know who would
Ron Olsen;684630 Wrote:
Have you watched this video from Ethan Winer's Audio Myths Workshop?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ
Then you will learn that hearing can be steered, and what you think you
hear can be affected by non-auditory cues.
Yes, I have, and I'm fully aware
guidof;684632 Wrote:
Yes, I have, and I'm fully aware of the fallibility of our senses.
Just the same, I don't see any of us driving around with our eyes
closed. ;-)
Guido F.
I was not proposing a listening test with your fingers in your ears!
--
Ron Olsen
guidof;684631 Wrote:
True. And this disinclination in an audiophile forum is surprising to
you?
Yes, yes, -Consumer Reports- does hold double blind wine tasting, but
how many enophiles do you know who would subject themselves to such?
Well, there are audiophile forums (eg, hydrogenaudio)
guidof;684631 Wrote:
True. And this disinclination in an audiophile forum is surprising to
you?
Yes, yes, -Consumer Reports- does hold double blind wine tasting, but
how many enophiles do you know who would subject themselves to such?
Guido F.
I'm aware of *many* single-blind tastings
garym;684638 Wrote:
I'm aware of *many* single-blind tastings in the wine aficionado
community. Downright common from my experience. It's a good way of
removing price (or country of origin) bias from opinions
'Bottle Shock' (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0914797/) being only one
of the more
Ron Olsen;684637 Wrote:
I was not proposing a listening test with your fingers in your ears!
Oh, good!
Guido F.
--
guidof
MUSIC ROOM:
Marantz TT 15S1 Turntable, Virtuoso Wood Cartridge-Conrad Johnson
Motif preamp
Oppo BDP-83 Universal Player-Cambridge Azur 840C DAC
Vortexbox
adamdea;684618 Wrote:
You don't measure a subjective effect as such, you measure things which
may correspond to it.
So you claim the knowledge that unerringly maps this correspondence?
That's pretty haughty, if you ask me. How did you come to such
heightened knowledge? And more importantly,
There is a scientifically rigorous tool to establish whether a change
makes an audible difference: the double blind ABX test. Any other kind
of comparison cannot be taken seriously, because we all know that
non-auditory clues cause the brain to change its perception of the
sound. The video that
The bigger question is: Why are people so pre-occupied with the
decisions of other people? Is hi-fi not a hobby? What fun is it to have
a hobby---and then sit in the box never trying anything new? Where's
the passion in that?
Experiment gents. Let the lab rats be lab rats, let the nut jobs be
Folks, calm down. ;-)
I was simply suggesting to the OP the possibility that, contrary to
conventional wisdom (including my own), Ethernet cable choice may --
underline may -- play a role in sound quality.
I was not up to testing, proving, predicting anything. Merely reporting
my own subjective
darrenyeats;684535 Wrote:
Last night I ripped the CD layer of the 2004 SACD Hybrid of 461 Ocean
Boulevard by Eric Clapton.
Sadly, listening on headphones on the train I can hear clearly that
this master is a lot louder than the early CD release I bought
previously. Disappointing that the
adamdea;684573 Wrote:
Incidentally it did occur to me when answering your original post, that
it would probably not cause you to reconsider the vital importance of
tweaking the the transport, if it turned out that the reason you had
given for believing that dacs were transport-sensitive
evdplancke;684662 Wrote:
Since experimentation with my system as on many others proved that
tweaking the source had an incidence on SQ, I am trying to figure out
why it happens. This is for me the correct scientific approach: trying
to modelise results of experimentation, and not believing
chill;684657 Wrote:
I considered starting a new thread for this, because I promise you, I'm
not raising it in a thread entitled 'Audio Myths' because I think it
falls into that category. But since the subject of the soundstage was
raised here I thought it could make an interesting aside to
garym;684663 Wrote:
Without speaking to what you've done (or not, because I don't know the
formality of your personal testing), but speaking more generally to
things I see at this forum, most of the experimentation reported here
is not actually an experiment that leads to learning new things
magiccarpetride;684665 Wrote:
In scientific terminology, the activities you've described above are
called 'fishing for results'. It's a legitimate strategy in scientific
circles, because by doing even a random set of repeated trial-and-error
activities, one may stumble upon empirically valid
adamdea;684613 Wrote:
I wrote a fairly long response to this but for some reason the browser
crashed as i pressed submit.
I'm sure that your let's all be nice point was well intentioned, but
the example you used was very badly chosen.
In the post which you quoted I was making the
steveinaz;684656 Wrote:
The bigger question is: Why are people so pre-occupied with the
decisions of other people? Is hi-fi not a hobby? What fun is it to have
a hobby---and then sit in the box never trying anything new? Where's
the passion in that?
Experiment gents. Let the lab rats be
steveinaz;684656 Wrote:
The bigger question is: Why are people so pre-occupied with the
decisions of other people? Is hi-fi not a hobby? What fun is it to have
a hobby---and then sit in the box never trying anything new? Where's
the passion in that?
Experiment gents. Let the lab rats be
Ron Olsen;684670 Wrote:
True. Do what floats your boat. But don't foist off voodoo science on
unsuspecting newbies looking to use a SB Touch in their music system as
required mods to get the best out of your Touch.
Yes! Recent example, someone wants to customize info shown on screen of
Touch
garym;684666 Wrote:
I see how you might interpret what I said this way. I didn't go into
complete detail in my response, but at least in my field, experiments
without any theory-based hypothesis are not a good thing. Without the
theory as a foundation for the hypothesis being tested, I agree
garym;684666 Wrote:
I see how you might interpret what I said this way. I didn't go into
complete detail in my response, but at least in my field, experiments
without any theory-based hypothesis are not a good thing. Without the
theory as a foundation for the hypothesis being tested, I agree
There's a reason it's called Venom. Seems to poison everything it
touches.
--
ralphpnj
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Transporter 2 (oops) - Touch
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
Ron Olsen;684670 Wrote:
True. Do what floats your boat. But don't foist off voodoo science on
unsuspecting newbies looking to use a SB Touch in their music system as
required mods to get the best out of your Touch.
Why is it that in here we find so many bleeding hearts and an endless
parade
ralphpnj;684679 Wrote:
There's a reason it's called Venom. Seems to poison everything it
touches.
How so?
--
magiccarpetride
magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863
View this
magiccarpetride;684675 Wrote:
Makes sense. But I think it also makes sense to allow for a bit of
random trial-and-error, you know just stirring up some shit, do a bit
of brainstorming, record one's findings, and if the findings turn out
to be significant, focus one's attention on trying to
garym;684673 Wrote:
Yes! Recent example, someone wants to customize info shown on screen of
Touch (similar to how they were able to do it on their old SB3). One of
the first few posters said basically first do all the TT3.0 mods! The
guy wants to change the info displayed, and he's being
What about all the wire in the walls? You just replaced a 3 ft. section?
You also need to rip out all that substandard wire inside the walls, all
the way back to the power meter, and replace it with Venom as well.
--
Ron Olsen
jmschnur;684677 Wrote:
You know: inductive based research is making in roads as we are able to
get large data sets and then apply sophisticated modeling to them.
true. and I'm familiar with folks doing just that. And in some cases
this helps tremendously in theory development that can then
rgro;684668 Wrote:
Heheheheh, I like this point of view!
+1 (which is why I don't read the soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0 thread
- I happen to think that the Touch sounds wonderful right out of the
box.)
--
ralphpnj
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Ron Olsen;684684 Wrote:
What about all the wire in the walls? You just replaced a 3 ft. section?
You also need to rip out all that substandard wire inside the walls, all
the way back to the power meter, and replace it with Venom as well.
If I place a water filter at the end of my faucet,
magiccarpetride;684680 Wrote:
How so?
Appears to have poisoned your wallet.
--
ralphpnj
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Transporter 2 (oops) - Touch
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
I think everyone would agree (and what I preach w/my 37yrs in this
hobby) is that you need to start with good base components. While I do
believe cables can make a difference(as an example)---it is IMO,
extrememly subtle; and there are far more important things to address
first.
The important
garym;684673 Wrote:
Yes! Recent example, someone wants to customize info shown on screen of
Touch (similar to how they were able to do it on their old SB3). One of
the first few posters said basically first do all the TT3.0 mods! The
guy wants to change the info displayed, and he's being
ralphpnj;684688 Wrote:
+1 (which is why I don't read the soundcheck's Touch Toolbox 3.0 thread
- I happen to think that the Touch sounds wonderful right out of the
box.)
Agree--I have an upgraded power supply (CIA), and I run into a
Benchmark DAC--I'm very pleased with the performance. I
magiccarpetride;684689 Wrote:
If I place a water filter at the end of my faucet, according to your
logic, that would be useless, because there are miles of miles of water
pipes leading to my house, and these pipes are supplying unclean water.
According to your reasoning, I should place water
magiccarpetride;684689 Wrote:
If I place a water filter at the end of my faucet, according to your
logic, that would be useless, because there are miles of miles of water
pipes leading to my house, and these pipes are supplying unclean water.
According to your reasoning, I should place water
garym;684681 Wrote:
At this forum, it seems that being questioned often leads to mean
spirited debate and personal attacks. I have a hard time understanding
why folks can't report their tweaks, let others question the tweaks and
whether they make any sense, and then move on. I'm probably
steveinaz;684693 Wrote:
I think everyone would agree (and what I preach w/my 37yrs in this
hobby) is that you need to start with good base components. While I do
believe cables can make a difference(as an example)---it is IMO,
extrememly subtle; and there are far more important things to
chill;684696 Wrote:
That analogy works if you believe the new cable has the properties of a
filter, ie it can clean up a dirty supply. But another analogy might be
to consider the new cable as just a better bit of pipe at the end of the
run.
Edit: Ralph beat me to it.
But a power cable
magiccarpetride;684689 Wrote:
If I place a water filter at the end of my faucet, according to your
logic, that would be useless, because there are miles of miles of water
pipes leading to my house, and these pipes are supplying unclean water.
According to your reasoning, I should place water
magiccarpetride;684698 Wrote:
This is because when someone calls me a moron for confessing how I do
see a difference in the displayed colors between a stock power cable
and a higher-grade power cable plugged into my computer, I feel
offended. Someone is very rudely and to my face calling me
Hi-fi is about TRUTH. If you sincerely want truth in your system, you
have to understand both the science of electronics/sound, and the
psyhcoacoustical (sp?) properties. Now, you can kid yourself all day
long--but that's no way to get at the truth. So ask yourself, what is
it you want to
rgro;684692 Wrote:
True. Do what floats your boat. But don't foist off voodoo science on
unsuspecting newbies looking to use a SB Touch in their music system as
required mods to get the best out of your Touch.
First of all, I agree with both of these. But, and I ask this in all
rgro;684692 Wrote:
True. Do what floats your boat. But don't foist off voodoo science on
unsuspecting newbies looking to use a SB Touch in their music system as
required mods to get the best out of your Touch.
First of all, I agree with both of these. But, and I ask this in all
magiccarpetride;684619 Wrote:
Ran into an unexpected tweak yesterday, which in the end turned out to
be very helpful for improving the sound of my Touch. Decided to share
this with a few sympathetic ears on this forum, despite being fully
aware that this narrative will provoke all the
A coiled cord will act as an inductor.
--
jmschnur
Joel
jmschnur's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8604
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93084
I appreciate our educated forum members like Ron who debunk myths like
this.
Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and
superstition.
Adam Smith (1723-90) Scottish economist. The Wealth of Nations, 1776.
--
mlbrand
garym;684706 Wrote:
You raise a very good question, and a difficult one to answer (a good
answer to this question could end all this discussion!). Some things
are hard to validate. But many things discussed on this forum are EASY
to test with a simple blind comparison. e.g., Tell me how
chill;684657 Wrote:
I considered starting a new thread for this, because I promise you, I'm
not raising it in a thread entitled 'Audio Myths' because I think it
falls into that category. But since the subject of the soundstage was
raised here I thought it could make an interesting aside to
Ron Olsen;684705 Wrote:
Good audio science = validated by blind listening test, with precise
volume matching between the test alternatives.
Good audio science = validated by relevant electrical or acoustic
measurements.
thats a good partial answer thanks.
Rgro rasies some more q it is
Hi folks.
Anything happened over here during the last 2-3 weeks?
People seem to get bored again lately. ;)
Cheers
@SBGK: If you turn off all audio services you don't have to tweak them.
;)
--
soundcheck
::: ' Touch Toolbox 3.0 and more' (http://soundcheck-audio.blogspot.com)
::: by
Mnyb;684718 Wrote:
Interesting side track, it deserves it own tread
You're right. I'll start another thread and ask people not to make any
further comment on the soundstage topic in this thread.
--
chill
chill's
In another thread somebody raised the question of the soundstage that we
perceive when listening to 2-channel audio. Rather than polluting that
thread anymore, I'm moving that discussion to this thread.
chill;684657 Wrote:
I considered starting a new thread for this, because I promise you,
Darren replied with this:
darrenyeats;684664 Wrote:
Interesting questions. I am of the belief that certain equipment can
create or at least enhance a soundstage, much like you can have
equipment with a warm bass or tizzy treble.
For example, on my current system, some tracks don't image
..and Mnyb replied with this:
darrenyeats;684664 Wrote:
Interesting questions. I am of the belief that certain equipment can
create or at least enhance a soundstage, much like you can have
equipment with a warm bass or tizzy treble.
For example, on my current system, some tracks don't
78 matches
Mail list logo
