SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Sarcasm noted. I am a software engineer. The points I mentioned have
valid science engg behind them. For eg. Vibration affect the
crystal/oscillator there by directly contributing to Jitter.
Let me know where you have a problem with it.
My point is - do we all have
jh901 wrote:
You lost me there, Ralph. Where exactly did I comment on your audio
system?
No one must spend $90,000 on a car either, but how many of us believe
that a Camry is pretty much the same thing?
I would challenge Ralph to swap in a dCS Puccini or a Playback Designs
MPS-5.
jh901 wrote:
The formula for hearing recorded music at its very best is:
- Great electronics throughout the chain (no weak links) driving great
speakers
- Position speakers and listening position with little or no compromise
(start at the thirds)
- clean the electricity with a
ralphpnj wrote:
Thank you and I didn't mean to offend I just wanted to level the playing
field, so to speak.
Regarding your and the audiophile community's fixation with jitter
here's what I just don't understand - you and everyone can't hear it or
at least can't jitter at the levels being
jh901 wrote:
http://www.barrydiamentaudio.com/vibration.htm
You will very likely find the link useful. Enjoy and please give
Barry's advice a try and get back to us.
I have tried this before. But I feel after I put every shelf on my rack
on spikes (and the shelf itself is spiked
Chuck Norris can hear jitter.
Nuff said about it.
pippin's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13777
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Ralph - the term audible is subjective. I agree, I am sort of
obsessed with jitter. But I have not spent much on this issue and
probably lesser than you.
I buy things used and sell them if I dont hear a difference I sell them
without much loss.
Music is about
pippin wrote:
Chuck Norris can hear jitter.
Nuff said about it.
Chuck Norris gives me the jitters!
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread:
garym wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/16/dining/american-malted-whiskeys-win-acclaim.html?hp_r=0
[...] until last month, when a single-malt whiskey from the Balcones
Distillery in Waco bested nine others, including storied Scottish names
like the Balvenie and the Macallan, in a blind
if you want to make a difference to the sound of your system...the only
things that matter.
quality of the material being played.
speaker selection
transparency of electronics input=output (this is trivial to acheive,
and even the lowliest budget gear does)
room acoustics(this is the most
The audiophiles surely invest much emotionally towards the equipment ?
Almost on the verge of anthropomorphize it .
Giving it emotionally loaded attributes , the musicality and feelings
comes from the performers and possible thier instruments ( really the
instrument maker ) . Hifi is the exact
So do you guys think that all bit perfect players sound the same ?
There used to be threads on here discussing the best sounding version of
LMS (squeezeserver), how could LMS have sounded different when it is bit
perfect or did you guys never hear any differences ?
Think you have all swallowed
SBGK wrote:
So do you guys think that all bit perfect players sound the same ?
There used to be threads on here discussing the best sounding version of
LMS (squeezeserver), how could LMS have sounded different when it is bit
perfect or did you guys never hear any differences ?
Think
SBGK wrote:
There used to be threads on here discussing the best sounding version of
LMS (squeezeserver), how could LMS have sounded different when it is bit
perfect or did you guys never hear any differences ?
Weren't these threads mostly populated with your posts with some sort of
ralphpnj wrote:
This may be stating the obvious but both the TACT and the Panasonic that
you speak of contain internal DACs and preamps, it's just that both of
them do not require separate external DACs and preamps. So from a
minimalist perspective these units better than separate components
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Ralph, I know the technology behind these (I am a EE/CS major). You are
misinformed about the Panny and TACT.
Jitter is not a silly thing. It is the main thing in digital playback.
I agree that jitter is real. I'm not an engineer, but the folks that I
know that
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Ralph, I know the technology behind these (I am a EE/CS major). You are
misinformed about the Panny and TACT.
Jitter is not a silly thing. It is the main thing in digital playback.
Please explain exactly how I am misinformed about the Panasonic and the
Tact. I am
Ralph, your Transporter, I think, is pretty good jitter wise. Have you
compared the streaming performance vs connecting a digital out of a DVD
player to it ?
SoftwireEngineer's Profile:
garym wrote:
I agree that jitter is real. I'm not an engineer, but the folks that I
know that understand the technology behind digital jitter problems have
pointed out numerous times that there is literally no evidence that
human beings can detect the audio effect of jitter in any modern
garym wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/16/dining/american-malted-whiskeys-win-acclaim.html?hp_r=0
[...] until last month, when a single-malt whiskey from the Balcones
Distillery in Waco bested nine others, including storied Scottish names
like the Balvenie and the Macallan, in a blind
20 matches
Mail list logo
