SoftwireEngineer wrote:
No, I have no interest in convincing anybody of anything.
Fair enough - but it is still good to know if, when you state I can
hear a difference, you have made any attempt to objectively verify your
perception. Helps to put it in the right perspective.
Julf wrote:
Just curious, did you set up a proper double-blind ABX test?
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
No, I have no interest in convincing anybody of anything. I think I have
the lowest priced system of all the posters in this thread (but believe
the performance of my system is way high and I
aubuti wrote:
Interesting point of view. I also value price-performance, which is
exactly why I prefer to do blind testing as much as is practically
possible if only to convince _myself_. Even if you don't go the DBT
whole nine yards it is often easy to do a less rigorous, but still
Julf wrote:
Fair enough - but it is still good to know if, when you state I can
hear a difference, you have made any attempt to objectively verify your
perception. Helps to put it in the right perspective.
Doing this doesn't have to be hard - just revert back to your previous
setup and
guidof wrote:
That great wine sure tastes not so great out of a styrofoam cup . . .
Agree 100%. Though it may still taste better than a crummy wine out of a
styrofoam cup. Empirical question, more research needed
maggior wrote:
Doing this doesn't have to be hard - just revert back to your previous
setup and replay what sounded different/better. A regular scenario with
me is I'll listen to something after making a change (software,
hardware, new headphones, new speakers...whatever) and think wow,
Re: double-blind testing - Earlier (10 yrs ago - before the kids) I used
to have a little bit more time to play around with my system. Either, I
get some friends to listen or even my wife to listen when I keep
changing things (my wife has more musical skills than I do). Nowadays,
too busy with
The latest issue of The Absolute Sound (Issue 230, February 2013)
features several reviews of some interesting equipment however the
review of the Lamm ML2.2 Single-Ended Triode Amplier (monoblock at
$37,290 per pair) by editor Robert Harley is not one them. The headline
of the review asks the
A reminder to get all results / submissions in! About 1 week left.
As of this AM, total 124 submissions.
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread:
Hi there,
I do believe there are some very minor improvements to be made by
changing for example the stock PSU adapter of the Touch with a better
one ;-)
We tested last week actually.
A Touch with stock power and a ultra-lineair,battery driven solution.
Together (3 of us) could hear a very
ralphpnj wrote:
The latest issue of The Absolute Sound (Issue 230, February 2013)
features several reviews of some interesting equipment however the
review of the Lamm ML2.2 Single-Ended Triode Amplier (monoblock at
$37,290 per pair) by editor Robert Harley is not one them. The headline
of
Mnyb wrote:
Why are you torturing yourself like this and it is waste of energy and
paper to print this stuff
While it's true that reading TAS can at times be very similar to torture
I do find it interesting to follow along as the latest audiophile trends
are created out of thin air. For
jvanhambelgium wrote:
Together (3 of us) could hear a very subtile improvement
Was that in a double-blind ABX setting?
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread:
ralphpnj wrote:
While it's true that reading TAS can at times be very similar to torture
I do find it interesting to follow along as the latest audiophile trends
are created out of thin air. For example, the current craze over
asynchronous USB and super low jitter is a DIRECT result of all
Mnyb wrote:
DSD itself is close to a scam , it's real value an effort to copy
protection by obscurity sacd ripping is very rare .
Not true. The older Sony PS3s featured digital output of SACDs and many
people have used this feature to rip SACDs to DSD encoded tracks which
are then convert to
ralphpnj wrote:
Not true. The older Sony PS3s featured digital output of SACDs and many
people have used this feature to rip SACDs to DSD encoded tracks which
are then convert to 24bit/88.2kHz PCM. A simple google search will give
you lots of hits on where you find some of the these rips.
I
Mnyb wrote:
I know about the ps3 trick maybe I have different ideas on what counts
as rare , connecting a digital out to a soundboard with digital in (not
everyone have this ) and playing the sacd in real time 40-70 minutes ,
use some software to snip it up in tracks etc looks like hours of
Ok so the ps3 can make iso's , pity I don't have one if I play games I
use my pc , but on the other hand I don't hav that many SACD hybrids
either ,will investigate other sources for the files
Mnyb's Profile:
Mnyb wrote:
Ok so the ps3 can make iso's , pity I don't have one if I play games I
use my pc , but on the other hand I don't hav that many SACD hybrids
either ,will investigate other sources for the files
And you can burn the iso files using a computer to a DVD which will then
play as an
ralphpnj wrote:
And you can burn the iso files using a computer to a DVD which will then
play as an SACD on some SACD players, such as the Oppo BDP-83. The list
of tested SACDs players can be easily found.
Unfortunately an SACD made from a PS3 derived iso file will sound vastly
inferior
Yep the Dalby D7 at only 55k£ ish prices
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?97505-Gold-Standard-in-Audio.
Can we build a complete hifi that does not work and get it up to a
million $ .
The Dalby may be overqualified , there must be something similarly
priced with really horrible
21 matches
Mail list logo
