Quad wrote:
> Don't take the analogy too far. But yes, you're right, it's different.
>
> Me for myself I am unable to hear a difference between FLAC and WAV. But
> I can hear differences between HDMI and USB outputs with otherwise
> identical variables. They are both bit perfect. I can't give yo
darrenyeats wrote:
> In the case of the DAC1 it could be DSP headroom if you are not doing
> digital volume at the transport and you are listening to loudly mastered
> stuff (see separate thread). The DAC2 has fixed this issue. Definitely a
> real issue although perhaps not audible ... but my imp
garym wrote:
> I don't recall people indicating that it is impossible to tell the
> difference between some DACs. DACs can certainly have a sound flavor.
> But this is because DACs have an analog stage. My Transporter DAC sounds
> different from my Benchmark DAC I (and I've detected this in a dou
Quad wrote:
> I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl
> (order is not important)
>
> Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke?
>
> Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority
> can't. Many tests have proven this.
>
> But I
Quad wrote:
> The same who will tell you that it is not possible to discern different
> modern DACs. Which - with all my respect - is complete BS.
I don't recall people indicating that it is impossible to tell the
difference between some DACs. DACs can certainly have a sound flavor.
But this is
Archimago wrote:
> BTW, what did they do to the NAD to make it "Rowen Swiss"?
Basically they replaced the analogue output circuit with Mundorf gear.
Quad's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20234
Vi
Quad wrote:
> I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl
> (order is not important)
>
> Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke?
>
> Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority
> can't. Many tests have proven this.
>
> But I
garym wrote:
> but a FLAC, ALAC, WAV, etc file are all decoded to the same bits as they
> enter the DAC. A diet coke and regular coke are NOT bit perfect (my
> chemistry colleagues can tell me how the makeup is NOT identical). We
> may not typically be able to tell a difference, but if we can t
Quad wrote:
> I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl
> (order is not important)
>
> Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke?
>
> Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority
> can't. Many tests have proven this.
>
> But I
ralphpnj wrote:
> I haven't had a Coke or Diet Coke in over 30 years so I don't care
> because as far as I'm concerned they are both poison.
True, that's why I'm listening to classical music.
Quad's Profile: http://forums
Quad wrote:
> I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl
> (order is not important)
>
> Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke?
>
> Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority
> can't. Many tests have proven this.
>
> But I
I have a question for you guys: ralphpnj, Julf, Mnyb, Archimago, mlsstl
(order is not important)
Do you think you are able to discern Diet Coke and Coke?
Almost everyone claims to be able to identify them but the majority
can't. Many tests have proven this.
But I can. Here I stand; I can do non
Julf wrote:
> We have provided pointers to ABX software on the mac. It is easy for him
> to show us the ABX logs if he wants to make his point. Until then, he
> has his opinion, and while it is unrelated to any factual evidence, I
> guess he still has a right to his opinion - and we have our righ
Mnyb wrote:
> Yeah "experimental errors"
>
> Actually I missed the point where we learned that he used server side
> decoding . Then everything is not just the same hen entering the DAC by
> actually from the point where it leaves the computer ?
>
> And it is a good example of perceptual bias t
darrenyeats wrote:
> Well, I didn't say everything matters.
True. I was using the opportunity to take a swing at a typical
audiophile "truism".
> My point is, each thing that might REALLY, LOGICALLY reduce distortion
> isn't necessarily detectable in a blind test on its own. But a
> combinatio
15 matches
Mail list logo
