arnyk wrote:
> Key to the audiophile credibility for such weirdness is the fact that
> audiophiles in general rarely hear live music, they avoid good listening
> tests, and that they can never properly audition the live feed from a
> good microphone or the console at a live performance.
You migh
SBGK wrote:
> why would they do that if the dac was immune to any gremlins fed to it ?
Probably for the same reason they already do all kinds of tweaks and add
all kinds of accessories that have no effect.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art
netchord wrote:
> I don't suffer from yours.
No reason why not.
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104227
_
SBGK wrote:
> why would they do that if the dac was immune to any gremlins fed to it ?
Because they are bullied into such wasteful purchases by unscrupulous
audio manufacturers, dealers and other audiophiles.
The audiophile culture has created a population of people who crave
influence and make
Julf wrote:
> Well, except... My point was that true audiophiles tend to declare
> asynchronous sample rate converters Truly Evil - probably because they
> make the whole jitter discussion a non-issue, and in a simple way, so
> that can't be good.
>
> The answer to by SBGK's question (that no d
Julf wrote:
> Well, except... My point was that true audiophiles tend to declare
> asynchronous sample rate converters Truly Evil - probably because they
> make the whole jitter discussion a non-issue, and in a simple way, so
> that can't be good.
>
> The answer to by SBGK's question (that no d
Julf wrote:
> I agree with not drinking and typing, but how can you *read* an
> audiophile forum and not drink?
Consider the source. ;-)
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thr
arnyk wrote:
> We already went through one stage of gratuitous reclocking with the
> advent of Asynch DACs, and look where that got us - a perceived need for
> another stage of reclocking!
>
> I have no doubt that given the low cost of parts to implement, and the
> almost universal gullibility o
ralphpnj wrote:
> What they said.
Well, except... My point was that true audiophiles tend to declare
asynchronous sample rate converters Truly Evil - probably because they
make the whole jitter discussion a non-issue, and in a simple way, so
that can't be good.
The answer to by SBGK's question
SBGK wrote:
> so what will you say when manufacturers start making their dacs with
> regen type devices already included and people prefer the sq of those to
> previous versions ? will that also be some form of mass delusion ?
See below:
Archimago wrote:
> What, USB DACs with a USB hub chip in
Archimago wrote:
> Julf. You should know better than to drink and type on an audiophile
> forum. :-)
I agree with not drinking and typing, but how can you *read* an
audiophile forum and not drink?
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high
Archimago wrote:
> What, USB DACs with a USB hub chip in front of the on-board
> microcontroller to "reclock" or "regenerate" or whatever?
>
We already went through one stage of gratuitous reclocking with the
advent of Asynch DACs, and look where that got us - a perceived need for
another stage
SBGK wrote:
> so what will you say when manufacturers start making their dacs with
> regen type devices already included and people prefer the sq of those to
> previous versions ? will that also be some form of mass delusion ?
I will do what everybody should do all the time, and what you should
13 matches
Mail list logo
