Just invited the boys at ComputerAudiophile General Forum last night...
One stat I'll reveal - 100% male response. Would be amazing to get even
one lady respond!
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
ralphpnj wrote:
Perhaps ZZJolx's mom will take the test but first you have to add some
Skynyrd samples :)
LOL Ralph. I'll remember that next time... :eek:
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Julf wrote:
Interesting - that will test how good your masking is - if one of them
figures out a way to tell the samples apart, they will all use that
instead of actually listening (this based on a similar listening test I
did over at CA at one point, that had to be stopped prematurely
Julf wrote:
You do realize that if your test is successful you will probably be
banned? :)
Well... So be it if that is the case. How odd it is that in 2014, there
would even be controversy in using blind testing to empirically explore
thresholds of human perception. As if there's some kind of
Indeed, I agree, overall a nice article. I like that little embedded
video talking about the limitations of vinyl mastering. Indeed that RIAA
curve is nasty and the old LP technology is full of compromises we have
taken for granted with the freedom of digital. (Makes issues like
jitter
Adam,
Since your friend did the test on the Goldberg already, tonight I just
did a null test on 'Bozza' and 'Vivaldi'. Looks fine to me with peak
amplitude differences at -90dB or so for both.
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Mnyb wrote:
Should the results for goldberg be discarded if there is some kind
bias aviable on some fora ?
It can go either way ? but can it be relied on ?
To counter this effect don't search to much on the net on this but
simply take the test under natural listening konditions and
answer would
depend on the sort of dither used..
Actually someone whose judgment I trust has confirmed a null with the
harpsichord [no it isn't it's a piano- what was I thinking of?] track
down to -98dB. Anyway I was not wanting to encourage cheating, I was
simply wanting to warn Archimago
adamdea wrote:
I have posted a link to this test (mistakenly suggesting that it is
16/44 vs 24/96 but i hope to be able to correct that) on Pinkfish.
It has been suggested on that site by someone that the two files do not
null to the expected level. *Archimago could you possibly check
Pascal Hibon wrote:
I just filled out the questionnaire... looking forward to the results.
I have also posted the link on a Belgian audio forum and hope that many
members will participate.
Another interesting test would be to compare CD quality to high res
material.
Thanks Pascal!
Just put in an invite to Audio Asylum... Many audiophiles hang out there
but it's not a big site either in terms of head count I suspect!
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
foxx wrote:
When I wrote 'spotted' I meant 'heard'.
Certainly, I did take a look at file sizes and creation dates ... but
those might be deliberately misleading. And I am missing more elaborate
tools and the technical understanding to investigate any further.
Indeed I was aware of those
It's live :-). Simple question... Can you tell the difference between
24/96 and 16/96 (encapsulated in 24/96 container) audio? Is there merit
to 24-bit even necessary for home audio reproduction?
Thanks for some of you who participated on the beta test over the last
week.
Feel free to have
BTW: Could someone invite Neil Young? Thanks. :cool:
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this
JJZolx wrote:
Most audiophiles think ABX testing is worthless. Why would they want to
ABX these samples? It's like telling an atheist to try praying to some
god or another and seeing if they get any results.
I'm also not sure what exactly the point would be of encoding them both
at 24/96
Great discussion guys...
I agree with Mnyb around the topic of measurements. Diffmaker
comparisons which null out pretty much tells us if there's any
difference at all. As for the idea of needing more and fancy tests,
well, of course there could be things to try... For example, on my blog
Mnyb:
Yes, Channel Classics is deep into the audiophile hardware kool-aid.
However, the recordings are still good and I can enjoy both the DSD and
PCM conversions.
Funny thing was about a month ago I E-mailed them that the 24/192
version provided no benefit due to use of Saracon (which they
Good discussion boys and I don't think there is a need to fight over
this either... Whatever works is fine. High-res formats are already
capable of retaining accuracy enough for anyone's needs and the
limitations of the recording studio. The issue here is nothing even
close to measurable and
dhallag wrote:
haha... good different or bad different?
Well... That depends if you believe non-flat frequency response and
harmonic distortion could result in euphonic outcome. They very well
could and I certainly didn't think the DACs sounded bad. I didn't like
the Eastern Electric MinMax
dhallag wrote:
I also saw the Touch Transport numbers and I was so happy to see that
there are no audible differences between USB/Coax/Toslink. (The more
and more I learn about the Touch), the more impressed I am with this
technology. So your point is sound on how the Jolida will handle
Interesting comment Firedog. I have not heard the Sony but will
certainly give it a try when I'm next at the dealer.
As one who has been buying SACDs since about 2001, ripping my SACDs
since 2012, having played with PCM -- DSD conversions like with JRiver
upsampling, and have some experience
dhallag wrote:
Here is a review and thread about the new Jolida Glass FX Tube DAC III.
http://www.hifiwigwam.com/showthread.php?98652-Jolida-Glass-FX-Tube-DAC-III
I've ordered one and wanted to share my excitement.
Enjoy...
I've hear 2 DACs with tubes. An Eastern Electric one switchable
I have heard the power supply (or at least a similar Boulder supply)
paired with a SB3 a number of years back before a friend sold it off.
I could never tell a difference but of course the SB3's analogue out is
not as good as the Touch.
As a digital source, it would not make sense to me how
dhallag wrote:
- I'm running LMS on my QNAP NAS. That was my first change. Since I
did that, everything seems to move faster -- the GUI on the Duet
controller and Touch. Plus the songs load faster so I love this change.
It's got a 1.6Ghz CPU with 512DDRIII so I believe that is powerful
Nice! Interesting blog...
Impressed that in the UK at least, there's some demand for accuracy and
the UK Advertising Authority is calling on a ban of Sony's stair
stepped ad :-)
dhallag wrote:
With the advent of more sources offering 96/24 and 192/24 offerings
(HDTracks and Youngs new Pono music), I'm starting to have more music
that is at least 96/24. The Touch has no problem handing the 96/24 and
192/24, but the SB receiver does --- it does play them, but I get
darrenyeats wrote:
I hated every multi-channel experience I've had so far. But that's just
my opinion.
Having had some surprisingly immersive 2 channel experiences, it seems
multi-channel is the wrong solution to a problem of flat-sounding 2
channel systems.
As with everything, YMMV
mlsstl wrote:
I believe the same will be true if multichannel becomes the defacto
standard. The urge to use trendy effects will be irresistible. The
capability for improved realism will be considered far too boring for
many recordings and we'll be back to where were are with CDs today and
jfo wrote:
I have been checking out the AIX site. How are you playing the 5.1's?
Downloading and burning to DVD?
5 options I see:
1. Author to DVD - but you would need to convert the surround sound to
Dolby Digital or DTS. This would be lossy and lose the high resolution
benefits.
2. Author
Mnyb wrote:
Well should not audiophiles be used to boring :) see all this audiophile
music .
just this track or do you plan to have more tracks ? ( with more
instruments ) .
. the 16bit version , is the algorithm you use transparent ? So that you
don't get false positives.
A
Julf wrote:
Proper dithering should do it.
Absolutely - will use iZotope RX 3 MBIT+.
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile:
Guys, I feel like we're in some kind of audio time warp...
We rehash PCM 24/192 for the on-line world (DVD-A -- HDTracks) starting
~2009
We rehash DSD64 for the on-line world (SACD -- DSD64 downloads)
starting ~2012
We now rehash the *super tweeter* in concert with the hi-res experience
in
Peiter wrote:
I know music is a matter of personal taste, but man ... Goldberg
Variations BWV 988 is borring.
:-)
Boring or not, I just want audiophiles to test if they can really tell
the difference between 24-bit and 16-bit. (As many claim they can!)
Archimago's Musings:
bz31 wrote:
http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/
Thanks for the input guys!
Thanks bz31 for the Goldberg Variation suggestion... This looks and
sounds very good. Furthermore, being public domain with good background
on the provenance of the recording, I think this one would be a
fantastic
Mnyb wrote:
Mark Waldrep is his name .
Free files http://itrax.com/Pages/ArticleDetails.php?aID=44
You probably have to ask if he would be cool with you resampling and
redistribute .
What can be sure of with AIX records is that the music is recorded in
hirez at the source ie AD
Mnyb wrote:
Nice little thing , wonder how it would fare with squeezelite on one of
those plug computer cubie boxes or RasPI or wandboard and whatnot , you
may have to get an 3,5mm headphone to RCA cable buts that's trivial .
That there is no need for extra drivers makes it promising for
Hi guys.
Read something funny on TAS yesterday. So wanted to try another test...
Can anyone recommend a FREE, well recorded piece of music which *should*
demonstrate the superiority of 24-bit audio that I can chop up /
manipulate / post for a future on-line audio test?
Just don't want to run
marflao wrote:
Can't you use one of the free 24bit downloads at the 2L webpage? Or
won't that work for your project? ;-)
Btw.. many thanks for your splendid tests. I really enjoy them every
time.
Looking forward to the next one.
Yeah... They're freely available but I doubt they'd be cool
Hi guys. Lots of chatter in the last while with the Geek Out and these
small USB DACs starting with the Dragonfly a couple years back...
Got my hands on the Audioengine D3 locally and wanted to check out the
performance using a few different machines. Not bad at all given the USB
power and all!
Daverz wrote:
Got my RBCD copy. It is very compressed sounding to my ears.
Everything is at the same volume level. Other words that come to mind
are flat, processed, and hashy. All this works against the ambience
that the music seems to be trying to create. It's nice music, but I
think
ralphpnj wrote:
The moral of this story is quite simple: if there is no penalty for
lying then why bother to tell the truth.
*That* is the truth.
What a joke... If Ludwig is to be believed that he mixed everything in
24/96, then he must have received *ALL* MP3-encoded masters for those 2
JJ77 wrote:
...
Just listened to some Flac Masters from Linn /records at 44.1Khz 24bit.
Although these are very good, The DSF converted files do sound more
detailed and live to me (again they are not the same songs/recordings
so very subjective.). I can really see where you have to decide
ralphpnj wrote:
There is one simple fix for HDTracks to resolve this whole mess:
HDTracks should just convert the 24/96 PCM tracks to DSD!
Once everything is convert to DSD is it, by default, Audiophile quality
- regardless of what any stupid graphs might show :)
Nice one... Alas,
ralphpnj wrote:
I believe that you almost have it but there are still two things
missing:
First you must copy the PCM files onto a Mac Mini then you must run it
through a *TUBE* DAC with asynchronous USB, then ANALOGUE TAPE, then
ANALOGUE CONSOLE, then a Meitner DSD ADC and then back to
JohnSwenson wrote:
I was actually IR laser light, this is a very important distinction. CD
players (NOT DVD players) used IR light to read the pits, the particular
green ink had a strong absorption to the IR wavelength used by the
laser, which did cut down on some leakage coming out of the
Thanks for the tip Wombat.
It appears that there's more of an issue with Morning Phase than I
originally thought beyond DR6!
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2014/03/follow-up-anomalies-in-becks-morning.html
Sad... Really...
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
Daverz wrote:
I have to say, I don't trust results with headphones, because of the way
they tend to collapse spatial information. But then all that matters is
the results on the equipment that you'll use for your own listening.
That's an interesting common sentiment I hear especially
Daverz wrote:
One will certainly pick up a lot of details on headphones, but I think
you lose some other kinds of audible detail because of the way
headphones interact (or don't) with the pinna.
I'll try to do some of my own testing here by downsampling with sox as
suggested earlier.
Alright guys... Time to just put this out there now that it has been a
few years since relative widespread availability of high-resolution
audio in the form of HDTracks and such. The recent Beck album is an
important example of concerns around the wastefulness of these high
bitrate files being
Greening the edge of CD's was all the rage around the time I first got
some $$$ to buy audio stuff.
Start date: ~1990
Reason for the buzz: Some vague theory about stray red laser light
bouncing around the polycarbonate. An article in ICE (International CD
Exchange) apparently. Green supposed to
It will be a sad day when my Transporter dies :-(
In late 2012 after the announcement that the Squeezebox was
discontinued, I managed to buy a used Touch. This is the unit I did all
the tests on last year. Well, I put the Touch away back in its box in
storage yesterday since I still have my old
Nice no-nonsense article... The kind of thing you'd expect from computer
geeks ;)
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile:
Nice ones Stephen and Wombat... :-)
Wombat: Boy I hope you didn't have to do a day shift the next day if you
went to bed after 0400!
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Julf wrote:
With an active repeater that regenerates the signal, yes. But a normal
USB cable shouldn't be longer than 3 or 5 m.
Correct, standard USB should not be longer than about 15-20 feet.
An inexpensive active USB extender like the one I wrote about can
connect to my TEAC UD-501 at
Hey guys. Had a listen and got a chance to photograph the Nautilus last
weekend... Good pair of speakers but the design is clearly showing its
age.
Don't know about you folks, but I'd never get my wife to accept such a
contraption in the home :-).
darrenyeats wrote:
I wonder if the dynamically compressed recordings as a reason for the
fatigue was a bit of an excuse. IMO dynamic compression is not welcome
at the mastering stage, it's different to reality ... but that doesn't
mean it's -unpleasant- per se. A well sorted system should be
cliveb wrote:
IME extreme dynamic compression does indeed render some music
unlistenable on good quality systems. It seems to me that revealing
systems do exactly that: they *reveal* how bad the mastering is.
Examples: Some years ago I noticed that Coldplay's XY sounded pretty
ropey on
cliveb wrote:
Thanks for your impressions. The Nautilus is a legend, and deservedly
so. Being a 20 year old design is no barrier to good performance.
Remember that some people think that the best speaker in history *ever*
is the original Quad ESL - which came out in 1957.
Regarding your
Hey guys, I didn't post on this last week when I brought up the 'Philips
Golden Ears Challenge'
(https://www.goldenears.philips.com/en/index.html) on the blog. But I
have been contacted by a couple folks on here who took the challenge and
earned their Golden Ears :-).
I don't think he'd mind me
Fantastic info. Thanks John.
BTW: Are you running room correction software on these? Curious what
plugin...
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile:
darrenyeats wrote:
I pondered upon your comments and then I looked through Stereophile's
measurements on DACs with interesting results. See my post here:
http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=151401 I hope you
don't mind me name-dropping you!
Interesting post Darren...
John, which Wandboard are you guys basing the CSP design off of? Duo,
quad?
Thanks...
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile:
Peiter wrote:
Unfortunately I did not save the link to that discussion. As I recall I
found that forum via a link on Your homepage.
No prob... I'll keep my eyes peeled. Looks like something the inmates at
the Audio Asylum would be discussing. Just curious what brands they'd be
claiming to be
cliveb wrote:
IMHO he's regurgitated a number of dogmas loosely based on a distorted
understanding of the facts.
And at the end he says he doesn't know why hi-res sounds better than CD,
when he has a trivial method of finding out. All he needs to do is take
one of his beloved hi-res
Peiter wrote:
Archimago, keep on your good work. I'll refer to your pages when
possible ...
The other day, I read on a forum about the importance of the Network
switch when streaming digital audio. Some was convinced that Switch A
was a lot better sounding than Switch B
Thanks
Here you go... Measurements of an Oppo BDP-105 using one of
audiophileland's valued company's products. I'm just amazed at the
kind of attention Synergistic / Ted Denney gets at various supposedly
respected places on the Net. Fancy power cables indeed...
SBGK wrote:
Can you prove your measurements are relevant to how something sounds ?
As I said in the article, the system can detect the slightest
differences like the minimal phase filtering effects (eg. TEAC DAC
filter settings)... I personally cannot hear significant differences
between say
Julf wrote:
Indeed - it is the problem of proving that unicorns don't exist. All we
can say is that it is extremely unlikely that they exist.
Further to this, it really should be upon the believer of said unicorn
to provide the evidence of its existence.
Certainly before one starts charging
acuety below -100
dB in a room you will start to hear the blood in your own ears as in an
anoic chamber .
People have done experiments mixing in jet engines and marching bands in
the last bits of CD quality audio and no one can hear that . Archimago
measures below that
...
Figured you'd enjoy
SBGK wrote:
or maybe you guys are wrong and the rest of the world is right. Is that
a possibility ?
Of course it's a possibility. Just not likely based on well understood
science and the fact that the science was used to create our electronic
gadgets and the lack of evidence for many of these
darrenyeats wrote:
$500 USB cable is foo, therefore all audiophile claims are foo?
Surely, Darren, you know exactly the kind of foo-lishness we're talking
about...
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Interesting discussion boys girls.
Posted a little something on Audio PCs this week for the blog.
A few months ago, I think it was Mnyb who suggested I have a look at one
of the audiophiles' cherished products. Managed to track one down
:-). Look for some interesting pictures and results in
castalla wrote:
Ahem - it's the love of money actually. As I said earlier it's a
sort of wealth distribution - there are better ones, but that's for
another argument.
Yup... Love of money... The point I think still applies (perhaps even
more so for the snakeoil salespersons).
Found a really crappy piece of USB cable from the turn of the century
:-)
A demonstration of what a poor USB cable sounds like to demonstrate the
effects of digital errors with an asynchronous USB DAC like the ASUS
Essence One. Also a look at the jitter test...
Kellen wrote:
My RMMA results gave me final noise level at -106.1 but I am talking
about the screenshot which shows information down -130+ like with your
Touch screen shot in your blog being showed underneath here. I wonder
about these very low readings that are passed the EMUs skills.
darrenyeats wrote:
What about here
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/02/measurements-logitech-touch-as-transport.html
for 24/96? You have different results for RCA and cheap RCA.
Good point. Fair enough :-). That was a demonstration of noise getting
into the DAC from an unshielded RCA cable
Kellen wrote:
And many of my thanks go out to you, Archimago.
I did the loopbacks test and got each of noise and dynamic range @
-112db. My thinking is this reading is the best the EMU can perform at,
no? If so, how can it show my Touch testings @ -130db as it does? Is it
a guess work
darrenyeats wrote:
Right but a reasonably intelligent and well educated person finding
something -implausible- does not constitute fact!
Not long ago, it was a fact that digital transports and cables couldn't
make a difference for DACs, until Archimago got his measuring stick
out.
Just
Stratmangler wrote:
Are you still using the noisy SMPS supplied with it?
A decent quiet PSU lifts the performance levels considerably, at least
it does in my experience.
I've used both over the past year... Borrowed a friend's linear power
supply about 6 months back. Interestingly, I didn't
Kellen wrote:
I solved the stereo crosstalk problem by interchanging L-R RCA's. Now,
measuring -103 dB and getting excellent rating.
Was thinking would this EMU and RMAA combinations be good to
measure power amp performances?
That's more like it!
And you'll (likely) see that the
Kellen wrote:
Was also wondering just how accurate the EMU is because on some of these
graphs it is showing levels way low like -130dB. If not accurate to
these low levels does it make wrong the results? Merci.
This has been accurate in my testing. The noise floor varies depending
on the
Kellen wrote:
Wow, this is awesome stuffs.
I also have a EMU 0404USB which I have used for years to record stuff
with my band. I never thought to use it to measure like you are here.
I think I will download the RMAA software and do a test on my Touch.
Just for interests sake.
Hi
mintaudio wrote:
I find your blog very interesting.. keep up the good work. I doubt it
would be very popular over at 'Computer Audiophile' though!
Smopular popular :-)
Doesn't matter really... The interesting thing is that even if there are
lots of disagreements and gnashing of audiophile
Probably the last measurement for the year :-).
Let's see what adding a 50-ft Cat5e cable extender does to the DAC's
audio output... If USB cables are *that* important, surely this should
ruin a few things like worsen jitter substantially, right? Measurements
with my -asynchronous- TEAC UD-501
Hey guys... Just thought I'd share what I'm rocking these days. Still
lots to do in the sound room - very bare walls and the rug's taking its
sweet time in arriving!
Nonetheless, lots of fun putting the pieces together and loving what's
coming out of my good 'ol Transporter.
Have a wonderful
Mnyb wrote:
Good !
But for the sake of discussion , if you tested this program and got the
usuall null result . There would be next program and the one after that
and so forth.
That test with completely different OS and computers still outputting
the exact same thing is a good indicator
Mnyb wrote:
I would,suggests that Archimago has the equipment and the vervital to
test this , but I doubt he will .
He has done similar products, so one more ?.
And by the reason I jut gave that there are endless flawed ideas for
every correct one it would be endless work to follow every
Yes, 24/88 plays great on the Transporter...
I have a bunch of DSD/SACD rips in this format so having this feature is
a must for me. If the Transporter did not handle this sample rate
well, I would have likely moved on!
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
Wow, looks like you need to also buy a copy of Windows Server 2012 to
get this to work (assuming you're not running it already).
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Pneumonic wrote:
Given that not one of us has - identical systems, setup in the same
room, with the same music being played - any subjective comparison on
what any us can or can't hear lacks a true reference and is nothing more
than an exercise in futility as it is nothing more than a
heisenberg wrote:
I was very saddened when I discovered that I can't reliably tell whether
the music playing is from a 320 kbps mp3 or from a lossless source.
Hence, I'm not into chasing after 24/192 -- like you've said, a complete
overkill.
Like Mnyb said, do not be saddened by this. I
jimbobvfr400 wrote:
I did however have some older MP3 files (that I've since replaced with
FLAC) where I could tell an immediate difference, or at least I think I
could?
I really do think Lame has been improved quite a bit in the later
versions, either that or I was an idiot and
Mnyb wrote:
Thanks again for the measurement part .
Hdmi has been accused of horrible jitter in it's implementation ?
And there are probably some not so fantastic implementations out there
especially older ht amps .
Can you see any of that in this Onkyo amp ?
What's the spectrum
ralphpnj wrote:
Thank you so much for presenting a clear and very reasonable
introduction and review to this wonderful new product. However I do have
a few questions which I feel are very important.
As you know the new audiophile standard for listening to computer based
audio is the Mac
Greetings.
True to his word, Keaton Goulden-Eyre has reviewed another set of cables
for me... Along with some HDMI cable measurements...
Enjoy :-)
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/11/guest-review-measurements-quantum-hdmi.html
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
Nice one Ralph :-).
Taking the creative writing class again, eh?
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
ralphpnj wrote:
The sad part is that what we all readily see as a complete farce is most
likely not that far from reality.
So in reality I'm right the cutting edge of high end audio marketing.
Now all that is needed is a very serious review by of the audio clowns.
:rolleyes:
Although
Hey guys,
Been away for awhile on vacation and general summer merriment :cool:
Anyhow, life's busy but found some time to have a look/listen to the
realtime PCM-to-DSD conversion process found in JRiver MC19. As usual,
details on my blog...
'PCM-to-DSD Upsampling Effects (JRiver MC19 Beta)
'
Haven't been through the forums much... Lots to do over the summer to
worry about audio!
However, I managed to borrow one of these units from my brother-in-law
to check out. So... For those who may have wondered what a current low
end digital streamer measures like in terms of analogue out and
Hello guys... Been away for a little while. In any case, managed to put
something up from some measurements I did a few weeks back. Thought I'd
try out one of Stereophile's digital tests which they've been doing for
ages!
501 - 600 of 1055 matches
Mail list logo
