Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I meant aligning REW's VA to HRR 10 and then applying the convolution filters to RMS Average (Steady State representation) yields etc
  3. IME, all audio devices don't have good filtration at the power supply - that is, it's trivially easy to introduce some electrical noise making device or process into the environment, and hear the impact on the SQ ... just read the reports of companies struggling to get good sound in a show situation, and how they had to deal with the "lousy hotel power!"
  4. if you are so inclined give Gentooplayer a try. I have been using since my review as an Squeezelite endpoint for my Roon system. http://Gentooplayer.com There is a pretty active thread here on Audiophile Style I am running Gentooplayer on my Ryzen 7 system right now. it is my Roon core and a Squeezelite endpoint for my Kii Threes.
  5. Having listened to Moode on the Allo USBridge Signature Endpoint for a couple of days I just found it too muddy and syrupy with my Khadas Tone Board. Switching back to Ropieee, brought sparkle and dynamics back to the music. It’s all subjective. What works for one listener won’t work for another.
  6. I'm looking to add optical isolation to my USB chain. The Monoprice slimrun is hard to find. Is the one made by FIBBR essentially the same cable achieving the same sound quality? Or, is it compromised like the Corning model? https://www.amazon.com/FIBBR-Female-Active-Extension-Optical/dp/B07BW91RHZ/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=FIBBR&qid=1594161696&sr=8-4
  7. I will have to reassess my Matching House Curves and Mastering .xls For what matters is the fit between creation and listening conditions and, unless you have excellent on fly tone controls, you need several operational room response options, in hope of recreating the conditions in which the Art was created. Personal tastes, loudspeakers behavior etc etc : can’t say there’s no argument for personal operational room response but I hereby suggest ways*, to have at hand EBU/ITU standard, historical B&K and Harman’s RR1 of most recent fame, that all are likely to have been in use in good mastering facilities one time or another. *taking into account advanced acoustics thanks to time-windowing etc, and with much better Impulse etc correction also simply because the Amplitude and the Time domains are corrected on the same basis Inputs are welcome Matching House Curves and Mastering.xlsx
  8. Japanese humour using an elevator https://www.dropbox.com/s/2gdhvoogv7p8n3q/Ascenseur_japonais___Pa_Mo-1.mp4?dl=0
  9. I don't know whether there's academic work to back this up, but I have the general notion that in terms of sensory stimuli, discrimination and pattern matching are two different things. Regarding discrimination, as @Audiophile Neuroscience and @Summit are saying, there seems to be a propensity to choose on the basis of a particular quality - sweetness when tasting soft drinks (wonder whether it's sweetness or something else that predominates in blind wine tastings?), loudness in audio (for example, blind violin listening tests, even when done by very accomplished violinists; or the hi res listening test done by former member Julf with the assistance of the principal of BIS recordings, where forum members by a large margin chose a file that was, unknown to them, 1dB louder than the rest as sounding best). Sensory memories are quite short - perhaps 4 seconds in the case of audio; I don't know about taste, but I imagine it's not terribly different. It's not at all surprising we'd need a strong, very recognizable quality to impress us as different in that short amount of time. And I think many of us have experienced the sense of being at sea, of having nothing to go on, when such a strong stimulus is absent and/or a comparison takes longer than 4 seconds. So the fact that so many blind tests show an inability to discriminate isn't surprising, but fully expected. Pattern matching is very different. There's the New Coke example - sweetness is preferred in a quick discrimination test, but when millions of customers sat back with a New Coke on a hot summer day and it just didn't taste "right" - didn't fit the familiar, comfortable pattern - they noticed, despite passage of a lot more than a few seconds since they'd tasted an original Coke. And of course in audio there's the familiar example many people have mentioned of a family member's voice on the phone - you recognize it instantly as matching the pattern of dad, mom, sibling, spouse, child, even if months have passed, and even on a connection that doesn't provide the best audio quality. People are so good at audio pattern matching that, for example, they are recruited to try to discern patterns in Jupiter's radio emissions. In fact we will even discern patterns that don't really exist - that's what optical and audible illusions are. Which of these are we doing when we enjoy listening to music? I certainly don't think we're trying to do loudness comparisons. I'd say our enjoyment arguably lies in how much the tone of a violin or acoustic guitar, or the sound of a human voice, reminds us of the real thing, and excites the same emotions as the real thing did. A few years ago I conducted a little test here in the forums. One acoustic guitar (classic Gibson, big round sound hole) was playing in one channel, a very different acoustic guitar (a very old Epiphone with small f-holes like a violin) in the other. The task was to determine which guitar was playing in which channel. Self-declared objectivists were given a selection that repeated 2 seconds on and 2 seconds off for 30 seconds. A rapid comparison, as an objectivist can tell you, is best for discrimination when doing the most common form of blind testing, i.e., listening to selection A, then quickly comparing it to selection B. So that's why they got that sort of test, even though there was no sequential comparison - both guitars were playing throughout the 2 seconds, one in each channel. Self-declared subjectivists were simply given a 30-second selection, because they don't tend to be concerned about quick comparisons, the length of echoic memory, and suchlike. The guitars sounded different enough that most people got it right. But not surprisingly, a higher proportion of those listening to the 30 second selection got it right than those who had only 2 second repeated snippets to work with. (Only 1 person out of 45, who said he was using an iPhone and earbuds, could not distinguish between guitars in the 30 second selection.) Statistically the results should only have occurred 6% of the time by chance, so there is some level of assurance this was a real effect. It seems to me that the act of trying to discriminate between sequential selections by blind testing may not be the best way to model what we actually are doing when we sit down to enjoy our music, to enjoy the familiar patterns of instruments or vocals. What does this have to do with measurements? Well, how do we determine what levels of various measurements of distortions, for example, are audible and thus important? By discrimination tests. And I wonder how well such tests simulate our ability to detect the pattern of something that "sounds right." After all, the taste discrimination tests that led to New Coke did not seem to do a very good job developing something that "tasted right" to legions of people accustomed to the taste pattern of original Coke.
  10. Using the same process but starting with a HRR of 12 dB, we get a nice RR1 fit. the RR1 is attached only for verification purpose if you do the thing rr1 KR.txt
  11. The Harman Curve yields a B&K operational room response. I chose to build upon the above response, adding a eQ set based on the Harman Curve only above 160 Hz (did not want to redo the steep raise region). the BK is attached only for verification purpose if you do the thing BandK-original-curve.txt
  12. HRR 10 can be computed from Harman’s literature; applied to REW’s VA it yields a EBU compliant operational room response. I advise you to manually finalize the Amplitude correction in RePhase because of discrepancies in the steep raise region.
  13. A whole thread I created on the topic got deleted by Chris who, previously, had heavily edited a quarrel we had in order to sarcastically create The Cucumber's Own "Advice" thread. Is this one going to get Le Concombre banned? Can’t believe it, can’t believe our beloved host was embarrassed by my challenging of the operational room response Mitch Barnett designed for him because of a business tie with Wilson Audio and because WA doesn’t publish any anechoic measurement on and off axis, while well behaved directivity is a prerequisite to apply eQ above 300/400 Hz. Maybe, even, Chris and I do favour the same target in the end. Can’t tell for sure, he refers to EBU 3276 by how the result looks but does not specify measurements conditions. I’d be happy to praise him. Neither can I believe Mitch Barnett withholds information for business reasons. Just wish he would have chimed in to say what he wrote in another forum ( https://www.audio “science” review/forum/index.php?threads/what-is-your-favorite-house-curve.2382/page-2) : “Additionally, the B&K curve is based on 1/3 octave pink noise, which is much different than the DSP stimulus and analysis software used today. However, one can figure out what the target has to look like in the design software in order to produce the B&K curve, and validating using the same measurement technique as described in the application note.” And I’m sure he means well when he suggests to Scott a change of target, with no specification of the measurement averaging, rather than a change of averaging of his measurements : http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?39134-Harman-Target-Curve and if I don’t get his point when he says that REW + RePhase can’t do as well as dedicated software it’s certainly for I miss some info and I’m sure there only have been misunderstandings with Chris and Mitch. Nevertheless, I think I have good insights and reverse engineering to share. So, here is for the DIYers with Donation Free Softwares and with loudspeakers of known and published excellent directivity control such as my Cabasse… In order to correct Time Domain as well as Amplitude, REW must be complemented by RePhase. It’s been described here and elsewhere (look for Swissbear) that the average of measurements to consider in REW is then the Time-Windowed Vector Average, the lowest in the attached graph and very different from the top averages, that are obtained by MMM or non FDWed RMS averaging, both representation of the Steady State. On one hand, EBU 3276, B&K and Harman’s RR1 pertain to Steady State, on the other hand it’s not what you want to correct, thanks to time-windowing, as Mitch, quoting Olive, Toole, etc, abundantly explains here and elsewhere. Of course you can purchase software that does the job and/or hire Mitch but if you have the heart to DIY, I’m pretty sure I’ve solved the predicament with the 3 attached REW ready targets and offer a much better solution than the ones published so far and inviting for Time correction on the VA and Amplitude correction on MMM or other Steady State representation. Don’t be afraid by the huge span of those targets nor debunked by the peaks and dips, the very essence of the solution is to correct an early stage that has, of course and by nature, a different profile than the Steady State, especially in the High Frequencies ; nevertheless, it’s reassuring to fall back on known targets and, i.e., to see that a sinuous and 16 dB wide target yields the classical 6 dB downshift B&K. The convolution FIR are created on the VA but the graphs in the following posts show a simulation of their application to Steady State measurements Harman CurveWIP.txt Harman 10dB RMS corrected.txt Harman 12dB RMS corrected (1).txt
  14. As if he was reading this, Amir just posted measurements of an AudioQuest powerstrip, measuring its advertised line noise filtration capabilities. Apparently it does filter above 30kHz, but leaves all of the junk in the audio band. Who knows, it may actually be useful for some audio devices that don't have good filtration at the power supply.
  15. Miska

    HQ Player

    Also note that HAPI cannot do DSD at 48k multiples, only at 44.1k. You could compare the clock figures to the stereo case to see if stereo case that doesn't have dropouts runs those few cores at higher clocks than here.
  16. Today
  17. Yes, same as normal sr4. Mine has 5, 7, 9 and 12 volts
  18. For those who have purchased an SR4T, do they have variable voltage? It is not mentioned on the website, but the photo shows this feature.
  19. I think Tim already uses the latest asix driver so you don't need to update anything unless you have also run sudo rpi-update to get the latest and greatest kernel. It's only with the latest kernel installed that you need the updated asix driver that corresponds to that kernel. The latest kernel that Allo support today is 5.4.50 in either 32bit form (v7) or 64bit (V8)
  20. Buffalo switches - does the 8-port model sound like the 16-port model? Time to find out. But first, some serious burn-in time needed.
  21. niner93

    HQ Player

    Thanks Miska for the reply. A couple updates: 1) I switched over to use the Merging HAPI DAC over Ethernet (RAVENNA), and the drop out is still there. 2) I turned off WiFi, unfortunately it didn't help. I used HWiNFO to capture core clock while the system is running above configuration. Please let me know if it helps.
  22. niner93

    HQ Player

    Thanks for your suggestions. I tried 44.1x256 and I still have drop out. I ran LatencyMon, and the system doesn't seem to have an issue with latency.
  23. In general the right configuration could be this NAA: RTIRQ_NAME_LIST="usb interface_name" Really the best would probably be: RTIRQ_NAME_LIST="xhci interface_name" If DAC is using xhci, check in Audiolinux status menu -> 2 "AUDIO interrupts" SERVER: RTIRQ_NAME_LIST="interface_name" where interface_name is the one connecting to NAA -> I would not set priority to extreme in this case If you give realtime priority to Ethernet you must be sure that Internet traffic is not exchanged. You can check this with sudo iftop -i interface_name (if iftop is not installed you can install it with yay -S iftop) If the command above show connections to Internet, you should change your hardware/software configuration. -> Change interface_name with the name of your interface.
  1. Load more activity

  • Create New...