Measured evidence that bit perfect playback software alters the analog output of DAC's?

[mav52]

I'm thinking the noise in the power out of the wall may vary quite a bit from home to home as well. Lots of variables.

 

Not to mention country to country.

 

Internal electrical noise within the home is dependent on the quality of the construction of the ac circuit and what the owner has connected to that one breaker that feeds the audio components. Some like myself have a dedicated 20 amp feed from a separate power distribution breaker box to my audio components. Software sure could have an impact on the sound but how much of that us actual dirty power. It all starts with the power.

[Daudio]

Why such aggressiveness?

 

Perhaps some folks are getting tired of the constant whining for somebody else to come up with test results, measurements, explanations, answers, etc. Paragraph after paragraph, post after post, thread after thread. And then on the occasions when these things are presented, they are never good enough, always flawed in some large or small aspect, and summarily dismissed.

 

Surely you can see how frustration could build to boiling-over levels under this long term situation, right ?

[esldude]

Hey esldude- If you're so "curious" why don't you go back to school and get an actual EE and CS degree instead of constantly demand everyone explain everything to you?

 

I'll make it multiple choice:

 

A. It would reduce time I could spend posting here for your enjoyment.

 

B. Most (though not all) EE's have the opinions and ideas I do about this stuff. So what is to gain?

 

C. Would you feel better if I had different opinions than yours, but were better credentialed?

 

D. The two years and the money it would take to get an EE would be possibly better spent by just taking that sum of money to buy a really nice USB cable and listen to it for two years until they improve USB some more.

[Boris75]

Perhaps some folks are getting tired of the constant whining for somebody else to come up with test results, measurements, explanations, answers, etc. Paragraph after paragraph, post after post, thread after thread. And then on the occasions when these things are presented, they are never good enough, always flawed in some large or small aspect, and summarily dismissed.

 

Surely you can see how frustration could build to boiling-over levels under this long term situation, right ?

 

Requests for and questions about measurements seem very natural to me, nothing at all to whine about or boil over really.

[Boris75]

 

D. The two years and the money it would take to get an EE would be possibly better spent by just taking that sum of money to buy a really nice USB cable and listen to it for two years until they improve USB some more.

 

You made me laugh, thanks

[Daudio]

Requests for and questions about measurements seem very natural to me, nothing at all to whine about or boil over really.

 

Then you can't see the forest for the trees.

[Boris75]

Then you can't see the forest for the trees.

 

I much appreciate your concern for my eyesight

[sandyk]

Requests for and questions about measurements seem very natural to me

 

 

Why ? The vast majority of C.A. members are not qualified to supply that information, and have no desire to search for, or provide proof to others, as to what they hear with their own ears. If you want measurements then do the hard work yourself.

Just another reminder. This is Computer Audiophile, NOT Hydrogen Audio, or an offshoot of M.I.E.E. or whatever they call themselves these days. These incessant demands for proof are coming from no more than perhaps .05% of the total C.A. membership. In other words a very vocal minority. Many other qualified members are also here to learn from others, and contribute where they can, but don't impose demands for proof from every poster whose views may differ from theirs or answer the reports by others with sarcasm.

For most here, the enjoyment of music is for relaxation, not endless technical arguments.

[Boris75]

These incessant demands for proof are coming from no more than perhaps .05% of the total C.A. membership. In other words a very vocal minority.

 

To me, by far the most vocal minority is the one that tries to squash any interest for scientific insights into our hobby.

[sandyk]

To me, by far the most vocal minority is the one that tries to squash any interest for scientific insights into our hobby.

 

Please show me any posts where the contributions from the usual vocal sceptics have resulted in any further improvements to the enjoyment of Computer Audio. All they are offering is negativity and continuation of the status quo.

IF many of them had their way, SACD, DSD and the high resolution PCM formats would cease to exist as they continually claim that their irrelevant blind testing shows that they are a waste of time, and that even RBCD is a waste of time , as many people can't hear an improvement over MP3 320 (or less!).

Perhaps you became a member of the wrong forum ?

[tne]

I'll make it multiple choice:

 

A. It would reduce time I could spend posting here for your enjoyment.

 

B. Most (though not all) EE's have the opinions and ideas I do about this stuff. So what is to gain?

 

C. Would you feel better if I had different opinions than yours, but were better credentialed?

 

D. The two years and the money it would take to get an EE would be possibly better spent by just taking that sum of money to buy a really nice USB cable and listen to it for two years until they improve USB some more.

 

 

Ha ! Good one, E-man.

 

I do not always agree with your points of view, but if I only paid attention to the posts from people that I agreed with it would be hard to learn anything new or to challenge my own beliefs.

[Daudio]

To me, by far the most vocal minority is the one that tries to squash any interest for scientific insights into our hobby.

 

That is absolute BS !! You should know better then to say crap like that

 

From my experience on this forum most subjective and objective posters are curious about the reasons behind SQ differences. There are probably a few that just don't care, but they do NOT try to squash interest and investigation. People do complain about getting half-ass objective stuff forced down their throat all the time, but that is a very different thing.

 

You should wash your mouth (fingers ?) out with soap

[Superdad]

Uh oh, I'm running out of popcorn...

[sandyk]

Uh oh, I'm running out of popcorn...

 

Then for heavens sake, finish off the popcorn and get back to those very worthwhile contributions to Computer Audio from both yourself and John Swenson that greatly outweigh all the combined negativity from a few closed minded sceptics.

[esldude]

Come on guys, I tried to prevent S vs O squabbling.

 

I am at a loss to understand being curious and asking for others measurements as being an attempt to squash interest or investigation. Very strange approach some people must have to investigate things.

 

But in any case, if you don't like the approach then just ignore this. Or start a thread espousing how much more effective non-objective investigation works. Just don't squabble about it in this thread.

 

I already have learned from Miska's contribution that I may need to look at other varieties of equipment for hardware differences. Worthwhile to know if you ask me. And I have in mind a few more things to go try myself in that area to see what I can find. Anyone with similar good info is sure welcome to post about it.

[Paul R]

C. Would you feel better if I had different opinions than yours, but were better credentialed?

 

D. The two years and the money it would take to get an EE would be possibly better spent by just taking that sum of money to buy a really nice USB cable and listen to it for two years until they improve USB some more.

 

Yikes - talking about being careful what you wish for - can you imagine the number of monographs we would get in this case?

 

Dennis - we like you you just the way you are... no need to go get credentials .... these are not the droids you are looking for...

[sandyk]

Come on guys, I tried to prevent S vs O squabbling.

No, you simply wanted to stand on your fanatical soapbox with megaphone in hand, and drown out any dissenting voices.

You would love to have your threads ignored by the other side, but it isn't going to happen while you continue to rain on other people's parades.

In any case, nobody except a few of your disciples are going to accept any of your findings, because they don't go anywhere near meeting the demands of absolute proof that you demand of others, and you simply don't have the necessary qualifications to be believable either. Whenever one of your null tests shows a residual, you then automatically reject it as inaudible! That is a breathtakingly arrogant conclusion on your part. There are even a few members here, who because of their training,have been able to extract valuable and essential information from well beneath the noise floor.

 

C. Would you feel better if I had different opinions than yours, but were better credentialed?

 

Since when have E.E.s had a mortgage on the truth ? i

[Daudio]

Come on guys, I tried to prevent S vs O squabbling.

 

Oh, please, do you think we are stupid ??

 

You encourage 'S vs O squabbling' all the time, the titles of your many threads, the constant attitude that subjective listening reports are nothing but (hallucinatory) 'expectation bias', dismissing subjective approaches at every opportunity, jumping into all kinds of threads to spread your message of gloom and pessimism. And not just here and there, but multiple, voluminous postings. A one man objective army aimed at raining on the parade of CA users, and you just don't get it that that pisses a lot of people off. My few posts to you mostly address that behavior, but you ignore them. Why is that ?

 

No, you swim in a sea of controversy, created by your posts and amplified by other fellow travelers. Please don't try and pass off that BS again, man-up and admit you love the attention, you are working out your demons, or whatever causes your behavior

 

 

I already have learned from Miska's contribution that I may need to look at other varieties of equipment for hardware differences. Worthwhile to know if you ask me. And I have in mind a few more things to go try myself in that area to see what I can find. Anyone with similar good info is sure welcome to post about it.

 

Good ! Maybe that will keep you busy and only posting raw data, instead of the same opinions, over and over, and over, ad nauseam.

 

 

P.S. Just came down with the flu last night, and the sickness has destroyed my normal politeness filters, and let my true feelings out. For better, or for worse

[esldude]

Oh, please, do you think we are stupid ??

 

You encourage 'S vs O squabbling' all the time, the titles of your many threads, the constant attitude that subjective listening reports are nothing but (hallucinatory) 'expectation bias', dismissing subjective approaches at every opportunity, jumping into all kinds of threads to spread your message of gloom and pessimism. And not just here and there, but multiple, voluminous postings. A one man objective army aimed at raining on the parade of CA users, and you just don't get it that that pisses a lot of people off. My few posts to you mostly address that behavior, but you ignore them. Why is that ?

 

No, you swim in a sea of controversy, created by your posts and amplified by other fellow travelers. Please don't try and pass off that BS again, man-up and admit you love the attention, you are working out your demons, or whatever causes your behavior

 

 

 

 

Good ! Maybe that will keep you busy and only posting raw data, instead of the same opinions, over and over, and over, ad nauseam.

 

 

P.S. Just came down with the flu last night, and the sickness has destroyed my normal politeness filters, and let my true feelings out. For better, or for worse

 

Well let me get this straight. You would not like me posting in otherwise mainly subjective threads with a contrary opinion. I sometimes do, and more often don't.

 

So I start threads of my own, and ask for more objective measurement oriented discourse to keep down the ill will and squabbling. And this is somehow raining on people's parades.

 

And you ask why I don't usually address the rantings of someone like yourself? Really, who is peddling BS here. You don't want opinions that disagree with yours allowed. It upsets you to see them. Now you think upsetting you or similar minded people is the reason I post. It is not. Somehow just the titles of my threads are considered inciting controversy, and you apparently can't leave alone threads you don't like. Somehow that is my problem? That is pretty cute.

 

I am sorry you are ill with the flu. Hopefully it will pass soon and without too much distress.

[sandyk]

and you apparently can't leave alone threads you don't like.

 

That's yet another case of the Pot calling the Kethel black . (smile)

[Allan F]

Somehow just the titles of my threads are considered inciting controversy...

 

If you are suggesting that some, if not many are not so intended, your lack of self-awareness is indeed troubling. Perhaps 'inciting' is too strong a word - your word not mine - but 'inviting' controversy seems to be your mission in life. I use the term 'in life' advisedly, because you seem to spend most of your life on this forum.

[mayhem13]

If you are suggesting that some, if not many are not so intended, your lack of self-awareness is indeed troubling. Perhaps 'inciting' is too strong a word - your word not mine - but 'inviting' controversy seems to be your mission in life. I use the term 'in life' advisedly, because you seem to spend most of your life on this forum.

 

I wouldn't call any of this controversy, but instead just benign differences of opinion.

 

Now, back to the topic. It's clear we have yet to see examples of the measurements Dennis asked for. Each can draw their own conclusion from it or reserve an opinion until such measurements of reliability are developed. My own reservations will allow me to wait this one out a while.....but my skepticism won't let me hold my breath either.

 

Since I have nothing further to positively contribute to this thread, I bid you all a good night.

[kml666]

Hey esldude- If you're so "curious" why don't you go back to school and get an actual EE and CS degree instead of constantly demand everyone explain everything to you?

 

Thread goes from interesting to mud slinging in, 3... 2.... 1....

 

:D

 

cheers

ken

[sandyk]

Each can draw their own conclusion from it or reserve an opinion until such measurements of reliability are developed.

 

esldude started this thread, just like in several other threads he has started, in the rather secure knowledge that there were no presently available publicly accessible published documents showing these measurements, and that like Miska, commercial interests are unlikely to publish sensitive in-house findings anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if Peter St. already has available such measurements, or is able to do so. Peter is also highly unlikely to publish them for the same reasons, as it may lead to disclosure of some of the proprietary things he does in the continuing development of his XXHE software.

 

Draw your own conclusions as to esldudes intent.

[Audio_ELF]

For full disclosure I'm going to cut some irrelevant parts from Alex's post (regarding Denis' motivation) to concentrate on what is important...

that like Miska, commercial interests are unlikely to publish sensitive in-house findings anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if Peter St. already has available such measurements, or is able to do so. Peter is also highly unlikely to publish them for the same reasons, as it may lead to disclosure of some of the proprietary things he does in the continuing development of his XXHE software.

I think you are missing what what "measurements" Denis is looking for when you claim they are only not available for commercial sensitivity...

 

Dennis is (if I have understood correctly) after a very simple thing. He (like me) follows the logic that for there to be a difference heard, there must be a difference at the output of the speakers, caused by a difference at the output of the amplifier, caused by a difference at the output of the DAC. Therefore to prove there is a difference to be heard; all you need to do is record the output of the DAC using software A; and compare that to the same recording using software B and with that comparison show there is a difference above the noise floor (or that there is perhaps a consistent difference within the noise).

 

To my mind, such a proof would be an amazing marketing tool: "Look we can SHOW you there is a difference with our software" so if such measurement has been made I would be surprised if it is kept secret / internal to a company.

 

The same measurement techniques could be used to prove any of dozens of factors can affect sound quality.

 

Eloise

 

PS. I accept an absence of such measurements is not proof that differences do not exist as measuring and comparing two wave-forms in this way is not going to be simple in practical terms.