Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: My Lying Ears


Recommended Posts

Hi Michael. I may have misunderstood what you are saying, but if I'm reading you correctly, you're reading what I've said incorrectly. :)

Jud ... I think what Michael is saying, is that while the eye pattern images show that yes, the signal integrity to the USB input of the DAC is improved with the Regen, this is not able to prove that it will correlate to an improvement in the analogue output of the DAC (which is what is then amplified and turned into sound waves by the speakers).

 

For a very limited analogy... Its like measuring the temperature of the water you put into the kettle, and because the water is chilled to 2c rather than 15c out of the tap pronouncing that the cup of tea that is produced is going to be vastly superior.

 

Eloise

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
Jud ... I think what Michael is saying, is that while the eye pattern images show that yes, the signal integrity to the USB input of the DAC is improved with the Regen, this is not able to prove that it will correlate to an improvement in the analogue output of the DAC (which is what is then amplified and turned into sound waves by the speakers).

 

For a very limited analogy... Its like measuring the temperature of the water you put into the kettle, and because the water is chilled to 2c rather than 15c out of the tap pronouncing that the cup of tea that is produced is going to be vastly superior.

 

Eloise

 

Yes, Eloise, that much is clear. It's the mechanism by which the changes in one cause changes in the other that is key.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Jud ... I think what Michael is saying, is that while the eye pattern images show that yes, the signal integrity to the USB input of the DAC is improved with the Regen, this is not able to prove that it will correlate to an improvement in the analogue output of the DAC (which is what is then amplified and turned into sound waves by the speakers).

 

For a very limited analogy... Its like measuring the temperature of the water you put into the kettle, and because the water is chilled to 2c rather than 15c out of the tap pronouncing that the cup of tea that is produced is going to be vastly superior.

I think that analogy breaks down when you consider explanations such as John Swenson's related to power supply rail noise - I think this is very meaningful. It would be useful to show measurements such as this, I would not be surprised if the supply rail noise is quite visible and different with a signal that requires a lot of "tracking work" vs a very clean one that does not.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
I think that analogy breaks down when you consider explanations such as John Swenson's related to power supply rail noise - I think this is very meaningful. It would be useful to show measurements such as this, I would not be surprised if the supply rail noise is quite visible and different with a signal that requires a lot of "tracking work" vs a very clean one that does not.

You're right that the analogy breaks down easily.

 

However (and I'm not suggesting Alex or John are claiming "proof") the fact that the input of the DAC is cleaners is not proof that the sound has changed.

 

As I postulated a couple of years back if you examine a chain ... computer --> DAC --> amplifier --> speakers ... for the computer (and associated cabling and software) to affect the sound quality, it must produce an effect which alters the output of the DAC. (This ignores environmental factors which can affect the sound quality but if measured over a shortish time period are irrelevant and unlikely to change significantly). While many people will disagree with me, for the purpose of my "thought experiment"; sighted listening is an invalid proof that there is a sound change, though I would accept a controlled blind test.

 

So these measurements are only part of the answer.

 

Now if John or someone can show that a cleaner input affect the analogue output of the DAC in a significant number of DACs; then certainly we can start to use eye pattern measurements to show that one "Regen" is performing better than a competing device. It would go a long way to being able to "measure" and even prove there can be improvements offered by one software player vs another; or one computer vs another.

 

Eloise

Eloise

---

...in my opinion / experience...

While I agree "Everything may matter" working out what actually affects the sound is a trickier thing.

And I agree "Trust your ears" but equally don't allow them to fool you - trust them with a bit of skepticism.

keep your mind open... But mind your brain doesn't fall out.

Link to comment
I think that analogy breaks down when you consider explanations such as John Swenson's related to power supply rail noise - I think this is very meaningful. It would be useful to show measurements such as this, I would not be surprised if the supply rail noise is quite visible and different with a signal that requires a lot of "tracking work" vs a very clean one that does not.

 

If you think power supply noise is the relevant factor, then measure that. Do not measure something else and handwave that this other thing might be causing the thing that actually matters.

Link to comment

I believe all that's being said here, if we accept that there is a difference in SQ with the Regen (as per the many reports), is that correlation dos not equal to causation? In other words there may be many things that change as a result of the signal passing through the Regen which we can measure but knowing which is the actual cause of the SQ difference is what is in question.

 

But this is at a preliminary stage of investigation so it's expected that there may be false starts & dead-ends encountered along the way before such causation is established. It's too soon to jump to premature conclusions one way or the other. Let the investigation continue at it's own pace without trying to preempt it. One has to remain open to the evidence that is produced & not try to force it. More evidence would be welcome, too!

 

This post uses the Regen as an example as it's easier to talk about specifics then generalisations.

Link to comment
With respect Roch... this forum is for a range of views from the pure "I hear what I hear therefore it exists" to "All DACs / Amplifiers sound the same because the measure the same to the known threshold of hearing".

 

To suggest the article shouldn't have been published in this forum is tantamount to censoring views you disagree with.

 

Eloise

 

Dear Eloise,

 

With respect… I believe deaf people, non trained ears, or with very bad listening gear (non necessarily Maserati like, but some Toyota like and never from the UK :) ) needs measurements. The others, like me, just enjoy the music.

 

And I still belive the article shouldn’t have been published, at least not in the Editorial Categorie.

 

BTW, are you some kind of moderator in CA?

 

Regards,

 

Roch

Link to comment
Then you better sell your listening gear, buy an oscilloscope and stay looking at the screen when fed with music. But beware the eyes are easier to deceive than the ears.

 

I find the article is rubbish and should never have been published in this forum.

 

Roch

 

Now this is some funny shit!

Vinyl is a hugely overpriced way to get flawed sound. Digital is an inexpensive way to get less flawed (though flawed nonetheless) sound.

Link to comment

If it can't be measured, or at least proven with a properly conducted A-B-X listening test, it will always remain strictly an opinion. An opinion which has no place in any scientific investigation..

"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information?"

Peter Aczel - The Audio Critic

nomqa.webp.aa713f2bb9e304522011cdb2d2ca907d.webp  R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press.

 

Link to comment
If it can't be measured, or at least proven with a properly conducted A-B-X listening test, it will always remain strictly an opinion. An opinion which has no place in any scientific investigation..

 

Please provide the evidence from scientific investigations validating use of ABX testing as proof of audible differences, versus the several other types of tests that are available.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Please provide the evidence from scientific investigations validating use of ABX testing as proof of audible differences, versus the several other types of tests that are available.

 

Science applied - Home

 

I'll side with the industries two single most influential people: Toole and Olive

 

I agree let's not just talk about AB/X testing. There are other testing protocols out there to blind and thus prevent bias.

 

The article writer finally figured out the pursuit of audio and it was to finally submit to getting rid of pre-conditioning and accepting it for the data driven endeavor that it is.

 

Blinding isn't handi-capping. It's isn't contrived listening. It isn't even stressful. What is stressful is thinking you can hear differences in everything instead of thinking about being excited to determine what you can and can't hear and going about it in a intellectually honest manner. The only stressed people I ever see in a blind scenario is the person that knows at their core belief is a seed of conspicuous self delusion.

Link to comment

Methinks you are doing that as well.

If you think power supply noise is the relevant factor, then measure that. Do not measure something else and handwave that this other thing might be causing the thing that actually matters.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
Methinks you are doing that as well.

I don't believe he knows what he is saying - hence his own handwaving - ground plane noise can come either from the PS or from the signal ground they both ultimately join up (in fact many designs just intermix them) - measuring both signal & PS is appropriate! And finding noise riding on the signal waveform itself is a very likely sign that it will infiltrate the ground

Link to comment
However (and I'm not suggesting Alex or John are claiming "proof") the fact that the input of the DAC is cleaners is not proof that the sound has changed.

Yes of course, agreed. I would like to see a measurement of power supply rail noise with and without a Regen, for example. As I stated elsewhere, I think every sound improvement should be measurable but what to measure might not be immediately clear.

 

So these measurements are only part of the answer.

Any (true) audible difference must be measurable. It's a physical world.

 

Now if John or someone can show that a cleaner input affect the analogue output of the DAC in a significant number of DACs; then certainly we can start to use eye pattern measurements to show that one "Regen" is performing better than a competing device. It would go a long way to being able to "measure" and even prove there can be improvements offered by one software player vs another; or one computer vs another.

Yes though again what to measure is not completely straightforward I don't think.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
If you think power supply noise is the relevant factor, then measure that. Do not measure something else and handwave that this other thing might be causing the thing that actually matters.

Yeap. Now even measuring power supply noise level, RMS level or whathaveyou might not be the entirety of the problem. Maybe the noise if looked at it carefully enough is able to make some component's non-linearity show up more than without the noise - I don't know - all I am trying to say is that there might be more to eat than the obvious measurements. As Jud pointed out, who wouldathunk jitter mattered?

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
I believe all that's being said here, if we accept that there is a difference in SQ with the Regen (as per the many reports), is that correlation dos not equal to causation?

Ah my friend you're treading a dangerous path... :)

 

Every (real) effect must be measurable. There are no phantasmagoric gnomes introduced by the regen that tickle our earloves making us believe the sound is better.

 

I would propose these measurements (if possible):

1- Supply rail noise level (10 microvol resolution should be plenty) with a USB input with and without a Regen.

2- Analog output noise with the same configs above

3- Phase shifts of all of the above

4- Do these measurements with both a very low level and a very high level pure tone signal

5- Same for a square wave signal

 

If we see a difference, then create a subsequent experiment where we magnify this difference.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment
If it can't be measured, or at least proven with a properly conducted A-B-X listening test, it will always remain strictly an opinion. An opinion which has no place in any scientific investigation..

Correct.

NUC10i7 + Roon ROCK > dCS Rossini APEX DAC + dCS Rossini Master Clock 

SME 20/3 + SME V + Dynavector XV-1s or ANUK IO Gold > vdH The Grail or Kondo KSL-SFz + ANK L3 Phono 

Audio Note Kondo Ongaku > Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

Signal cables: Kondo Silver, Crystal Cable phono

Power cables: Kondo, Shunyata, van den Hul

system pics

Link to comment

I think it's worth thinking about where we are at the moment, which is that we've got digital side measurements of differences with the Regen that accord with the theory behind its design. I think this is (strange to contemplate) more than I can recall seeing for other commercial high end audio products making similar claims, for example USB cables.

 

John and Alex have said they will have measurements forthcoming. We'll see what they tell us.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Ah my friend you're treading a dangerous path... :)

 

Every (real) effect must be measurable. There are no phantasmagoric gnomes introduced by the regen that tickle our earloves making us believe the sound is better.

 

I would propose these measurements (if possible):

1- Supply rail noise level (10 microvol resolution should be plenty) with a USB input with and without a Regen.

2- Analog output noise with the same configs above

3- Phase shifts of all of the above

4- Do these measurements with both a very low level and a very high level pure tone signal

5- Same for a square wave signal

 

If we see a difference, then create a subsequent experiment where we magnify this difference.

 

Miggy this is too complicated for me .

Could you explain this at my level - the cromagnon subhuman level ?

Link to comment
Every (real) effect must be measurable. There are no phantasmagoric gnomes introduced by the regen that tickle our earloves making us believe the sound is better.

 

In a sense, there are. They're called confirmation bias.

 

I would propose these measurements (if possible):

1- Supply rail noise level (10 microvol resolution should be plenty) with a USB input with and without a Regen.

2- Analog output noise with the same configs above

3- Phase shifts of all of the above

4- Do these measurements with both a very low level and a very high level pure tone signal

5- Same for a square wave signal

 

That seems like a good set of initial measurements. Unfortunately, I don't have the equipment to do them myself.

 

If we see a difference, then create a subsequent experiment where we magnify this difference.

 

We could also induce whatever differences are found by other means and let listeners determine which ones are audible. Then it would be possible to address those problems directly rather than making random stabs in the dark.

 

The current approach to these matters reminds me of medieval alchemy as opposed to modern chemistry.

Link to comment

As Jud says - how we view these measurments is really determined by where we are in the process of investigation. Currently we are at the preliminary stage in this investigation, the discovery stage where many measurements are being tried & correlations looked for. As I said correlations do not = causation (at this stage). Hopefully some early indications can be followed through to tests inside the DAC or audio device & the effects of the initial measured issues traced through the steps or not, as the case may be.

 

I would love to see some measurements from JS to get some other data from another set of test equipment

 

I believe it's completely the wrong approach to suggest trying to simulate the different proposed mechanism to see what is audible. There's just no way to do this correctly without the investigative work that is ongoing to uncover the underlying mechanism(s) & their nature/structure/characteristics - that's the scientifically correct approach

Link to comment
Ah my friend you're treading a dangerous path... :)

 

Every (real) effect must be measurable. There are no phantasmagoric gnomes introduced by the regen that tickle our earloves making us believe the sound is better.

See my post above - at this stage in the investigation correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation. There may turn out be many measurements which show something is changing between with/without Regen inline. We need to tease out which are of importance for SQ/audibility

Link to comment
If it can't be measured, or at least proven with a properly conducted A-B-X listening test, it will always remain strictly an opinion. An opinion which has no place in any scientific investigation..

 

Empirical evidence is often what drives scientific investigation. To suggest that it has no place is, IMO, akin to sophistry.

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...