The first mile: What power stations are best for audio?

[jabbr]

No, it isn't unique to my particular system, and has been duplicated by quite a few other DIY members of another forum.

 

Who and on what forum?

 

Well in any case it doesn't seem to affect my system and since we seldom are actually discussing ripping, why should we think this information has to do with, e.g. playback? You see, why are you suggesting that something you observed years ago under a particular circumstance should apply years later and in entirely different circumstances? ripping and playback are very different, correct? and the effects you see are dependent on your very specific circumstances, correct?

[wgscott]

Unmeasurable metaphysical entities that haunt digital files without changing their MD5sums don't do time.

[jabbr]

Unmeasurable metaphysical entities that haunt digital files without changing their MD5sums don't do time.

 

branes my man:)

[Jud]

branes my man:)

 

Where's Ed Witten when we need him?

[jabbr]

Where's Ed Witten when we need him?

 

He is busy working out the details of how multidimensional ground plane noise can actually affect recordings in the future, and the way they were played back years ago.

[Tony Lauck]

Unmeasurable metaphysical entities that haunt digital files without changing their MD5sums don't do time.

 

Good one!

 

There was insufficient description of the experiments performed regarding these "bit identical rips" which preclude other people attempting to confirm or reject the results. This renders these results irrelevant, as far as I am concerned.

 

Before I could be convinced that there was some magical property of the two files that had the identical MD5sums that allowed them to be distinguished, I would have to see evidence that the content of the files was the determining factor rather than the physical representation of the two files. This would be easily tested by recopying the files (according to a suitable experimental design) and then listening to the copies to see if they preserve the characteristics of the originals. This is a matter of operating system file copy operations, not any kind of software development operation.

 

Unfortunately, none of the people who have reported such listening results have done such recopying tests. I am unable to conduct such experiments myself, because I have yet to hear any differences between two files with identical MD5 checksums that sound different, except in one case where I did hear a difference that I tracked down to seek noises transferred acoustically from the disk drive to my ears. (One file was fragmented on disk.)

 

In the case of the related WAV to FLAC and back to WAV issues, I have done a number of tests over the years with different software. invariably the audio samples are identical in the two WAV files, but at least half of the time the MD5 checksums of the two WAV files are not the same. I haven't bothered to get a hex file debugger and look at how the WAV files differed, because I never heard a difference between the two WAV files with identical samples. But, in principle, given that the files are different, there is no physical law that is being violated if two files with different MD5 checksums sound different. It could be a simple software bug in the player software.

[jabbr]

Good one!

 

There was insufficient description of the experiments performed regarding these "bit identical rips" which preclude other people attempting to confirm or reject the results. This renders these results irrelevant, as far as I am concerned.

 

Before I could be convinced that there was some magical property of the two files that had the identical MD5sums that allowed them to be distinguished, I would have to see evidence that the content of the files was the determining factor rather than the physical representation of the two files. This would be easily tested by recopying the files (according to a suitable experimental design) and then listening to the copies to see if they preserve the characteristics of the originals. This is a matter of operating system file copy operations, not any kind of software development operation.

 

Unfortunately, none of the people who have reported such listening results have done such recopying tests. I am unable to conduct such experiments myself, because I have yet to hear any differences between two files with identical MD5 checksums that sound different, except in one case where I did hear a difference that I tracked down to seek noises transferred acoustically from the disk drive to my ears. (One file was fragmented on disk.)

 

In the case of the related WAV to FLAC and back to WAV issues, I have done a number of tests over the years with different software. invariably the audio samples are identical in the two WAV files, but at least half of the time the MD5 checksums of the two WAV files are not the same. I haven't bothered to get a hex file debugger and look at how the WAV files differed, because I never heard a difference between the two WAV files with identical samples. But, in principle, given that the files are different, there is no physical law that is being violated if two files with different MD5 checksums sound different. It could be a simple software bug in the player software.

 

+1

 

Everybody read this very carefully. Try to understand the implications of each paragraph.

[gmgraves]

I don't know of any fellow Sydney Audiophiles who feel the need to use special isolation transformers.

Some of you in the USA must have pretty poor mains supplies if you need to use them, or your gear has quite poor power supply rejection problems.It's as simple as that.

 

 

No Alex. I don't think that we have any worse mains supply than anywhere else, but, I will say that some of our urban infrastructure is very old. Much of it is early 20th century and some is even late 19th century! We electrified our larger cities earlier than anyone else in the world because the people who invented the infrastructure; George Westinghouse, Nicolai Tesla, and even Edison, invented it here, so it got used here first. If one lives in older parts of our large cities then there is probably more noise on the line than there is on more modern mains installations. Having said that, I think the truth is that a lot of American audiophiles just might be more neurotic than our distant cousins down in Oz! My excuse for going the Isolation transformer route was simply because it was very cheap to do, and better than my medical-grade 3600 Watt (at 120 volts) transformer, one simply cannot get!

[sandyk]

Having said that, I think the truth is that a lot of American audiophiles just might be more neurotic than our distant cousins down in Oz! My excuse for going the Isolation transformer route was simply because it was very cheap to do, and better than my medical-grade 3600 Watt (at 120 volts) transformer, one simply cannot get!

George

I had considered that possibility, but I can get myself into more than enough trouble in C.A. without actually suggesting something like that in a post.

 

Alex

[Daudio]

(I was busy with other, more productive pursuits, so it took me some time to get back to my reply in this (pick your own negative adjective) thread)

 

 

Don't you ever think about anything? Where is your intellectual curiosity?

 

I take that as an ugly insult, and am sorely tempted to respond in kind But, I will let it pass, for now, since I happen to be a a good mood today (for a change

 

You should damn well know better, given our previous discussions, especially the thread about 'the absolute sound !!

 

ie: "I read almost all the early TAS issues - not all the reviews, or every word, but always the philosophy, methodology, and things that addressed the 'why' questions. My interest in those kind of audiophile issues continues to this day"

 

 

I'm asking a philosophical question: can a blind belief in something that conventional wisdom says doesn't exist still be considered a "theory" or does it cross-over into a religious belief? ]... I was hoping for some discussion of this issue (the religious aspect of some people'd beliefs, not Atlantis)

 

A "philosophical question" or a 'push poll' , or a not-so-veiled insult to those who think differently then you ? A serious discussion, or just more of the same point-scoring, put-down, argumentation that fills this and so many other forums. You can contend that it is all innocent discussion, but it sounds damn fishy to me

 

One persons "conventional wisdom" can well be anothers ridiculous fantasy. And your 'issue' is just a mean spirited piece of crap, given the context here on the forum.

 

Opps, I almost forgot the most germane comment to the tenor of this 'discussion". But not by me, by Jud: "It's hard to do real science if you already know everything."

 

 

Bah Humbug *

 

 

 

* (Different day, different mood)

[gmgraves]

(I was busy with other, more productive pursuits, so it took me some time to get back to my reply in this (pick your own negative adjective) thread)

 

 

 

 

I take that as an ugly insult, and am sorely tempted to respond in kind But, I will let it pass, for now, since I happen to be a a good mood today (for a change

 

You should damn well know better, given our previous discussions, especially the thread about 'the absolute sound !!

 

ie: "I read almost all the early TAS issues - not all the reviews, or every word, but always the philosophy, methodology, and things that addressed the 'why' questions. My interest in those kind of audiophile issues continues to this day"

 

 

 

 

A "philosophical question" or a 'push poll' , or a not-so-veiled insult to those who think differently then you ? A serious discussion, or just more of the same point-scoring, put-down, argumentation that fills this and so many other forums. You can contend that it is all innocent discussion, but it sounds damn fishy to me

 

One persons "conventional wisdom" can well be anothers ridiculous fantasy. And your 'issue' is just a mean spirited piece of crap, given the context here on the forum.

 

Opps, I almost forgot the most germane comment to the tenor of this 'discussion". But not by me, by Jud: "It's hard to do real science if you already know everything."

 

 

Bah Humbug *

 

 

 

* (Different day, different mood)

 

 

I've long since given up on ever having any kind of a meaningful conversation with you that wasn't filled (from your side) with bile and hatefulness. You are a suspicious, paranoid person who looks for veiled threats, insults, and put-downs everywhere, especially where none are intended or exist.

 

I ask a philosophical question and you immediately believe that I have some nefarious agenda. Well, I don't. What you considered an ugly insult, I meant as a plea to your sense of intellectual curiosity to get you to see the question in the spirit it in which it was asked. I meant no insult, it was just a rhetorical question. If you took it as such, then I humbly apologize for my misleading turn of phrase. But I see that no matter what I say, you're purposefully going to take it the wrong way. I suspect that we should try to avoid each other in the future on these forums. I know that I will try to avoid you. As far as actually responding to your continuation of the conversation; in case you haven't noticed, this thread has moved-on and my attempt at a general conversation about hobbies as "religious" belief systems no longer interests me.

[gmgraves]

George

I had considered that possibility, but I can get myself into more than enough trouble in C.A. without actually suggesting something like that in a post.

 

Alex

 

 

Well, Alex, as a non-American, it's probably not your place to make such a suggestion, any more than it would be my place to make a comment about Oz's infrastructure (one of the few places in the "Western" world where I've never been) nor, indeed the character of her audiophiles. But OTOH, it's probably OK for me comment on it.

 

But while my comment about my American audio counterparts being somewhat neurotic was made mostly in jest, I have known more than a few who fit that mold a little too well.

[Daudio]

I've long since given up on ever having any kind of a meaningful conversation with you that wasn't filled (from your side) with bile and hatefulness. You are a suspicious, paranoid person who looks for veiled threats, insults, and put-downs everywhere, especially where none are intended or exist.

 

Yeah, and you are a peach too

Your memory is conveniently faulty. I quit arguing with you when you voluntarily gave up on the "cables have no sound' mantra. I even spent a lot of time trying to help you with an iTunes multi-disk consolidation problem. You simply whined that nothing worked and then vanished when I asked you to contribute to the conversation.

 

I don't think you have a clue how you appear to others

 

 

I ask a philosophical question and you immediately believe that I have some nefarious agenda.

 

Your agenda was quite clear from the loaded words ("blind belief", religious faith"). If you can't see that... well I just don't know, beyond the pale ? Others clearly noticed it

 

 

What you considered an ugly insult, I meant as a plea to your sense of intellectual curiosity to get you to see the question in the spirit it in which it was asked. I meant no insult, it was just a rhetorical question. If you took it as such, then I humbly apologize for my misleading turn of phrase.

 

Try reading this as if it were asked of you: "Don't you ever think about anything? Where is your intellectual curiosity?"

For anyone with any kind of mental life, that would be offensive ! The fact that you don't seem to realize that is troubling.

 

I actually thought you had some potential to overcome an outsized arrogance, but I was wrong, so I will endeavor to ignore you from now on.

[Paul R]

Reputable or not, they are offering a million-dollar reward, and hearing differences between identical files would certainly be a qualifying feat.

 

Right.... and you really think a stage magician hasn't rigged the game so that that he wins, or appears to win, every single time?

 

Man, the guy makes his living by tricking people.

 

-Paul

[Paul R]

Good one!

 

There was insufficient description of the experiments performed regarding these "bit identical rips" which preclude other people attempting to confirm or reject the results. This renders these results irrelevant, as far as I am concerned.

 

=+1

 

-Paul