Amir at ASR claims Uptone won't sell the ISO regen to him...

[Sal1950]

19 minutes ago, Superdad said:

I did.  But measurements are not going to tell you much about the SQ improvement the ISO REGEN makes

Are you really so scared that some bit of poor engineering will be revealed by Amir's measurements that you have to refuse a sale? LOL. Is your faith in the ISO so weak that you have attempt to hide it? Or do you just insist on a belief in your magic dust?  Although Amir would never let any personal animosity to bias his results, I'd think you'd want a reviewer to look into things without throwing him personal insults before hand.

A very sad and lame approach from a supposed engineer Alex

[Sal1950]

5 minutes ago, firedog said:

I think it is pretty clear that: a) Amir has an agenda which colors his work; b) isn't actually competent to do the measurements properly.

He also did let his biases influence what he wrote in his original evaluation of the Regen.

Hogwash

[Sal1950]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

 Doesn't have anything to do with having a degree, and having the Analyzer doesn't 

mean you know how to use it properly.

No it doesn't have anything to do with knowing what your doing or talking about. And certainly nothing to do with having the best and most applicable measuring equipment. I don't think Superdad could show him how to use the AP since he doesn't even own one.  

Are you serious Dog 

[Sal1950]

4 hours ago, lmitche said:

Anyone that needs measurements to accept the positive impact of the ISO Regen on sound quality is in the wrong hobby.

 

Actually you have that backwards. Anyone willing to accept the outcome of biased, sighted, mass delusional results to judge the worth of a audio component is in the wrong hobby.  Without the supporting evidence of science, pure opinion is worthless. These sort of things more rightly belong on a magicians stage.

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

Funny, when John Atkinson measured the Regen it actually measured WORSE then no regen. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Findings that corroborate Amir and some others. Who has the agenda here? 

Yes but in the interest of objectivity the source should be quoted.

"Using this long cable and my MacBook Pro running on battery power, I tested the Regen with a PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC and a Meridian Prime D/A headphone amplifier, using my Audio Precision SYS2722 analyzer and the same test signals I'd used for the JitterBug review. Sad to report, I found that the Regen made absolutely no difference in the D/A processors' analog output signals. With one exception: the levels of the power-supply–related spuriae in the Prime's output when powered by its wall wart were slightly higher in level with the Regen than without it."

John Atkinson

 

But then there, as so often happens with many here, The subjective "ears only" reviewers ignored the evidence and heard all sort of unsupportable changes in the sound., A ridiculous approach to technology that would not be accepted in any other serious endeavor that I'm aware of.

 

[Sal1950]

3 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I am not selling the ISO Regen.  I did, however, participate in a blind test of two candidate designs, where I very quickly selected the one most like the current production model because of what I felt were clearly audible differences.  The other blind test participant did the same.

 

Of course with regard to minimum phase and intermediate phase filters, there's no "secretly added" reverb.  Rather there is the potential for reverb if post-ringing has that audible effect, something various people have said is so, but that hasn't at least to my knowledge been established in the scientific literature one way or the other.

I've heard you refer to various successful blind tests involving the Reg but never found any actual details, sorry if I missed them. Would you be so kind to point me to their posting or supply some further info here.

Exactly how was this test conducted? Who were the participants?  What were the various components involved, source, DAC, etc? What source material was used? How many rounds of tests were made?  What were the specific "blind" conditions. What were the final voting numbers.

TIA

[Sal1950]

49 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Alex sent me and @lmitche each two identical looking ISO Regens, asking us simply to listen and separately let him know what we thought.  The only difference between the two was a strip of blue painter's tape on the top of each, where in black magic marker the letter "G" was written on top of one, and the letter "M" was written on top of the other.

 

I plugged each ISO Regen into my system in place of the original Regen.  I only had to listen to each once to know that I very much preferred "G."  The whole thing took maybe five minutes because the difference was so apparent.  (I liked both G and M better than the original, but of course that comparison was non-blinded.)

 

Afterward I learned @lmitche's experience was pretty much a carbon copy of mine.

Well there ya go.  You should present that as a paper to the AES.  LOL

[Sal1950]

On 6/4/2017 at 2:34 PM, Jud said:

I plugged each ISO Regen into my system in place of the original Regen.  I only had to listen to each once to know that I very much preferred "G."  The whole thing took maybe five minutes because the difference was so apparent.  (I liked both G and M better than the original, but of course that comparison was non-blinded.)

Time to brush up on proper blind testing procedures.

http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/statistics-of-abx-testing.170/

A single trial gives us 50% chance that you heard a difference. If you did it again and got that one right, then it would give you 75%. To get to 95%, you need to get 8 of 10 trials right.

No wonder you always claim blind testing is without merit. 

[Sal1950]

7 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Forgive me for being a bit dense, but I'm still trying to envision a configuration for having this device in and out of the signal path between source/DAC (per manufacturer site) to allow rapid switching (assuming same voltage output from DAC).

Ideas welcome.

A J, good to see you here old friend!

[Sal1950]

6 hours ago, jabbr said:

For this crowd, how many have had a hip or knee replacement? How many of you read the research on the specific device that was used to replace your hip or knee? But yet for a $200 or whatever dohickey we are worrying so much about whether a "G" or "M" might have somehow subconsciously influenced @Jud to like it better?

But this IS a audiophile site, says so right in the name. And audiophile issues are what we've gathered here to discuss.

Back to earth jabbr.

[Sal1950]

32 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

As always, thanks for the feedback and input. 

18 minutes ago, Jud said:

As always, I am hoping that folks can leave the personal stuff aside and just have an interesting chat about our shared enjoyment of audio.

 

I see nothing in the way of personal attacks here, Only some hard questioning on scientific procedures. No one has fallen off the tracks and been reduced to name calling as so often happens.  Sorry if the folks from Regen aren't happy with some results but they have been invited to counter.

[Sal1950]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Perhaps human eyes aren't the best tool to identify such things. There must be a measurement of personal attacks that can tell us with 100% accuracy.

 

I couldn't help jabbing you Sal. Thanks for the feedback.

LOL

[Sal1950]

1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

Most manufacturers that i have encountered face to face believe that they have insight into a "great sounding" component that enhances the listening experience and want to share it. Many of these designers have great sound and great listening experiences as their goal with making money as secondary.

That's what's called a marketing spin and it is active in most all industry. I don't condemn them for it, its' what must be done to make sales. I've participated in it myself during my times on the other side of the counter.

But on the consumer side the the enlightened buyer does his homework, questions all claims, and looks for factual supporting evidence.

To believe there aren't business models based on snake-oil products and profit making, is to stick your head in the sand and believe in Santa Claus.

[Sal1950]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

Ah yes, those dirty objectivists must be silenced lest they contaminate delusional thinking with the facts.