USB audio cracked... finally!

[Johnseye]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

no, it's from a complex analysis math class I took one summer

 

I can never tell when you're joking.  Always such a straight face.

[Ralf11]

or... I am always joking and recognize that life is just a temporary joke ;]

[fas42]

2 hours ago, elcorso said:

 

+1,000,000

 

"Repair" the source....   Discouraging for good recording engineers !!!

 

Roch

 

The recordings we have, the archive of what's been done to date, since the concept of capturing a moment in musical time was conceived, is a huge treasure - mostly under appreciated, because the mechanisms for revealing the contents have not been refined sufficiently ... something that will be sorted for a wider audience down the track ...

 

That said, I'm not particularly impressed by a couple of recent efforts in classical recordings I've come across - the engineers appear to be seduced by the "sophistication" of the tools at hand, and one can hear a sloppiness, a lack of care taken in getting everything "just right". One can excuse very old recordings, but not recent efforts.

[Bystander]

7 hours ago, kennyb123 said:

 

I largely agree with you.  What I've noticed though is that the rising tide does tend to lift all boats.  The better my system gets, the more enjoyable all my music has gotten - even the bad recordings.   

Really? I'd say for me it's the opposite. The better my equipment gets, the more evident any potential flaws in my recordings become. Great recordings sound better than ever, but problematic recordings also become easier to identify as such. That doesn't necessarily make them less enjoyable but neither do they benefit from being more faithfully reproduced from a certain point on. It's like getting sharper vision where it becomes easier to identify blurry pictures. Nothing will change the fact that they're already blurry, the only benefit of sharper vision is that you can suddenly tell they are.

[tipunch]

Hello,

Thanks to all for your answers for the lush alone...
 

Best regards

[Jud]

11 hours ago, kennyb123 said:

 

I largely agree with you.  What I've noticed though is that the rising tide does tend to lift all boats.  The better my system gets, the more enjoyable all my music has gotten - even the bad recordings.  The recent digital improvements in particular have made it possible to even enjoy the most compressed and hard-sounding recordings in my library.  So from that perspective, I get where fas42 is coming from with his Mercedes analogy.

 

What I have noticed when my system sounds better to me is that I can find interest in at least some recordings I thought were boring.  I feel that I’m better able to follow the musicians’ intent and interplay.

[PeterSt]

Although differently put, I find the example of the road a great one.

Remember me telling about the transients being "connected" in a good fashion (yes, which is smear). Combine with the tt needle someone came up with, but now with vertical motion. We call that ...

 

suspension.

 

This would be exactly the mechanism at play.

Of course this is not the means I created explicitly (how could I have), so it is only the way better description of the connected transients.

 

Nobody would want the car to follow the ditches (try Cuba !!) and bumps. So the suspension covers for that.

It is a means of necessary filtering.

Mind you, all reasoned in aftermath, but as long as some reasoning is plausible, I am happy enough.

[Johnseye]

3 hours ago, Jud said:

 

What I have noticed when my system sounds better to me is that I can find interest in at least some recordings I thought were boring.  I feel that I’m better able to follow the musicians’ intent and interplay.

 

That's my same experience.  I've been playing around with the AR LS28 over the weekend and the instrumental balance was improved to where the interplay became more obvious.  Of course it's already there in the recording.

[elcorso]

10 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

or... I am always joking and recognize that life is just a temporary joke ;]

 

+ 1,000,000  

 

Or the dream of some gods...

 

Roch

[elcorso]

4 hours ago, Jud said:

 

What I have noticed when my system sounds better to me is that I can find interest in at least some recordings I thought were boring.  I feel that I’m better able to follow the musicians’ intent and interplay.

 

Well, one never loses hope 
 

Roch

[kennyb123]

11 hours ago, esldude said:

Following that to its logical conclusion, good recordings are unnecessary.  Good luck with that.

 

It's you your logic that needs better luck.

 

I said "a rising tide lifts all boats" with respect to how enjoyable they are.  I said nothing about the ability to differentiate good from bad - but that increases too.  It's just that the bad recordings went from being unable to sit through - to listenable - and now mostly enjoyable.

[elcorso]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

Although differently put, I find the example of the road a great one.

Remember me telling about the transients being "connected" in a good fashion (yes, which is smear). Combine with the tt needle someone came up with, but now with vertical motion. We call that ...

 

suspension.

 

This would be exactly the mechanism at play.

Of course this is not the means I created explicitly (how could I have), so it is only the way better description of the connected transients.

 

Nobody would want the car to follow the ditches (try Cuba !!) and bumps. So the suspension covers for that.

It is a means of necessary filtering.

Mind you, all reasoned in aftermath, but as long as some reasoning is plausible, I am happy enough.

 

Or... my country, with many more vehicles per kilometer of road built than Cuba. We still pay import taxes of 83% for vehicles, which is supposed to build more and better roads ...
But in these countries Mercedes is not strong enough, we need the (Toyota) Lush  

 

Roch

[manisandher]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

Nobody would want the car to follow the ditches (try Cuba !!) and bumps. So the suspension covers for that.

It is a means of necessary filtering.

 

That's exactly what I was getting at a few weeks ago:

 

On 7/30/2017 at 11:09 AM, manisandher said:

A bit like... if I wanted a smooth ride over a bumpy road, I'd prefer a car with highly compliant suspension - the ride height would have less variance.

 

What I meant is that it's the ride height that's important (the signal) and not the bumps in the road (the noise). But all analogies are ultimately inaccurate...

 

Mani.

[kennyb123]

9 hours ago, Bystander said:

Really? I'd say for me it's the opposite. The better my equipment gets, the more evident any potential flaws in my recordings become. Great recordings sound better than ever, but problematic recordings also become easier to identify as such. 

 

What tends to be a key indicator for what I've termed a "bad recording" is the amount of compression applied.  Compression adds a hardness while at the same time stripping away naturalness.

 

As my digital front end has improved, it has responded more gracefully to this hardness because it imposes less of its own harness on top of it and draws out more naturalness.  I can still tell that these recordings are compressed, but they are easier to enjoy because more goodness is able to come through.

[fas42]

I've been aware of how recordings "transform"  as the system playback improves, for decades - and it's always been a positive outcome ... always. So much so that I always use my "worst" recordings for assessing other systems' playback - I get instant feedback on every limitation and wart of the replay chain; within minutes I have a general sense of the competence of the rig, and know, for example, that it begins to fall to pieces above a certain volume, or, that the treble capabilities are highly marginal.

 

The "magic" that occurs when a system is supremely competent is that the limitations of the reproduction don't also drag the perceived quality down, beyond redemption - the marvellous abilities of the ear/brain to discard what is unconsciously recognised as not relevant to the musical content comes into play, fully; and what is left is a complete and satisfying awareness of the musical message. Over the years, especially in the early ones, I have had so many CDs that I thought were "impossible" - they sounded so mucky and unpleasant to listen to that they were beyond salvation - only to ultimately be proven wrong when I managed to lift the replay to a level where they suddenly "snapped into focus". So, I've given up on applying the term "bad recording" to anything - those then become my "test instruments"; they provide the instant feedback as to whether a particular system has reached adequate levels of competence.

[Bystander]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

The "magic" that occurs when a system is supremely competent is that the limitations of the reproduction don't also drag the perceived quality down, beyond redemption - the marvellous abilities of the ear/brain to discard what is unconsciously recognised as not relevant to the musical content comes into play, fully; and what is left is a complete and satisfying awareness of the musical message. 

Sounds fascinating.I just hear a bad recording (which can be enjoyable nonetheless, regardless of the playback chain). Probably need better cables to experience any of that. 

[fas42]

42 minutes ago, Bystander said:

Sounds fascinating.I just hear a bad recording (which can be enjoyable nonetheless, regardless of the playback chain). Probably need better cables to experience any of that. 

 

Nope. Everyone has different ideas on what a "bad" recording is - to me, it's when I sensing that the experience is 'small'; when I'm aware that there is a lack of quality, in any sense, for any reason, when listening - I want the experience to overwhelm me, make me feel like a small bystander in something that is far 'bigger' than I what I am in the picture - that's the goal. And that doesn't mean being pummelled into the ground ...

 

It's not a case of "betterness" of some part - it's the absence of weak links in the chain, anywhere that matters. If a particular cable solves a weakness in some manner, then that issue has been taken care of; that's the approach I find very effective.

 

 

[Ciukas]

After a week of owning and burning in the Lush, I can confidently say there is a notable difference vs the stock USB cable in my Chord Hugo 2 setup. At first listen, the Lush is alarmingly muted in nearly every aspect, it sounded quite closed in. I actually had to raise up the volume to compensate for the perceived lack of dynamism and clarity. What a difference a week makes.

 

Unlike other posters, I don't really find the Lush to be necessarily warmer nor full bodied with rock/pop tracks. With artists such as Patti Smith, Grace Jones, Bauhaus, Sisters of Mercy, etc... I thought there were subtle differences against the stock usb cable but I couldnt quite put my finger on it... certainly a little airier, and slightly less harsh, but I really couldnt describe how... I thought there could be some sort of confirmation bias. I preferred the Lush in general but I couldnt tell you why, and I certainly wouldnt be confident in taking a double blinded test. Until I played Midnight Sun by Kate Boy did I really notice a significant amelioration in bass texture. With the stock cable, there was more bloom whereas with the Lush there was more definition and it was definitely punchier. Then I tried Limbo by Gorilla Rodeo! and this time I was certain of a difference in bass texture. The Lush has a punchier and better bass definition than the stock. 

 

So I decided to go full bass attack to see if there was truly such a marked difference in the low end by playing proper techno and deep house. Birth (Adriatique Remix) by Andre Lodemann with the Lush has punchier and more detailed bass line compared to the bloomier and slightly less transparent stock usb cable. It's a night and day difference. Same results with Skin & Bones by Terranova. More punch, greater separation, more forward upper bass, less bloom. And then finally, with Tikal by Jonathan Kaspar, the Lush truly did sound more lush.... and warmer as well... more musical.... I know.. on a digital techno track... but the difference is clear.

 

So while I couldnt tell that much of a difference where I could be confident with a double blinded test with goth/hard/glam/post rock, I certainly would bet money on deep house/techno tracks which is somewhat ironic since I hardly listen to edm in my off time. Still in general, I can say that I prefer the Lush as it's more transparent and less overbearing than the stock usb, which makes it less fatiguing for me. I dont know about more lush specifically, but more agile for sure, thus more effortless and more musical. It's a keeper. I'd be curious to do a comparison with the USPCB later this month.

[barrows]

3 hours ago, Ciukas said:

I thought there could be some sort of confirmation bias

Definitely no confirmation bias here...  I have trained myself well to avoid these problems (and I have been paid to listen test components as part of my job in the past), and, I confirmed my view of the Lush being a bit warmer/fuller than the comparison cable (not stock) via a friend who I did the comparison for (without giving him any prior idea of what I thought about the differences, his initial statement after one A/B was that the Lush sounded "fuller").

Good for you to use electronic music for testing as well, contrary to some audiophile beliefs, I find electronic music (in my case often NIN) can be quite telling on some aspects of sound quality; there is a lot of interesting textural details in electronic music which requires a good system to express fully.

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, barrows said:

Definitely no confirmation bias here...  I have trained myself well to avoid these problems

ROFL

[elcorso]

40 minutes ago, mansr said:

ROFL

 

In case of PMSL please check your prostate health !

 

BTW, do not you have a better thing to do than interfere with our conversation?

 

Roch

 

PS / This goes also for the other seals that applaud...

[barrows]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

ROFL

Comments like these speak more about the commentator than they do about me.  You have no idea of my level of training and experience in this area-like most things, listen testing is a learned skill, and learning how to avoid biases of any kind are a big part of that skill set.

[kennyb123]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

ROFL

 

We hear ad nauseam that confirmation bias is something that needs to be accounted for.  You would think Barrows acknowledgment would be welcomed - or at least smartly challenged.  

 

Repeating what I posted a week ago:

 

On 8/15/2017 at 11:25 AM, kennyb123 said:

Seems these cable posts simply serve as a source of narcissistic supply that some use to boost their egos, draw attention to themselves, and affirm their feelings of superiority.  It's sad.

[Cxp]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

 

Good for you to use electronic music for testing as well, contrary to some audiophile beliefs, I find electronic music (in my case often NIN) can be quite telling on some aspects of sound quality; there is a lot of interesting textural details in electronic music which requires a good system to express fully.

 

I use hard rock music to evaluate... here it is really easy. Compressed midbass/midrange with high gain amplifiers, turns to mush pretty easy in suboptimal setups. Also, the guitars tend to blur everything together when it's bad. 

 

Nine inch nails is great  make The Day the World Went Away sound musical/haunting and you are on the right track!

 

 

[Ralf11]

12 minutes ago, barrows said:

Comments like these speak more about the commentator than they do about me.  You have no idea of my level of training and experience in this area-like most things, listen testing is a learned skill, and learning how to avoid biases of any kind are a big part of that skill set.

 

Thx to you, Ciukas, and others for the listening impressions, but...  have you been tested to determine if you have really trained yourself out of confirmation bias?  Or is it only confirmation bias that makes you think you don't have confirmation bias???