Objective proof the UpTone Regen ISO can improve a DAC's output(*)

[pkane2001]

3 hours ago, MikeyFresh said:

removed by editor

 

I so enjoy reading a coherent, intelligent, well-reasoned argument. Doesn't get much better than this

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

One of the fundamental issues here is the misinterpretation of what "science" is, - or the difference between investigative science and engineering. 

 

No, the fundamental issue here is between proper science and engineering, and designing to an unproven conjecture or to a marketing spec.

 

It doesn't matter if Amir is inept, biased, or otherwise incapable. Measurements can be verified, and someone posting measurements is automatically submitting their findings to be reviewed and repeated by others. The way to disprove Amir is to perform proper measurements that prove him wrong, and not to argue about his biases or lack of skills or that he doesn't have a stereo system.  Amir was criticized for possible flaws in his measurements, so he repeated measurements with different configurations, showing every objection as invalid. This is how objective science is done. 

 

There's very little in Alex's claims that can be reviewed or tested. These claims are unverifiable and untestable, and so are the opposite of science or proper engineering. The one theory that Alex brought up about SMPS noise turned out to be easy to confirm, and was proven wrong.

[pkane2001]

30 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

No,

Amir is accused of pseudo science & bad science by only conducting tests that will achieve the desired conclusion.

 

Accusations are easy to make. Substantiate them with real evidence, then we can talk.

 

30 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

This is the really crazy thing about the "glorification" of measurers and conjurers It is a Cult of personality. Anyone who picks up a cheap ruler is suddenly a "scientist" and any other scientific test is called mysticism and not science. One either measures, or it's not science at all. 

 

Not crazy at all. Science and engineering are based on measurements. If you don't believe this, take some courses on the history of science and engineering.

 

30 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

the so called "claims" are general in that regenerating the USB signal and galvanically isolating it CAN/does improve SI, mitigate, noise, etc, to the DAC, which can ultimatley improve the overall sound. Why did you and Amir single out Uptone? What about the 9 other ones? What claims are they making? The claims are very verifiable, tested, and proven to the satisfaction of the 95% who have tested them. These products work.

 

There's zero objective evidence that regeneration and galvanic isolation improves sound output of a well-designed DAC. I've no idea what Amir's reasons are, but I chose ISOR because I was considering this product for evaluation in my system, when I was investigating what I thought were USB-related issues. When I requested some basic measurements (similar to what Amir published), I was told that these measurements are not necessary or useful, that they'll prove nothing and therefore are of no consequence. I beg to differ, and Amir has already shown why.

 

Please describe a single verifiable, controlled listening test that has been conducted to prove that ISOR works. I've not seen one yet. 

 

 

 

[pkane2001]

14 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

Who did great things? Certainly not Amir. He was among the most miserable, failed executives ever work in any corporation. All you have to do is read the internal emails that are part of the public record in the DOJ Anti Trust Case against Microsoft.

 

He was an utter failure. Could not build a competing store to iTunes. Could not design a competing device to the iPod. And the list goes on. Probably the only thing he was successful at was walking away with a big pay package funded by shareholders.

 

Several failed vanity business after that. And utterly devoid of any knowledge about audio. Probably owns 50 albums.

 

Quite a lot of great things, yep.

 

Don't know much about Amir or his background, but this sounds a bit like a character assassination, heh, Digital Assassin? To say that someone didn't come up with an improvement on iPod or created a competitor to iTunes is really not saying much, as that's true of about 99.9999% of the industry. And what does this negative personal stuff have to do with anything?

 

[pkane2001]

7 minutes ago, Digital Assassin said:

Utter nonsense.

 

That was his JOB> And he was specifically directed to this other things which failed to do DIRECTLY by Bill Gates..with BIllions

at his disposal.

 

99.9999% of the others did not have a MS Warchest.

 

No character assassination.  That is Amir's job.

 

All in the public record.

 

Utter speculation. Were you there to witness this? In any case, from this you conclude what? That Amir can't use measurement equipment? Or doesn't understand how digital audio works? I don't follow.

[pkane2001]

17 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Read the words that go along with the measurements. Clearly a bias. Screaming from the hilltops that something sucks, then whispering to a small group of followers several pages later that you screwed up the test, is one example of many. 

 

Also, he has a clear bias toward products he sells. If he measures all those components and publishes the results, that'd be a positive step. 

 

Chris, unless you intend to show that Amir made up or faked the measurements he posted, there's nothing to be gained by accusing him of bias. Measurements speak for themselves, regardless of who makes them. I don't need Amir (or Alex) to tell me how to interpret them.

 

And guess what? Alex didn't share any measurements, even when I and others asked for them. Amir did, and he measured exactly what I wanted to see, with better equipment than I have access to. He found an issue with the product, which Uptone either wasn't aware of or didn't want to discuss. Tell me again why I should care about Amir's supposed bias?

 

[pkane2001]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Then the measurements showing the Regen helped and hurt and did nothing should be given the same weight and on the front page. 

 

The microRendu article was a disaster. Even the first measurements were a disaster. Corrections need the same headlines as the improper measurements. 

 

If you don't see a bias in all the words surrounding the measurements, I can't persuade you to see it. But you can read measurements and don't you think all measurements should be given the same headlines? If they don't get it, there's a bias. 

 

I don't know or care if Amir has a bias. Scientific process is by nature adversarial and is designed to work regardless of personalities. And that's OK, because bias is as good a driver for progress as anything else.

 

It's fine by me if Amir is motivated by more than just a pure desire to know. The end result is the same for me: I got the measurements I wanted to see. 

[pkane2001]

11 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Remnd me again what measuments you wanted us to publish?

 

And please tell me why Amir's "discovery" of leakage currents from the $10 optional SMPS we offer is supposed to be some big revelation, resulting in condemnation of a product whose function is galvanic isolation and USB signal regeneration?  

Lots of audio products come with an SMPS--including DACs and other USB devices (see the iFi iPower that comes with many of their products and which produces quite similar leakage--we have measured it and others)--and the users have a choice to use something else.

 

This thread has become weirisom and at this point I'd rather not toss fuel on the fire by citing the obviously biased phrases and judgements that Amir lead with in his "expose" at ASR.

 

 

 

I wanted to see FFT measurements at the output of the DAC. As a prospective customer, it is important for me to know that SMPS that is sold with ISOR potentially introduces AC noise into the output of my DAC. Had Amir not published his measurements, I would've purchased a product that, instead of cleaning up the signal at the output, possibly introduced unwanted AC distortions.

 

 

[pkane2001]

3 hours ago, Thomas savage said:

That's actually the point Chris, to show the workings and be open to challenge. It would be easy and tbh in amirs intrest to of deleted a bit of the microrendu thread and reposted without the errors ( there was no such errors in the latest ISO regen thread) but that would of not been transparent. ( though I'm not sure these corrections rendered the thread title obsolete) .

 

You can argue he shots himself in the foot but by doing so showed he is genuinely open and transparent. ( I'd suggest that shows integrity not any kind of false as you seen to allude to).

 

the threads are a process , that process of review is designed to show errors and reinforce the objective of accurate results. Going back and rewitting history is not part of the process though it may provide some advantage as you suggest plus tbh make amir himself look better.  

 

Hes not intrested in that, he's just interested in the data being reviewed, more importantly being seen to be reviewed. 

 

But yes, the result of that is you have to follow the threads. Being wrong is not a crime nor is it something that should hurt ones ego or a basis for deception. Personally I don't see what's wrong with that. 

 

There were mistakes made on the microrendu thread, but they have not been repeated on the ISO regen thread.  In fact the further investigation carried out in the ISO regen thread serves to validate the microrendu threads conclusions on those psu issues. 

 

Its all open, transparent and there to be seen for all. For better or for worse that's the process we believe to be right. The peer review process. 

 

It might however be wise, given a amount of time to open a new thread that reflects the findings of the review process. A kind of ' what be learnt ' or ' conclusion' thread that clearly supersedes the original review process.  

That does however happen organically in the review threads themselves so I'm not sure just how useful or practical that would be tbh. 

 

The measurement process is designed to allow for errors, error detection, and error correction. That's why it's a better process than, for example, sighted listening or blind faith. Neither one of these allow for error detection or correction by others. Nobody can prove or even question that you hear a 'veil lifted' or 'sound stage increased' if you find this in an uncontrolled test. In the absence of error detection and correction, errors, biases, placebos, and agendas are rampant. 

 

While measurements can be proven right or wrong by others, uncontrolled tests are simply reports of someone else's (often biased) opinions. As such, these cannot be proven right or wrong, as opinions vary. That's why it's almost a necessity to question someone's personal agenda, accomplishments, or personality traits when discussing subjective tests -- there's nothing else to debate or to question. But these discussions are irrelevant to published measurements. Published measurements are subject to peer review, validation, or repudiation without the need to get personal. Biased opinions or not, measurements stand on their own.

 

That's why it's laughable when the subjectivist crowd tries to accuse Amir of bias. Not that he's not biased -- everyone is. It's just that this is irrelevant to the measurements he published and to the review process that ensued.

[pkane2001]

50 minutes ago, k-man said:

Anyone just read ASR's measurements and review of SOtM SMS-200? Here's an interesting bit for those who are on Alex's case by selling the IsoRegen with the Meanwell supply. Quote from the site:

 

"While there is still some mains contributions, the MeanWell is the best of the switchmode power supplies here! It has a grounded AC mains connection which allows the output high frequency shunt to go to that pin, rather than to hot/neutral. That reduces the amount of mains leakage contribution. And for $12, it is a bargain compared to the iFi."

 

 

 

It would be an interesting test of ISO-Regen to feed the more noisy output from SOtM SMS-200 powered by iFi switcher through the ISO-R to the DAC. Assuming the galvanic isolation and reclocking work as advertised, we should see decreased noise and distortions at the output of the DAC compared to no ISO-R.