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

[esldude]

Never mind. 

[esldude]

14 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

1. He isn't whining, he's explaining.

2. The measurements aren't objective, - they are simply poor.

3. This is not "modern science" it is pseudo science in that the scientific investigation is designed to achieve a pre-determined outcome. That predetermined outcome is not being thoroughly tested by not even conducting the BEST tests to determine performance levels.

4. The manufacturer isn't making any "claims" that are based on some universalizable & quantifiable criteria.

5. There are no "marketers" and what you call "Value" is only applicable to you, under an entirely unreasonably and overly strident burden of proof.

6. Whom you call "from most anyone" are the tiniest minority, - 4 people. "everyone else" who are conducting REAL science understands that the 3 "big 3" products are of benefit to USB based digital file playback.

This post must be from bizzaro world.  As that is the only place these claims would fit.

[esldude]

Using what I have available I wonder if anything makes more difference than the clocks and PLLs unless it is very nasty going in.

 

Here is a pair of 40 hz wide looks at 12 khz signal.  Each FFT bin is .367 hz wide.  The red trace is from a device which gives this very same close in profile with 4 different clock sources.  Some faster in clock speed and some slower.  Two were USB to SPDIF converters, one was the clock from a recording interface and one was from a BluRay player used for the clock.  Looks as if the SPDIF filtering gives the same result.  The blue trace is from a different device with the same 4 clock sources.  You can see by the numbers on the left of this screen at 1.1 hz offset from the 12 khz peak there is a difference of more than 30 db.  Not shown if I let the playback interface run off of its internal clock the central few bins covering +/- 2.2 hz is just very slightly lower and a very small difference either side of the peak for about 100 hz. 

 

 

Here are the same results shown over 2 khz either side of the tone. As you can see the red trace is better or equal the first 20 hz either side of the tone, but the blue trace is better out to 200 hz or so each way.  Then they are both pretty even in the noise shown except the blue trace has those spaced spikes.

 

 

SPDIF is the only way to feed the device in the blue trace.  I would think the PLL is going to be the limiting factor there.  So cleaning up the USB signal to a USB to SPDIF converter is likely not to make a difference I think.

 

The device in the red trace appears to act similarly with the SPDIF inputs.  It however can run off of its internal clock.  It appears the difference in its internal clock and how well it cleans up the PLL input is extremely small.  Will tidying up the USB feed when on internal clock improve when running off the internal clock?  I don't know, but given how these things work I rather doubt it will.

 

That is without the whole swamp involving the fact we really have nothing other than conjecture and sighted listening making us think close in jitter is an audible phenomena with the levels of it normally displayed with modern gear.

[esldude]

50 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

snip............

In a sense we are arguing over chocolate and vanilla. Nobody gets hurt selecting either one and we all have free will to select or not select either one. 

snip.....

 

 

Oh you go far too far here Chris.  Chocolate is a French neo-socialist plot to enslave new world indigenous people by creating the idea chocolate is good.  Chocolate also effects the thinking of those who consume it even being additive to some.

 

Now the good, wholesome, simple taste of vanilla would have taken over completely if not for these conspiracies to psychologically pre-condition people almost from birth or least from a young age to give chocolate a chance.

 

I think the use of DACs is no less important however.

 

 

 

 

[esldude]

41 minutes ago, firedog said:

snip......

 

My response was that "objectivists" also exhibit this trait, and I gave  a few examples: Look around the net where it is constantly claimed that "science proves" that listeners can't differentiate between hi-res and redbook, or between moderate and low levels of jitter. Yet, it has been shown that trained listeners can do both in properly conducted tests.

snip.....

 

Copy of a response to you over on ASR:

 

Could you specify or link to those if possible. I don't know of any on jitter.

On hires vs redbook there are always, in the ones I know, caveats. And that is okay, just wish to know which ones you speak of.

There is one where hires downsampled was detected vs hires, but not native redbook vs hires. Seems likely the downsampling is what was audible. There are the MQA related results, but they also include poor dither practice and unusually steep filtering, and point to a very weak effect. There was another where DSD was detected vs 48 khz, but not detected vs 44 khz which seems as if something odd must have been going on.

I don't know of any showing jitter being detectable except at very high levels. Would be most interested in those results.

 

[esldude]

5 minutes ago, k-man said:

Since Amir's name has been mentioned here on CA on a few occasions, isn't it best to have him over here and put his PoV across, just as @Thomas savage has done? I'm sure his dialogue here will be less limiting compared to his own forum. I don't see much of his activity elsewhere like Roon community or Whats Best Forum (which he was a co-founding member).

Chris does not want him posting here. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, Siltech817 said:

 

I am considering various options to upgrade my local file playback set, my Macbook Air just never sounded very good even with JRiver or Audirvana. I'm thinking to just start with a device such as the isoREGEN, or W4S Recovery, but might end up going with a network player instead.

Newbie question: who is Amir?

Chances are neither will improve your Macbook sound.  There probably is nothing wrong with it.  So when you say it doesn't sound good do you have another source for comparison?  Or which attributes of the sound do you find lacking?  If the sound is not to your liking it is likely to be elsewhere in your playback system.

[esldude]

30 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.

I would guess Steve Jobs never had hands on or used an AP test unit.  I would even guess SJ would be a person with very little input on technical testing of some of this audio gear.  Creating the iPod and testing dubious audiophile claims.  One is not the other.

[esldude]

10 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Dennis (esldude) has not, but hundreds of others have.  You might find more useful information in the thread where people actually listen to the product--with many different computers, streamers, and DACs--and report their findings in great detail.

 

 

Also, our products are sold with a 30-day, money-back satisfaction guarantee (no restocking fee, just the modest cost of the original postage to get it to you).

 

The majority of the people in this thread deny that USB cables, computer source variation, or USB signal integrity and clocking can make any audible difference.  They are very much in the minority.

 

It is true that most attempts to see variations in the analog output of a DAC--that correlate to what large groups of people hear--have not yielded much.  In face there are $79 DACs that, with present measurements, perform on the bench identically to $10,000 DACs.

But in the listening room they sure don't sound the same...

 

 

 

Have you listened to the $79 DAC?

[esldude]

11 hours ago, Siltech817 said:

 

Yes my Marantz disc player sounds better, and so do various different DACs when connected via Toslink to an Apple Airport Express, as opposed to the same dac connected to the Macbook via USB.

Now of course the Marantz disc player comparison is only marginally valid, in that it has a different power supply, DAC, and analog output stage than a USB DAC connected to the Macbook. Unfortunately the disc player does not have digital inputs. Still, it sounds better, as do several different outboard DACs running Toslink to the AEx, however that is limited to 16/48 by the Apple firmware so not a solution for the long haul, I've already kept it too long.

I find the Macbook's USB connection to be lacking in soundstage size and focus especially, but also not as transparent or revealing, it sounds veiled.

Maybe the IsoREGEN, or W4S Recovery will boost the quality of the Macbook's USB connection allowing the DAC to perform better.

Have you tried the IsoREGEN with a Macbook and found no improvement?

 

 

I have not.  I have measured several DACs from USB and other inputs.  There doesn't appear to be degradation from the USB inputs.  You do sometimes see disc players with more jitter though I doubt it by itself is at an audible level.  I have listened to several DACs being fed from a Macbook or a Mac Mini.  They sounded quite good. 

 

So what is the DAC which sounds poor with the Macbook USB?

[esldude]

10 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

@Superdad said: "The majority of the people in this thread deny that USB cables, computer source variation, or USB signal integrity and clocking can make an audible difference"

 

however, those same people will rail against MQA leaky filters, even though they may not be audible. They haven't bothered to listen for audibility. It's only used when it supports their point of view. 

I don't know if they are audible.  Using leaky filters that increase aliasing is not a 'feature' for which I wish to pay or have restrict how I listen to a recording.  I guess I am just strange that way.  Doubly so when there is a campaign to tell me it is superior performance rather an inferior. Even more so when people stand to gain money from this inferior digital performance. 

[esldude]

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. 

I posted a few measurements in a thread there a few weeks back.  Discovered a mistake.  Said so, and asked if Amir preferred I clean it up or delete the thread.  He said something like mistakes happen, and are honest, and how we move forward.  Said to leave it as it was. People would see what went on transparently.

[esldude]

10 hours ago, Digital Assassin said:

Amir has massive personality disorders. He also has a unmanageable burning jealousy and vindictiveness against successful, smart entrepreneurs, who bring excellent products to market at very fair prices. Because as an "engineer" he has never been able to ever produce a commercially viable audio product.

 

No wonder, he knows nothing about audio. He did not even have a music collection until 2 years ago, if that.

I guess that is why he tested a $79 DAC and posted a thread about how it performs better than expected.  He is jealous of people accomplishing anything.  Especially successful companies.  Yeah, that's it. 

 

The bit about a music collection.  I guess if you can't make reality based criticisms just make something up in your head.  Much easier to look like you're someone worth listening to that way. 

[esldude]

39 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Well my comment--about a divided and divisive nation, and a plea for more civility here--was not an expression of my personal political leanings.  

Maybe some of you don't watch the news, but it has gotten pretty ugly out there.  There are over 900 active hate-groups in the USA, and just this weekend something pretty horrific took place.  Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers called out Trump for not specifically condemning the White Nationalist and Nazi hate groups involved (and those groups reveled in the fact). This really is not a partisan issue.  It is one of human decency.  

 

I am open to most all viewpoints--and I have plenty of Republican friends.  But violent racism is something else entirely, and while I doubt there are many audiophiles in that camp, I'll gladly pass on business from any of those.

And you could have omitted any mention of the entire business which would have had no effect on the info posted in this thread as it relates to audio. 

[esldude]

22 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

It wasn't me who said that. What's going on here?

I noticed you also didn't say that he had no music collection until 2 years ago or less. 

 

 

[esldude]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Correct. I don't even know the guy. 

It would seem the Digital assassin doesn't either.  Yet he seems intent on posting ridiculous comments like having no music until 2 years ago.  Only operating out of jealousy etc. etc.  Making generally demeaning comment without foundation or useful information. 

[esldude]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Agreed. I would like to remove that comment, but don't want to be seen as removing something of substance when it is brought up etc... I know it sounds strange, but I feel like someone would call me biased for removing it after it was brought up.

Yes it sounds very strange.