Ralf11 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 2 hours ago, wwaldmanfan said: What noise and interference issues? My system sound clear. It does, however, expose flaws in poorly mastered recordings. A few percent of my albums are recorded and reproduced well enough to sound quite excellent. I evaluate my system's SQ accordingly. my understanding is that the noise affects SQ in fairly subtle ways, before you would hear it as noise per se Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 "computer audio" is for people with a mac mini (used maybe) and a disc reader for their CDs - or who can afford a streamer - it doesn't have to be hard or expensive (for 1st world types) To get the best SQ may well require some experiments with various DACs, USB Cables, external clocks, etc. but you don't have to go to that level (just as many of us are happy with a lowly $7,000 pre-amp - or even a used $2,500 one - and did not buy a Ref 6. Or a cheap pair of Maggies or Personas instead of Aida's ($120,000). A meta-analysis by Reiss of high resolution files vs. Redbook found a slightly significant difference (statistically) - that is the best study I know of so far. Several people on here have said there were large differences however. I agree that the differences in recordings or masterings can be much larger than equipment differences. There are also several people who have come on here and asked about good $250 speakers and so forth. You don't have to spend a lot to listen to music. You can start a new thread along the lines of: "Best CD only system for $xxx" etc. and I am sure people will try to help. Ajax 1 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 is that new DAC for your own use? or a kit/plans for others? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 Oppo is just like Apple - designed in Silicon Valley; made in China Since I have colleagues in China (and all over the world) the made in the usa thing is not huge for me... besides that one of the grocery stores here has labels for "Local" vs. "Made in this county" as opposed to "foreign" foods made elsewhere in the state... Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 Let's say it take a good engineer a month to lay out a board - compare the amortized cost per unit for a 2,000 unit run with a 50,000 unit run. That is the power of a mass market. If you can build that board into something that has a large market (universal audio + video disc player) then savings can be had. Who has heard the Oppo-205 and looked inside at what parts were used where (as not all power supplies are as critical as others)? I am curious how much one would have to spend on a DAC to get better SQ than the Oppo provides? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 22 hours ago, barrows said: We did a private demo a couple of years ago (at RMAF) for some folks who wanted "proof" that USB out of the microRendu would be any better than USB out direct from a MacBook Pro. We started with the MBP, then went to the microRendu... It took less than 10 seconds of playback via the microRendu for everyone present to go "I get it now..." The difference is not subtle. BTW this was using a DAC with full galvanic isolation on its USB input, the difference with lesser USB inputs is even greater. You might "believe" this is "highly debatable", but anyone who listens will not. Keeping noise out of the DAC is big advantage sonically and easily audible. how do you think the noise got into the DAC? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 I was wondering if EMF could be the issue -- esp. if the noisy radiator is near the DAC. One thing is for sure - if galv. isolation still allows noise into a DAC, then some additional counter-measures are needed. I've always wondered why optical isn't used more... some have said the Benchmark is immune in the sense that it sounds just as good on any input (not measuring results)... Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 I want better optical than TOSlink Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 I never heard anyone say W4S sounds bad... Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 On 1/10/2018 at 11:09 PM, marce said: Galvanic isolation is to stop a direct current path between equipment, it is not designed to stop noise (though it can breaks ground loops ) it is for protection... EMC or noise requires more thought and a full understanding of coupling mechanisms and ensuring there are no coupling mechanisms in the gear you are designing... ok, if there is no electrical connection (galv. isolation is used, such as opto-isolators) then what "coupling mechanisms" could exist, barring EMR ?? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 uh... thx - I had to calculate all that as a Soph. physics major - really a good way to make people shy away from vector fields... but I said barring EMR ... Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 15, 2018 Share Posted January 15, 2018 a trivial effect is one that cannot be heard or, let's go full bore into neurophysiology and neuropsychology and say it is trivial if not only can the listener NOT hear it consciously but it affects the listener in no way whatsoever, even unconsciously we can use fMR and collect stress hormones from the eye surface to test Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 55 minutes ago, sandyk said: I suspect that this lady and Barry Diament, who are both highly respected Recording Engineers. have way better hearing abilities than you do, smart ass ! do you have to call people "smart ass" ?? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 you know sandman, "many, many members have heard the difference between" decent people and yourself Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 "these differences are easily audible" and sound like...? hiss? loss of 'impact' on bass? veiling on voices? or what? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Thanks. I'll listen for that when comparing. Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Barrows, as long as we have you on speed dial on this thread, I have some more questions... it seems this might summarize part of your comments: - No interface is inherently better than another. The critical issue is how the interface is implemented. So, my question to manf.s is: which interface is easiest and least expensive to implement well? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 Thanks. Next question: I am using WiFi to transmit Redbook CD rips from another room (iMac with iTunes to an Apple TV3). This sounds just fine to me, and is capable of revealing crummy masterings, recordings, etc. Any thoughts on that? (I have not gotten around to trying a Mac Mini with USB or buying other gear in the digital chain; exception is an Oppo-205 which I use for SACD disc playback, and will become a DAC upgrade (over the Cambridge DACPlus i have now) still using the TV3 for at least a while). Audio Research LS25 Mk II into a Sunfire amp driving Maggie 3.7i) Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 17, 2018 Share Posted January 17, 2018 5 minutes ago, mansr said: Then it must also be readily measurable. hmmm, if you can span a space, does that mean it mensurable? Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 how about we take a really thin membrane, sprinkle millions of sensor on it, and wrap it around and around in a spiral? we could make some of it thicker, wider and then use FFT to analyze what we get with highly parallel processors all over the place Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 I have to disagree. They are, as you said, suggestions. And what he said is often true, esp. in systems costing < $20k Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 5 hours ago, mansr said: Hell is other people. he's gone Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 I just want to thank barrows for "Ayre chooses not to use global negative feedback in their circuits" - my emphasis - it is all too rare that people distinguish global vs. all or local neg. feedback moving on: Benchmark is using a feed forward circuit in their AH2B Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, mansr said: What we need is a feedback-and-forth design. like visual processing in the vertebrate eye? or more like the brain? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now