IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?

[PeterSt]

20 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Are you here to help explain my position , or otherwise ?

 

No worries, Alex. But it comes to mind that you shout a lot lately. My remark was only about that. Otherwise cosily read what I all said and in the context you know, and you will see you are fine.

 

That it is better for you and us that you don't mix in your stance about this in each and every thread, well, do we count 100 already ?

Anyway, it has been a longer time for me, so I jumped in once again.

 

Maybe it is a good idea for you to learn that whatever trouble you undertake to make clear your stance, did not help me anywhere for better music reproduction. That is, would I follow your "rules" (figuratively). However, since I *DO* counteract all what you claim for the wrong reasons, but which is true for net result, music reproduction DID improve after all.

I hope it is clear a little because possibly too hard to understand. But if I take FLAC vs WAV (which is not Cookie's idea in the first place, but people believe) which is since day one (now 10 years ago) covered for in XXHighEnd, then it already brings psychological rest that I don't need to worry about differences which inherently *are* there (for net playback result). But I covered for it, so now all is fine. IS the net result for SQ better or worse ? I don't care a hoot. I only don't want to be confronted with the idea that I should take care.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

This is a very difficult concept for objectivists to accept — that there is no such thing as digital audio. Yes, there is a sort of logical data deciphered from square waves, but there isn’t even a hint of 1s and 0s going into your speakers, and speakers have no way to know if an electrical impulse should be there or not.

 

There is an imaginary pretend wall between "digital" and "analog" parts of a playback chain. You guys have to learn that this boundary does not exist.

 

Since you are talking to objectivists, you'll need to provide objective evidence for this phenomenon. So far, all the objective evidence points to the opposite of the point you're making. Except maybe for a few really poorly designed DACs that pass through computer noise over USB and a few USB cleaner devices that actually inject power supply noise into the DAC.

[beerandmusic]

5 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Since you are talking to objectivists, you'll need to provide objective evidence for this phenomenon. So far, all the objective evidence points to the opposite of the point you're making. Except maybe for a few really poorly designed DACs that pass through computer noise over USB and a few USB cleaner devices that actually inject power supply noise into the DAC.

 

I am not taking either side on this, and it is my personal opinion that noise is the biggest problem with usb, but i was at a local audio group meeting tonite, and while talking to some "professed design engineer", he suggested that he believes that the clocking is a bigger issue than noise, and that noise wouldn't be such an issue with the right clocks.  He sounded convincing, but I really have no idea, but i do know that the new famed sotm ultra does have some new clocking in it, so maybe that is the magic juice....just something to ponder....

 

you two can rage on.....

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

That it is better for you and us that you don't mix in your stance about this in each and every thread,

 Peter

 I had no desire to start this up in this thread, but Kumakuma dragged me into it yet once again.

Even wgs recently respected my position of not being dragged into it again.

 

Alex

[GUTB]

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Since you are talking to objectivists, you'll need to provide objective evidence for this phenomenon. So far, all the objective evidence points to the opposite of the point you're making. Except maybe for a few really poorly designed DACs that pass through computer noise over USB and a few USB cleaner devices that actually inject power supply noise into the DAC.

 

Go get a $70 SotM SATA filter, or use a USB to SATA splitter to power your SSD externally. Oh, your audio playback suddenly became clearer and more revealing? Must be in your head, right? No, what has happened is that all the noise your SSD has been dumping into your PSU rail has been eliminated, and it’s no longer effecting your audio playback. That’s right, just your SSD working caused a degradation of sound.

[pkane2001]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I am not taking either side on this, and it is my personal opinion that noise is the biggest problem with usb, but i was at a local audio group meeting tonite, and while talking to some "professed design engineer", he suggested that he believes that the clocking is a bigger issue than noise, and that noise wouldn't be such an issue with the right clocks.  He sounded convincing, but I really have no idea, but i do know that the new famed sotm ultra does have some new clocking in it, so maybe that is the magic juice....just something to ponder....

 

you two can rage on.....

 

Proper clock implementation is important on the DAC side. There's very little to say that a USB clock within standard tolerances has any effect on the sound quality or that a well-implemented USB receiver allows any of the computer noise to interfere with SQ at the output of the DAC.

 

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

Go get a $70 SotM SATA filter, or use a USB to SATA splitter to power your SSD externally.

 

You too don't know all. Just don't have in the d*mn SSD in in the first place ?

 

Next one up please !

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

Go get a $70 SotM SATA filter, or use a USB to SATA splitter to power your SSD externally. Oh, your audio playback suddenly became clearer and more revealing? Must be in your head, right? No, what has happened is that all the noise your SSD has been dumping into your PSU rail has been eliminated, and it’s no longer effecting your audio playback. That’s right, just your SSD working caused a degradation of sound.

 

Which part of the above is objective evidence?  

 

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Peter

 I had no desire to start this up in this thread, but Kumakuma dragged me into it yet once again.

Even wgs recently respected my position of not being dragged into it again.

 

Alex

 

You've keep mentioning your finding in other threads as if they were established facts. I didn't realize that they weren't allowed to dispute your crackpot theories.

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

There's very little to say that a USB clock within standard tolerances has any effect on the sound quality or that a well-implemented USB receiver allows any of the computer noise to interfere with SQ at the output of the DAC.

 

ALL the threads and posts in CA are completely useless because everywhere you run into the same guys with the same ideas and nobody seems to pick up anything from whatever has been said.

Am I right perhaps ?

 

People must have sooo much spare time. It is unbelievable.

Actually everybody is a troll, this way. Should include myself. 

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

Which part of the above is objective evidence?

 

And what do you want to achieve with that question ?

[sandyk]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Peter

 I had no desire to start this up in this thread, but Kumakuma dragged me into it yet once again.

Even wgs recently respected my position of not being dragged into it again.

Even if I say nothing further , I will still continue to be dragged into these nasty  "Get Audiophiles" type threads.

At least in your own forum, you have a say on whether this kind of behaviour will be tolerated or not. 

I would bet that you don't have too many of your members who would suggest that you are either delusional or smoking weed ?

Alex

 

[PeterSt]

IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, PeterSt said:

 

ALL the threads and posts in CA are completely useless because everywhere you run into the same guys with the same ideas and nobody seems to pick up anything from whatever has been said.

Am I right perhaps ?

 

People must have sooo much spare time. It is unbelievable.

Actually everybody is a troll, this way. Should include myself. 

 

Fully agree, Peter!  By the way, where are the Lush cable measurements you were promising?

 

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, PeterSt said:

 

And what do you want to achieve with that question ?

 

Read at least one or two messages that preceded my answer, and I think you'll be able to figure it out.

 

[beerandmusic]

can't we all just get a long

 

[PeterSt]

Just now, pkane2001 said:

Fully agree, Peter!  By the way, where are the Lush cable measurements you were promising?

 

Yeah, I could expect that one.

You know very well what I was referring to.

 

You don't want to know how much breath taking it takes to even start with this. Anyway the net effect is that I for two months by now I listen to a DAC with measurement wires sticking out everywhere, useless.

 

Btw, you can't help it that Beer injects his clock thing. But I thought "let's not respond to that, or else ...".

But I am not alone in here.

[Cyrus]

While reading this thread, Julian Lage's Stop Go Start from his Arclight album started playing. Track as proxy/surrogate for the thread title?

 

Given the induced blueness...Had to look it up...and here's what comes up as the second search result (google) for 'color blue':

 

"Blue has more complex and contradictory meanings than any other color."  It appears, Blue is not equal to Blue....after all!

 

There's more: https://www.colormatters.com/the-meanings-of-colors/blue

 

I'm queueing up Cassandra Wilson's Blue Light 'Til ....  because 15 replies were posted while typing the above!!!

 

 

 

[beerandmusic]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Yeah, I could expect that one.

You know very well what I was referring to.

 

You don't want to know how much breath taking it takes to even start with this. Anyway the net effect is that I for two months by now I listen to a DAC with measurement wires sticking out everywhere, useless.

 

Btw, you can't help it that Beer injects his clock thing. But I thought "let's not respond to that, or else ...".

But I am not alone in here.

 

just trying to change the subject as it sounded like it was getting heated...plus i value both your input and was curious if there was any possible logic to what the guy was saying about clocks....he was making it sound like you can take a cheap chinese dac, replace the clocks and have something that sounds wonderful...i am sure there was more to it than that, but he sounded very confident in what he was saying.

 

 

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

That’s right, just your SSD working caused a degradation of sound.

 

That is why I power both my internal SSDs individually from the internal +12V rail, regulated down to +5V, then followed by a variety of Shunt Regulator to improve the isolation between them and other components via the internal PSU.

[PeterSt]

24 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

34 minutes ago, GUTB said:

This is a very difficult concept for objectivists to accept — that there is no such thing as digital audio. Yes, there is a sort of logical data deciphered from square waves, but there isn’t even a hint of 1s and 0s going into your speakers, and speakers have no way to know if an electrical impulse should be there or not.

 

There is an imaginary pretend wall between "digital" and "analog" parts of a playback chain. You guys have to learn that this boundary does not exist.

 

Since you are talking to objectivists, you'll need to provide objective evidence for this phenomenon. So far, all the objective evidence points to the opposite of the point you're making. Except maybe for a few really poorly designed DACs that pass through computer noise over USB and a few USB cleaner devices that actually inject power supply noise into the DAC.

 

That one ?

All I took from that one was that you were telling that I use a lousy DAC. Yes, here too I use the known context at your side.

So, discuss it ?

 

Of course not. I read on. But don't keep coming back on it (which you did).

 

So I have a lousy DAC. Sniff.

No evidence needed, I provided it myself already. <smiley>

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Btw, you can't help it that Beer injects his clock thing. But I thought "let's not respond to that, or else ...".

But I am not alone in here.

 

Sorry I took the bait 

 

[PeterSt]

3 minutes ago, Cyrus said:

"Blue has more complex and contradictory meanings than any other color."  It appears, Blue is not equal to Blue....after all!

 

With this one I should be able to sleep well !

 

3 minutes ago, Cyrus said:

 

I'm queueing up Cassandra Wilson's Blue Light 'Til ....  because 15 replies were posted while typing the above!!!

 

Maybe Chris @The Computer Audiophile should consider that he created a chat forum with this. We go viral ourselves !

[pkane2001]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

So I have a lousy DAC. Sniff.

No evidence needed, I provided it myself already. <smiley>

 

Your next DAC, I'm sure, will be better

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Maybe Chris @The Computer Audiophile should consider that he created a chat forum with this. We go viral ourselves !

We've had a chat feature off and on over the years.