The Best for the Least

[firedog]

On 2/4/2018 at 7:03 PM, Spacehound said:

 

 

Yes you do.

 

You are happy to cross  the  bridge we built, or fly in the airliner we built. Without us you would have not have those  or even your   audio system.

 

And you don't dispute with your heart surgeon or whoever.

But  because you might  have a little knowledge (a dangerous thing) you suddenly start to believe in magic, because you spent money on it. Which is, admittedly, easy to do. I've  almost convinced myself about 'tweaks' on occasions. USB power is a fun one, and I believe the Regen provides it. Most DACs don't use USB power. Nor do USB 'pulses' have leading or trailing edges to 'improve', 'edges' is not  how it works..  'Reclocking' is pointless  as all clocking is done in the DAC.  That's  just three examples.

 

And do you seriously think that someone buying his first system is going to buy little boxes to 'improve'  it,  even if they do work? He may do so later, but not when he is starting from buying the DAC, amp, speakers in most of the 'least cost' suggestions.

 

Also you and davide256 are the' "policemen by suggesting we stop posting such stuff. Which may  be reasonable, but it is still 'policing'.

 

Part of the problem? Of course as are you.  We are all someone's 'problem' if we disagree, but none  of it would ever advance if we all agreed,  forums 'discuss'. and if we all sgree discussion is not needed. 

 

As  'engineers' or  many 'scientists ' we suffer a constant high 'noise' level from laymen who falsely think they know how stuff works because they have a certain personal  familiarity about some of it.  Doctors, accountants, airline pilots, etc.  don't seem to suffer from this.

The problem with your post is that it assumes that all engineers and scientists agree with your POV regarding audio. They don't. It isn't hard to bring deuling engineers and scientists to these arguments. 

[Spacehound]

56 minutes ago, firedog said:

The problem with your post is that it assumes that all engineers and scientists agree with your POV regarding audio. They don't. It isn't hard to bring deuling engineers and scientists to these arguments. 

As I posted as a reply to someone else:

 

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" - Arthur C Clarke

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 hours ago, Spacehound said:

Next to the Vivaldi 'stack', which I couldn't afford,  it's the best measuring DAC that exists. 

 

And I like it's shape ,  and that most of their business is in studio stuff and military communications, so I know they have a clue. 

None of their current business is in studio stuff or military communications. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 hours ago, esldude said:

Then there are the Schiit Multi-bit Bifrost measurements. 

 

Hmmm, not too impressive either. 

 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurement-and-review-of-schiit-bifrost-multibit-dac.2319/#post-63533

 

 

It would be helpful to have the manufacturer’s feedback on this, just like all the other items posted over there. 

 

What does @schiit say about the write-up?

 

 

[Spacehound]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

None of their current business is in studio stuff or military communications. 

If they have stopped completely (and I will take your word for it) they must be smaller than I assumed.  

[mansr]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

None of their current business is in studio stuff or military communications. 

Was audiophoolery more profitable than military contracts? Wow.

[plissken]

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It would be helpful to have the manufacturer’s feedback on this, just like all the other items posted over there. 

 

What does @schiit say about the write-up?

 

 

 

Agreed. I'm just waiting to see how those measurements are debunked.

[schiit]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It would be helpful to have the manufacturer’s feedback on this, just like all the other items posted over there. 

 

What does @schiit say about the write-up?

 

 

Hey guys,

 

No clue what they're measuring, since their measurements don't correlate with our own (on Stanford SR1/SR1+ and Avermetrics Averlab). Nor do they correlate with other measurements posted by another audio engineer, AtomicBob on Head-Fi and SBAF. He actually measured two Bifrost Multibits:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-technical-measurements.235/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-loaner-program-unit-technical-measurements.610/

 

Bob's conclusion was different than ASR:

 

Excellent channel matching, even in the distortion measurements
Jitter is close, though not quite as excellent, as Gungnir MB
Listening evaluation to note multibit magic of dimension and depth present
Incedible performance for a 16 bit resolution DAC

 

Also, he measured some of our other DACs:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-modi-mb-technical-measurements.2603/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-gungnir-mb-measurements.414/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-yggdrasil-measurements.413/

 

Hopefully this helps a bit. Beyond that, DAC questions should be addressed to Mike Moffat, as I'm the analog guy.

 

All the best,

Jason

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks Jason.

[Spacehound]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Was audiophoolery more profitable than military contracts? Wow.

 

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Was audiophoolery more profitable than military contracts? Wow.

Perhaps the Republic  of Nauru ran out of money.

[esldude]

37 minutes ago, schiit said:

Hey guys,

 

No clue what they're measuring, since their measurements don't correlate with our own (on Stanford SR1/SR1+ and Avermetrics Averlab). Nor do they correlate with other measurements posted by another audio engineer, AtomicBob on Head-Fi and SBAF. He actually measured two Bifrost Multibits:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-technical-measurements.235/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-loaner-program-unit-technical-measurements.610/

 

Bob's conclusion was different than ASR:

 

Excellent channel matching, even in the distortion measurements
Jitter is close, though not quite as excellent, as Gungnir MB
Listening evaluation to note multibit magic of dimension and depth present
Incedible performance for a 16 bit resolution DAC

 

Also, he measured some of our other DACs:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-modi-mb-technical-measurements.2603/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-gungnir-mb-measurements.414/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-yggdrasil-measurements.413/

 

Hopefully this helps a bit. Beyond that, DAC questions should be addressed to Mike Moffat, as I'm the analog guy.

 

All the best,

Jason

The spiky noise floor is different. Atomic Bob's low level linearity and other measures look much the same. I'm sure your response on the other forum would be welcome.

[bigbob]

8 hours ago, Spacehound said:

As I posted as a reply to someone else:

 

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" - Arthur C Clarke

 

 

 

I have found this exchange very informative. As the Computer Audiophile on the cheap, and having zero experience testing with anything but my ears, I am open to you folks helping me to understand what this means. There was a discussion about a ground pin attached to nothing.

 

I live in a post-WWII era apartment which didn't have any earth ground in the electrical system.

 

I found a remarkable, and a quite noticeable improvement, when I took a run of speaker wire and wrapped one end around the metal water pipe under the sink, and the other end around the tab on a 3-prong adapter, in which I plugged my Chang Lightspeed Encounter--and by extension every other component plugged into it.

I also attached a run to the GRD on the back of the Denon. I was told this was a "star-ground". Okay, all I know is that is sounded better.

 

Now, on the 'Best for the Least', I have tested iFi iDSD nano LE, and own a Schiit Modi 2. I have an AQ Dragonfly (v1.2) also. I am awaiting a test unit of the Multibit version of Schiit. I read one mention of Cambridge DAC and a Behringer unit that sells for $79.

 

Please tell me more about these, as I am interested in the best value for the best price, and have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system. Thanks to you all for your input, exchanges, and opinions.

[Spacehound]

1 hour ago, bigbob said:

 

 

I have found this exchange very informative. As the Computer Audiophile on the cheap, and having zero experience testing with anything but my ears, I am open to you folks helping me to understand what this means. There was a discussion about a ground pin attached to nothing.

 

I live in a post-WWII era apartment which didn't have any earth ground in the electrical system.

 

I found a remarkable, and a quite noticeable improvement, when I took a run of speaker wire and wrapped one end around the metal water pipe under the sink, and the other end around the tab on a 3-prong adapter, in which I plugged my Chang Lightspeed Encounter--and by extension every other component plugged into it.

I also attached a run to the GRD on the back of the Denon. I was told this was a "star-ground". Okay, all I know is that is sounded better.

 

Now, on the 'Best for the Least', I have tested iFi iDSD nano LE, and own a Schiit Modi 2. I have an AQ Dragonfly (v1.2) also. I am awaiting a test unit of the Multibit version of Schiit. I read one mention of Cambridge DAC and a Behringer unit that sells for $79.

 

Please tell me more about these, as I am interested in the best value for the best price, and have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system. Thanks to you all for your input, exchanges, and opinions.

The Cambridge Dacmagic Plus is fine, but mine doesn't do DSD, (maybe they've upgraded it, mine is at least eight years old)

Thr 'regular'  Dacmagic is useless on USB and  'adequate' on coax and Toslink. I don't think they still make it.

I know nothing of the Behringer or the others you mention.

 

Speaker wire. Interference in apartments can be very bad. An 'earth' wire firmly  attached to a water pipe is fine. Here in the UK  about 15 years ago I had the actual utility company rewire the entire house, built in 1923 and wire dating from the early 1960's.  I used the utility company rather than a local so-called 'electrician'.  They hammered a big corrosion -proof (maybe stainless steel?)  spike into the  ground and also firmly strapped a lead from their  'consumer unit'  to a conveniently placed cold water pipe.

[semente]

9 hours ago, Spacehound said:

If they have stopped completely (and I will take your word for it) they must be smaller than I assumed.  

There's a lot more money in high end audio. Soon they'll be selling wooden cable supports...

[Ralf11]

oh yeh - thx for that reminder!

 

BigB, you "have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system" but I have to wonder if a DAC, or a more expensive DAC, is always the place to add $$ for a consequent increase in SQ?

 

(for the record, I have an old DacMagic (not the + version) and am about to test it against an Oppo 205 Dac built in to their disc player)

[fas42]

18 hours ago, Spacehound said:

"we are still way off being able to derive numbers that correlate with the subjective SQ."

 

Of course we can. You just destroyed your own argument by mentioning 'subjective SQ'.

 

What someone thinks is good SQ is  entirely personal, as in  "Spacehound likes it but fas42 doesn't"..

 

No more than that.

 

But it you measure it, and find that it  (be "it" a DAC, amp, speaker, whatever) has low noise, a flat frequency response, low phase shift throughout its frequency response, and a high input impedance and a low output impedance so it will work well with whatever is in front of it and behind it:

 

It can't HELP but reproduce the source accurately.

 

Which, lacking the artistes in your room, so having to use a recording as your source,   is the very definition of 'good sound quality'  (hifi = high fidelity = accuracy = qood sound quality). Got nothing to do with whether you like it or not. If you don't then buy a different recording.

 

 

 

Objective SQ is what we currently measure, subjective SQ is how perceive the presentation; whether it ticks all the boxes. What I like, and so far others that I've come across like, are no audible giveaways that the sound being heard is a "fake", that there are no signature sounds of a hifi system doing its thing; other phrases could be, complete invisibility of the speakers anywhere in the area, and that all recordings throw up a convincing illusion. These aspects may not be agreeable for you, but that's fine ...

 

To this day I have no way of measuring what the key parameters are, by instrument. All those parameters you mention are helpful, but not sufficient for understanding whether the system "measures up" - the critical ones are in the area of low level distortion, noise, interference effects; aspects which are never measured.

 

If you have never heard the SQ I speak of then it may be hard to understand what the goal is - I obviously have, and it's "as clear as day" when a system has it, and when it doesn't ...

[fas42]

5 hours ago, bigbob said:

I found a remarkable, and a quite noticeable improvement, when I took a run of speaker wire and wrapped one end around the metal water pipe under the sink, and the other end around the tab on a 3-prong adapter, in which I plugged my Chang Lightspeed Encounter--and by extension every other component plugged into it.

I also attached a run to the GRD on the back of the Denon. I was told this was a "star-ground". Okay, all I know is that is sounded better.

 

 

These are exactly the sort of experiments I did, and still do, to work out where room for improvement exists. If the sound changes, that means the components, forming a system, are not stable - that is, the observed behaviour is not invariant when simple, easily performed tests are done. The audio industry should have sorted this out decades ago - but since they haven't, it's up to the curious to see if more can be extracted from the raw ingredients - the rewards can be immense, as I found out decades ago.

[plissken]

6 hours ago, schiit said:

Hey guys,

 

No clue what they're measuring, since their measurements don't correlate with our own (on Stanford SR1/SR1+ and Avermetrics Averlab). Nor do they correlate with other measurements posted by another audio engineer, AtomicBob on Head-Fi and SBAF. He actually measured two Bifrost Multibits:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-technical-measurements.235/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-bifrost-mb-loaner-program-unit-technical-measurements.610/

 

Bob's conclusion was different than ASR:

 

Excellent channel matching, even in the distortion measurements
Jitter is close, though not quite as excellent, as Gungnir MB
Listening evaluation to note multibit magic of dimension and depth present
Incedible performance for a 16 bit resolution DAC

 

Also, he measured some of our other DACs:

 

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-modi-mb-technical-measurements.2603/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-gungnir-mb-measurements.414/

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-yggdrasil-measurements.413/

 

Hopefully this helps a bit. Beyond that, DAC questions should be addressed to Mike Moffat, as I'm the analog guy.

 

All the best,

Jason

 

 

Actually they kinda do according to Amir (and it looks like he reproduced Bobs results. It's the conclusion that is different and I don't trust Bob's synopsis).

 

 

 

Topping DAC:

[plissken]

I'll give the same advice I gave SuperDad when he initially questioned Amir on the LPS-1 measurements.

 

UpTone was so entrenched in protecting their market that they didn't have the capacity to read and hear what Amir was saying. This only made things worse when they realized Amir was correct.

 

Amir has confirmed the finding over at SBAF. I can only wonder how Bob doesn't see the measurements, the channel imbalance, the non-linearity, the distortion, as an issue from a purely design point. I'm giving a nod to the subjectivists that it may not be audible while reminding them that they always like to say 'everything matters'. 

[GUTB]

6 hours ago, bigbob said:

 

 

I have found this exchange very informative. As the Computer Audiophile on the cheap, and having zero experience testing with anything but my ears, I am open to you folks helping me to understand what this means. There was a discussion about a ground pin attached to nothing.

 

I live in a post-WWII era apartment which didn't have any earth ground in the electrical system.

 

I found a remarkable, and a quite noticeable improvement, when I took a run of speaker wire and wrapped one end around the metal water pipe under the sink, and the other end around the tab on a 3-prong adapter, in which I plugged my Chang Lightspeed Encounter--and by extension every other component plugged into it.

I also attached a run to the GRD on the back of the Denon. I was told this was a "star-ground". Okay, all I know is that is sounded better.

 

Now, on the 'Best for the Least', I have tested iFi iDSD nano LE, and own a Schiit Modi 2. I have an AQ Dragonfly (v1.2) also. I am awaiting a test unit of the Multibit version of Schiit. I read one mention of Cambridge DAC and a Behringer unit that sells for $79.

 

Please tell me more about these, as I am interested in the best value for the best price, and have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system. Thanks to you all for your input, exchanges, and opinions.

 

First of all, ditch the crappy sticks, dongles and baby boxes. They can perform well from a measurement perspective but they can’t generate a high quality analog signals, and your playback from them will always be gimped.

[Shadders]

28 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

First of all, ditch the crappy sticks, dongles and baby boxes. They can perform well from a measurement perspective but they can’t generate a high quality analog signals, and your playback from them will always be gimped.

[GUTB]

9 minutes ago, Shadders said:

 

Knowledge and experience defeated by a reaction image. Guess we know who won’t be going to AXPONA.

[bigbob]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

oh yeh - thx for that reminder!

 

BigB, you "have deduced that the DAC is the centerpiece of a Computer Audiophile system" but I have to wonder if a DAC, or a more expensive DAC, is always the place to add $$ for a consequent increase in SQ?

 

(for the record, I have an old DacMagic (not the + version) and am about to test it against an Oppo 205 Dac built in to their disc player)

 

Well, I am making the assumption that the DAC is the ultimate "source" of the analog signal, which the amp will amplify, and the speakers will turn into sound.

I don't think the computer or the USB cable which transports the digital file from a hard-drive will impact in a positive manner a bad signal from the DAC. I have heard a noticeable improvement when I got the Nordost Valhalla speaker ribbons--but I would not be recommending an $8,000 speaker wire upgrade as the place to start.

[bigbob]

1 hour ago, GUTB said:

 

First of all, ditch the crappy sticks, dongles and baby boxes. They can perform well from a measurement perspective but they can’t generate a high quality analog signals, and your playback from them will always be gimped.

 

As a disabled person, with a right, below the knee amputation, I am not certain if "gimped" is a proper adjective.

What are the "crappy sticks, dongles and baby boxes" to which you refer?

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, bigbob said:

What are the "crappy sticks, dongles and baby boxes" to which you refer?

Baby box: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22751415

 

No idea how it relates to audio.