Jump to content
IGNORED

The Brinkman Ship MQA Listening Results


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, esldude said:

RME ADI 2 DAC.  $999. There's one for you.

 

It doesn't have the Nyquist DAC's glass top plate. How on earth can you tell how good it sounds?

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Absolutely false. 

 

Name one person who has been banned without good cause? We have rules. Not many of them, but we have them. Anyone breaks them, there is usually a warning or two, then a ban. 

 

Do we agree that you receive PMs from certain people alerting you to incivility?  Do we also agree those PMs come from a relatively small group or even mostly one person?

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

It doesn't have the Nyquist DAC's glass top plate. How on earth can you tell how good it sounds?

Actually I think they have an anniversary edition with clear top panel.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Shadders said:

Hi,

You have no proof, only your subjective opinion. The ITU has a standard for assessing the quality of video pictures -  old analogue system. There is NONE for audio, and nor could there be - it is all in our heads. No proof.

Not sure why you keep on about variance, capacitors are specified on their capacitance, voltage rating, tolerance etc. 

One of the best opamps in the world costs less than £1. This is why many people use the NE5534/5532.

If a system is designed properly, then a capacitor will not affect other parts of the system, apart from the function it is designed to do. Your statement that a capacitor affects other parts in the components does not make sense. It does not, it operates as it is designed to do, and may or may not have distortion. This pseudo science statement has no validity in a design.

Again, you associate high cost with a better component, which makes a better system, and hence a high cost is ok. This is not true. High cost of a component, does not mean it is better.

Regards,

Shadders.

""You have no proof, only your subjective opinion""

It is more than that, - it is both my proof and others' who listen to the system. It is the best PROOF that anyone could ever get, and you would have the same PROOF if you sat in the room with me, and you cannot "prove" otherwise. There is no BETTER proof for system efficacy. I really don't have any interest in what your SUBJECTIVE "pseudo-proof" may be, - i buy a system for MY criteria/enjoyment.

""Not sure why you keep on about variance, capacitors are specified on their capacitance, voltage rating, tolerance etc."

If you would've read what I said, - than you would know. I suggest re-reading again.

"One of the best opamps in the world costs less than £1. This is why many people use the NE5534/5532."

So? What if one does not use an "op-amp?" Or, (better), what does "one of the best mean?"  I'll answer:  a SUBJECTIVE choice.

 

""It does not, it operates as it is designed to do, and may or may not have distortion. This pseudo science statement has no validity in a design."

Unless it fails. It is not pseudo science or science. A capacitor that IN PRACTICE has a 40% variance as opposed to one that has a 2% variance may possibly cause a different overall SQ result. So, then, can you agree that a capacitor that operates at a 2% variance is better than one that operates at a 40% variance?

""Again, you associate high cost with a better component,"

NO! I am saying that better parts MAY make the component sound better, and that there are many factors that make a combination of components sound great in any system. AND... in general.... better parts, - will likely cause a component to perform better. But ultimately BETTER parts are more expensive, and they are a REASON why a component is more expensive. The VRDS-NEO is a much more expensive transport with its beefy, more accurate, motor, its magnesium disc clamping mechanism, and its large capacity rails. This transport is EXPENSIVE because of the aforementioned reasons; and it sounds BETTER under direct comparisons with other transports.

Regards,

 

Link to comment
Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

Yes.

 

 

No.

 

What I meant in my original post was to be mindful of the tattletales.  And what I meant by "sway" is that you take notifications of incivility more seriously from some than others.  I think my point is made here without any disrespect meant toward you.  I grew up in a home with many siblings and I can spot a tattletale from a mile away.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

What I meant in my original post was to be mindful of the tattletales.  And what I meant by "sway" is that you take notifications of incivility more seriously from some than others.  I think my point is made here without any disrespect meant toward you.  I grew up in a home with many siblings and I can spot a tattletale from a mile away.

 

Are you calling me a tattletale?

 

No pms that I recall regarding civility to Chris Connaker. Just checked what I'm able to check --- past 2 years.

 

Are you referring to the report post function? Do you consider reporting the kind of repeated personal attacks that Fair Hedon made on 2 forums as being a tattletale?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Albrecht said:

I am not saying that you're doing this, - (as I haven't read every single post in this thread), - but i don't think that you need to sell the fact that high end audio consumers have wholeheartedly rejected MQA. I DO agree that the audiophile enthusiast review publications are largely supporting MQA, - with a big, notable exception in Doug Schneider. What my take is that a fair number of supporters have been bamboozled by some vague, (pro-tech gadget), propaganda. "If it's high tech, it's good."

What MQA is, is akin to a cheap reverb tank.  (Musicians, are very woke or easily awakened to these things). These "digital filters" are just another flavor of formaldehyde cookies.

While running MQA, Meridian, & a cowed media into the ground, - don't forget to add Tidal, the criminal record labels, ISPs, and streaming music in general to the list. All are part of the problem, and all are harmful to the artists and the listeners who love them.

Lots here to digest but of course I largely agree!

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

""You have no proof, only your subjective opinion""

It is more than that, - it is both my proof and others' who listen to the system. It is the best PROOF that anyone could ever get, and you would have the same PROOF if you sat in the room with me, and you cannot "prove" otherwise. There is no BETTER proof for system efficacy. I really don't have any interest in what your SUBJECTIVE "pseudo-proof" may be, - i buy a system for MY criteria/enjoyment.

""Not sure why you keep on about variance, capacitors are specified on their capacitance, voltage rating, tolerance etc."

If you would've read what I said, - than you would know. I suggest re-reading again.

"One of the best opamps in the world costs less than £1. This is why many people use the NE5534/5532."

So? What if one does not use an "op-amp?" Or, (better), what does "one of the best mean?"  I'll answer:  a SUBJECTIVE choice.

 

""It does not, it operates as it is designed to do, and may or may not have distortion. This pseudo science statement has no validity in a design."

Unless it fails. It is not pseudo science or science. A capacitor that IN PRACTICE has a 40% variance as opposed to one that has a 2% variance may possibly cause a different overall SQ result. So, then, can you agree that a capacitor that operates at a 2% variance is better than one that operates at a 40% variance?

""Again, you associate high cost with a better component,"

NO! I am saying that better parts MAY make the component sound better, and that there are many factors that make a combination of components sound great in any system. AND... in general.... better parts, - will likely cause a component to perform better. But ultimately BETTER parts are more expensive, and they are a REASON why a component is more expensive. The VRDS-NEO is a much more expensive transport with its beefy, more accurate, motor, its magnesium disc clamping mechanism, and its large capacity rails. This transport is EXPENSIVE because of the aforementioned reasons; and it sounds BETTER under direct comparisons with other transports.

Regards,

 

Hi,

Listening to a system is not proof. It is just subjective opinion. What is good for you, is bad for another, or indifference to another. Not proof.

 

I have no need to re-read what you wrote regarding variance. You did not define what parameter the variance applied to. Your later text states capacitance. So, are you stating that there is variance to the capacitance value of a capacitor of 2, 40 or 50 ???. If so, then you do not understand specifications. When you purchase a capacitor, you specify the required tolerance. So a 1% tolerance means that a 100pF capacitor once purchased will be between the values 99pF and 101pF and no more, and no less. Your variance statement is meaningless.

 

One of the best opamps mean that for the cost, and technical performance, it is the best. Some opamps may have lower noise, or higher slew rate, but these are very few in number. The designers in the 1980's really did know what they were doing. There is no subjective choice in an opamp selection - it is an engineering decision to meet a specification.

 

Again, you state MAY sound better - this is just associating more cost with better component. Pick a capacitor that you think sounds good - if you do, it MUST have an associated specification datasheet. marketing statements with no engineering data is meaningless. It is a con otherwise.

 

With regards to the transport - as long as the data off the disc is correctable by the disc player, then an expensive transport makes no difference to the data. It may be less noisy - but that is all. Examine a DVD drive on a PC and rip a CD. It rips at 8x or 16x, no errors. The computer DVD drive costs £10. No need for an expensive transport, the cheap ones work.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

Found it!

 

9888630.thumb.jpg.c2ac75b934065eb43e10932bf99324e1.jpg

 

@GUTB

 

What do you think? How does this one sound?

I think that is the ADC/DAC, there is just the DAC for half the price.  I would think there is some considerable similarity internally of course.  

 

http://www.rme-usa.com/adi-2-dac.html

 

http://www.zenproaudio.com/rme-adi-2-dac

 

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

"" Listening to a system is not proof. It is just subjective opinion"

Define proof. A comparative listening test is the best "subjective proof" that we have. There can be nothing else that can determine good sound. There is no such thing as objective proof as the "goal" or the purpose is "good sound" which is subjective.

 

""Examine a DVD drive on a PC and rip a CD. It rips at 8x or 16x, no errors. The computer DVD drive costs £10. No need for an expensive transport, the cheap ones work.""

LOL. If it were a question of "working" none of us would be, or should be here. The question is how well does it work? and error correction software/firmware certainly does NOT WORK WELL compared to a disc that spins at the right speed and does not wobble. Simply put the $5000 VRDS-NEO works BETTER than a cheap-ass plexor: and the best way to tell is to compare them.

 

"The designers in the 1980's really did know what they were doing. There is no subjective choice in an opamp selection - it is an engineering decision to meet a specification."

It is always a subjective choice. A particular part may be too expensive to deploy, - that is a subjective choice. As, - it is a subjective choice to not use op-amps at all, - which in general, - or eschewed for better sounding designs. Most designers design as they go..

 

""So a 1% tolerance means that a 100pF capacitor once purchased will be between the values 99pF and 101pF and no more, and no less. Your variance statement is meaningless.""

 sorry.. Variance is with resistance. But the point is that there are "better" capacitors with greater and less tolerance, different levels of heat resistance, longevity, etc. If all were the same, that were rated the same, they would not vary in price, or manufacturer. 

 

If you haven't compared (through good scientific methodologies) high performance systems to consumer audio systems, - then you have no experience and therefore no knowledge. These types of scientific investigations are the ONLY WAY to prove the efficacy of a system. And, - the results are overwhelmingly proved by the testers.

 

 

 

If I were you I would quit wasting my time. It is apparent that Shadders is lost and has no interest in finding the way. Methinks it is bias by intent in the hope that there is not actually a difference. That appears to be a popular meme around here these days. To suggest that a passive part such as a capacitors are all the same based on capacitance value alone is particularly foolish. There are distinct reasons why different types of dielectric are offered by the same manufacture to provide parts for different uses.

Forrest:

Win10 i9 9900KS/GTX1060 HQPlayer4>Win10 NAA

DSD>Pavel's DSC2.6>Bent Audio TAP>

Parasound JC1>"Naked" Quad ESL63/Tannoy PS350B subs<100Hz

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

That was a joke. I had and have no evidence that he is back under a new name, but I stated my suspicion.

 

If he is even half sensible, you'll never know. New email address, VPN,  full  blocking of cookies,  canvas track blocking, TOR - the list is endless.

 

What catches out sock puppets is their posting style.

 

p.s. MQA is amazing

 

Regards,

 

'Big Tough'  Michael Lavorgna

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

"" Listening to a system is not proof. It is just subjective opinion"

Define proof. A comparative listening test is the best "subjective proof" that we have. There can be nothing else that can determine good sound. There is no such thing as objective proof as the "goal" or the purpose is "good sound" which is subjective.

 

""Examine a DVD drive on a PC and rip a CD. It rips at 8x or 16x, no errors. The computer DVD drive costs £10. No need for an expensive transport, the cheap ones work.""

LOL. If it were a question of "working" none of us would be, or should be here. The question is how well does it work? and error correction software/firmware certainly does NOT WORK WELL compared to a disc that spins at the right speed and does not wobble. Simply put the $5000 VRDS-NEO works BETTER than a cheap-ass plexor: and the best way to tell is to compare them.

 

"The designers in the 1980's really did know what they were doing. There is no subjective choice in an opamp selection - it is an engineering decision to meet a specification."

It is always a subjective choice. A particular part may be too expensive to deploy, - that is a subjective choice. As, - it is a subjective choice to not use op-amps at all, - which in general, - or eschewed for better sounding designs. Most designers design as they go..

 

""So a 1% tolerance means that a 100pF capacitor once purchased will be between the values 99pF and 101pF and no more, and no less. Your variance statement is meaningless.""

 sorry.. Variance is with resistance. But the point is that there are "better" capacitors with greater and less tolerance, different levels of heat resistance, longevity, etc. If all were the same, that were rated the same, they would not vary in price, or manufacturer. 

 

If you haven't compared (through good scientific methodologies) high performance systems to consumer audio systems, - then you have no experience and therefore no knowledge. These types of scientific investigations are the ONLY WAY to prove the efficacy of a system. And, - the results are overwhelmingly proved by the testers.

Hi,

Asking someone to define proof, is stupid. Look it up on the wiki. There is no such thing as subjective proof. You NEVER convict someone with subjective proof. Or do you ?

 

With regards to the DVD aspect - the drive either produces the right bit stream with errors that can be corrected or not. As cheap £10 drive in a PC is more than adequate. An expensive $5,000 drive does NOT produce a different bit stream. Again, a £10 DVD drive produces bit perfect ripped file. If it did not, then you might have a case. Again, this is engineering, both the $5,000 drive and £10 drive do the same job. Both work as required. Your reference to cheap-ass indicates you do not understand engineering, which is the design and manufacturing of a system to meet a specification within the bounds of the budget. The £10 DVD drive does this. Just as well as the $5,000.

 

With regards to the opamp - it is engineering choices - performance versus budget etc. There is no subjectivity. There is no engineering degree that discusses subjectivity in its curriculum. No one designs a laser that works 95% of the time, but hey, doesn't the colour look pretty. It just does not happen like this.

 

You are now defining variance as the variation of the capacitance with resistance. Are you talking about the external resistance in the circuit, or the inherent equivalent series resistance of the capacitor ? You talk of heat tolerance - again, are you referring to some negative temperature coefficient in regards to the ESR ? You are not making sense. Longevity ?. Is this the life of the capacitor ?. Electrolytics - yes, they have a lifetime, but this is specified in regards to the use, temperature, voltage rating and how much they have been over rated for the circuit in question (using a 100volt in a 25volt circuit - over rated - longer life). If you are talking about polythene, film capacitors, then they last nearly forever if you have the correct rating.

 

Your reference to comparing high end to consumer - this comment by you makes no sense. Both use electrical components - passive and active. Both are designed to meet a specific performance. It is engineering. It is engineering that allows people to design goods.

 

Regards,

Shadders.

Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...