Blue or red pill?

[beerandmusic]

19 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

Not to any part before where the tiny DAC chip (most use a chip)  converts its binary input to its analogue  voltage output. There might be some noise on that, but it won't be because the input data has become 'inaccurate'  as it won't or 'furry round the edges', it's ok with that.

 

It's what 'digital' is for  - it works 'perfectly'   in an  increasingly  noisy environment, then it just stops. 

 

Thus my view on this test is there won't be any difference. If there is there will be lots to talk about, and it  won't be about their methods.

 

agree to disagree...if different interfaces, there will be a difference, and nothing to talk about..it has been known to me for many years.

 

 

[Spacehound]

8 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

agree to disagree...if different interfaces, there will be a difference, and nothing to talk about..it has been known to me for many years.

 

 

If you say so.

 

 

 

 

 

[beerandmusic]

11 minutes ago, adamdea said:

 smart dacs had ground isolation long ago and interface jitter is largely irrelevant. 16/44 is almost certainty quite enough, and if

 

This may have been "somewhat" true prior to processing required for high resolution files, and high end hardware...but i believe we have come along ways since then.

[beerandmusic]

7 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

If you say so.

ever since i compared native dsd via ethernet vs same file via usb over 5 years ago.  differences may be less for flac pcm on an optimized pc, but easily notable on higher resolution files over ethernet vs a non-optimized pc out usb.

[Spacehound]

22 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

ever since i compared native dsd via ethernet vs same file via usb over 5 years ago.

I added a picture. The RFI was so high it physically damaged the probe.

 

"Paradoxically, no matter how weak the transmitter is, how weak the receiver is, what the distance is, and how much noise there is, it's always possible to transmit information with  (any chosen) arbitrary precision"

Bartosz Milewski

Physicist (Ph. D. in quantum field theory), Mathematician, Programmer

[adamdea]

Just now, beerandmusic said:

 

This may have been "somewhat" true prior to processing required for high resolution files, and high end hardware...but i believe we have come along ways since then.

what processing required for what high resolution files and what high end hardware? We haven;t come along at all. This is just fantasy land. For what its worth there are many people who believe that the best adc ever made was by Meitner (some time in the 15th century.)

Ultimately the limits of human hearing have not changed. Neither has the snr of most amps.

[beerandmusic]

1 minute ago, adamdea said:

what processing required for what high resolution files and what high end hardware? We haven;t come along at all. This is just fantasy land. For what its worth there are many people who believe that the best adc ever made was by Meitner (some time in the 15th century.)

Ultimately the limits of human hearing have not changed. Neither has the snr of most amps.

 

inre high-end hardware, i am just saying that many current dacs still do not use any usb isolation. 

 

In regards to amps...i still say a mcintosh amp will make a lot more difference than most dacs.

 

I think anyone that doesn't believe that usb toys will make a difference in many dacs, really is the one living in fantasy land...granted, imho, the circuitry in these toys should (and is starting to) become available in new dacs.

 

[beerandmusic]

The manufacturers of Auralica VEGA G2 advertise it is 20% quieter than the original VEGA.  Even if it was only 1% quieter, it shows progress is continued to be made.

The G2 introduces galvanic isolation over the original.

 

I think if anyone does any reading, by the manufacturers themselves, they can be educated.  Sure, maybe a lot of stuff from manufacturers is "fluff" and exaggerated, but I do believe they are making some advancements, and if anyone doesn't believe advancement are continued to be made, they are the ones fooling themselves.

 

This may be slipping from the topic, but I absolutely believe, by means of my own listening tests, that there is a difference between different interfaces, and that i believe the differences are more pronounced on higher resolution files, as would be logical.

[Spacehound]

7 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

The manufacturers of Auralica VEGA G2 advertise it is 20% quieter than the original VEGA.  Even if it was only 1% quieter, it shows progress is continued to be made.

The G2 introduces sophisticated galvanic isolation.

 

I think if anyone does any reading, by the manufacturers themselves, they can be educated.  Sure, maybe a lot of stuff from manufacturers is "fluff" and exaggerated, but I do believe they are making some advancements.

 

This may be slipping from the topic, but I absolutely believe, by means of my own listening tests, that there is a difference between different interfaces, and that i believe the differences are more pronounced on higher resolution files, as would be logical.

Look at what I posted four posts above this one.

 

Physics does not take your personal beliefs into consideration.

[beerandmusic]

9 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

Look at what I posted.

 

Physics does not take your personal beliefs into consideration.

 

I am probably one of the more objective types here, and very difficult to sell, but I know what i know through my own listening experiences...you are just pretending you know the correct physics involved...but you are wrong in your thinking.

 

You of all people are very surprising to me, for the simple fact that you also have the capability to switch between several different interfaces easily with same source and dac, and don't hear a difference.

 

Do this for me....get a copy of an 11.2mhz DSD256 file and play it via enet and play it via usb and tell me you do not hear any difference??

[Spacehound]

Just now, beerandmusic said:

 

I am probably one of the more objective types here, and very difficult sell, but I know what i know through my own listening experiences...you are just pretending you know the correct physics involved...but you are wrong in your thinking.

I don't know all the relevant physics, far from it. But I bet my reference knows more physic than you.  And physics still won't take your personal  beliefs into consideration no matter how many times you tell it to.

 

No more replies from me on this. Believe whatever you want.

[manisandher]

There are a lot of guys here who've studied Physics at degree level or above. Well count me in as one too (a long time ago, but hopefully that's allowed). I can't tell you how pissed off I am that the things we've discussing in this thread exist at all. I would absolutely love it to be the case that I could use whichever source, whichever software player, whichever cable, whichever interface, and for there to be no change in the sound. I would rejoice like you couldn't imagine.

 

Do you have any idea how long I've been trying to achieve this? Take a look at this thread:

 

 

Edit: a couple of guys posting in this thread were/are serious 'hitters'.

 

I was aware of bit-identical interfaces having different sounds 4-5 years before this thread. I've been through numerous interfaces and ADCs since, including the venerable Pacific Microsonics Model Two, which itself sounded different with different bit perfect interfaces. (I probably still have the captures I took with it somewhere, when I was testing all this stuff.)

 

We're not all crazy subjectivists. (Not suggesting anyone has called anyone else this in this thread.)

 

Mani.

[beerandmusic]

9 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

 But I bet my reference knows more physic than you. 

 

probably, but you don't know the right ones, if you don't know what would make one interface sound different than another.

[pkane2001]

6 minutes ago, manisandher said:

I can't tell you how pissed off I am that the things we've discussing in this thread exist at all. I would absolutely love it to be the case that I could use whichever source, whichever software player, whichever cable, whichever interface, and for there to be no change in the sound. I would rejoice like you couldn't imagine.

 

Hold off until you do the blind test with Mans, maybe you'll be rejoicing after all

 

[beerandmusic]

 

I don't know physics (other than what I would consider "common sense" physics), but i have a strong digital background, and I have learned many years ago to "never discount any possibility".  I have seen so many strange things, where in the digital world everything is 1's and 0's, and everything should be very logical.  I am very "right brained" where i have difficulty believing anything that is not logical.  I have come to realize that "noise" of all different types defies logic.  Isn't it "noise" that jams precision guided missiles?  If i didn't hear differences first, it would be a very hard sell that a different interfaces with different noise signatures could cause a difference in SQ.  My initial thinking was that the noise was corrupting accuracy, but my current thinking isn't that it corrupts the digital accuracy, but that the noise corrupts the processing.  It was then that things became more clear that I was able to accept what my ears were telling me.

[patagent]

18 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

probably, but you don't know the right ones, if you don't know what would make one interface sound different than another.

 

Have you ever considered the possibility that you (the individual listener) are a greater variable than the components you are testing?  FWIW, I myself am surprised how much better music sounds (the exact same file in the exact same setup) at night compared to daytime.  Am I crazy or is human physiology just way more complicated than a simple electronic device?

[Spacehound]

26 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I am probably one of the more objective types here, and very difficult to sell, but I know what i know through my own listening experiences...you are just pretending you know the correct physics involved...but you are wrong in your thinking.

 

You of all people are very surprising to me, for the simple fact that you also have the capability to switch between several different interfaces easily with same source and dac, and don't hear a difference.

 

Do this for me....get a copy of an 11.2mhz DSD256 file and play it via enet and play it via usb and tell me you do not hear any difference??

Done that. With a piece I'm familiar with, many different formats,   and the same master/supplier  in all cases (a Mozart concerto with a lot of solo violin and nothing else, which is good for this) and some others.

 

BTW - my many ways  to do it  are more accidental than deliberate. I use USB 90% of the time as I'm happy with it.. occasionally I have an attack of curiosity to find out if what some say is true. I don't have to physically alter anything. Not for me so far.

[adamdea]

16 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

The manufacturers of Auralica VEGA G2 advertise it is 20% quieter than the original VEGA.  Even if it was only 1% quieter, it shows progress is continued to be made.

The G2 introduces galvanic isolation over the original.

 

I think if anyone does any reading, by the manufacturers themselves, they can be educated.  Sure, maybe a lot of stuff from manufacturers is "fluff" and exaggerated, but I do believe they are making some advancements, and if anyone doesn't believe advancement are continued to be made, they are the ones fooling themselves.

 

This may be slipping from the topic, but I absolutely believe, by means of my own listening tests, that there is a difference between different interfaces, and that i believe the differences are more pronounced on higher resolution files, as would be logical.

really good dacs have been up close to the limits of thermal noise for some time. and as for differences being more pronounced on high resolution files, not really. I mean yes you need a 24 bit file to show of a dac's noise floor (if it's any good) but my old musical fidelity x dac from 2004 was already pretty close to irreproachable. You can measure a bit better but so what. and anything which measures better is also  pretty much immune from interface jitter. 

 

I can't particularly see why dsd would be any good for showing anything much, given its ridiculous hf noise content. Seriously if you are worried about noise it's the last thing you should use. 

Ultimately liking the shiny box has more effect on your hearing than anything that a usb reclocking device is going to do. 

[esldude]

2 minutes ago, patagent said:

 

Have you ever considered the possibility that you (the listener) are a greater variable than the components you are testing?  FWIW, I myself am surprised how much better music sounds (the exact same file in the exact same setup) at night compared to daytime.  Am I crazy or is human physiology just way more complicated than a simple electronic device?

Usually ambient noise levels are a good bit lower at night.  Simple physics without involving the more complex human brain into the matter.  

[beerandmusic]

6 minutes ago, patagent said:

 

Have you ever considered the possibility that you (the individual listener) are a greater variable than the components you are testing?  FWIW, I myself am surprised how much better music sounds (the exact same file in the exact same setup) at night compared to daytime.  Am I crazy or is human physiology just way more complicated than a simple electronic device?

 

It's the beer... (wink)

 

 

[adamdea]

5 minutes ago, esldude said:

Usually ambient noise levels are a good bit lower at night.  Simple physics without involving the more complex human brain into the matter.  

Yes the why do things sound better at night? Is one of my favourite absurdities. It is widely touted as "proof" that the mains noise has to be filtered. IIRC noise levels are at least 10dB lower at night in most areas. And if you are listening at sane levels that's a really big increase in the snr of your system. Maybe even up to 13 bits level!

I do actually agree with the thrust of patageant's point though: psychological factors are also a big influence.

[beerandmusic]

 

I am really surprised at how many people didn't realize that different interfaces will sound different...

 

....most people (spaceman is first i know of ) that has a device that supports both enet and usb and doesn't have a preference based on SQ.

 

The other recent person to share their opinion that surprised me that liked his INNUOS ZENITH playing from internal SSD over enet.  Besides spaceguy, I haven't heard from anyone that has a streamer/player/dac, that doesn't have a interface preference based on sq yet.

 

[Spacehound]

37 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

probably, but you don't know the right ones, if you don't know what would make one interface sound different than another.

I don't know any physicists (I did know an atomic  one  but he worked in personnel) except myself and I qualified a long time ago and have only applied stuff, not discovered any.

I did work out  some hard (took my specially made  computer 5 months 24/7) sums in 'quantum chromodynamics' once but I don't actually know what it is.

 

What sort of physicist is "the right one"?

[beerandmusic]

3 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

I don't know any physicists (I did know an atomic  one  but he worked in personnel) except myself and I qualified a long time ago and have only applied stuff, not discovered any.

I did work out  some hard (took my specially made  computer 5 months 24./7) sums in 'quantum chromodynamics' once but don't actually know what it is.

 

What sort of physicist is "the right one"?

 

I quoted you...you typo'd in your initial post...so laugh at yourself..lol

 

your quote from above:

But I bet my reference knows more physic than you. 

[Spacehound]

3 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

I quoted you...you typo'd in your initial post...so laugh at yourself..lol

Initial post? Where? I'm not looking through 15 screensful. And the search function seems to use fuzzy logic. Too fuzzy by far