Blue or red pill?

[mansr]

Just now, Spacehound said:

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

That's because is running on a filthy SMPS.

[manisandher]

3 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

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

 

Your third post ago!

 

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

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.

 

Mani.

[beerandmusic]

Logic suggests to me that bits are bits, and that if the analog and output circuitry are the same, then the digital shouldn't make any difference, since the bits just go to the dacs buffer, and the processing thereafter would be the same.  I still have a hard time understanding why...because I kept neglecting to realize that different circuitry has different noise, and that noise does impact the processing.  It may or may not affect the accuracy of the buffers contents, but my guess is that it more affects the processing, clocking, and the conversion more than the buffers contents.

 

The funny part, every previous test before my ND8006, i have always preferred ethernet to USB, and always discounted USB as noisy.  But this ND8006 advertises PC isolation circuitry, but i still didn't try the USB interface until just 2 days ago, as I was certain i would prefer ENET over usb from past experience.  This was the first time I have actually enjoyed the USB interface more than the ENET interface.  It was the first time i have got the bass and detail that actually sounded better than enet, and they are notably different.  I have to do more testing yet to consider it conclusive, but the 11.2mhz DSD256 JAPRS_Orfeu_Negro file via pc usb, really had my nerves flinching like never before..

[sandyk]

9 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

If that is a true quote, I would guess that Cooky no longer believes that insanity.

She has on more than one occasion said something that she later deviated from, and she is not someone i would ever quote.

 

 Yes it does. Zipping,TX, RX and Unzipping again does cause some degradation, similar to what Mani is now reporting.

This is also why she provides files as UNCOMPRESSED Zips, after a series of tests with C.A. member Roch (elcorso)

[sandyk]

1 hour 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.  

 Add to that, the A.C. mains supply powering all your devices is normally far less polluted late at night too.

[Ralf11]

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

Re-attempt :

 

* * *

current draw (no matter how small) will influence the DAC's jitter response and that is what we hear. ...

 

 

ok, so how would bit identical files alter current flow?

 

or are you not persuaded that they sound different, or can sound different?

[Ralf11]

9 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

the "darkness" which you project on others might be lifted from your eyes.

 

 

 

just lift the veil

 

and reduce the noise

 

who cares about darkness?

[beerandmusic]

21 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Yes it does. Zipping,TX, RX and Unzipping again does cause some degradation, similar to what Mani is now reporting.

This is also why she provides files as UNCOMPRESSED Zips, after a series of tests with C.A. member Roch (elcorso)

Really, all four...or only if you do all four....

i suppose it matters the order you do it in too...lol

haha..not even worthy of a debate

[beerandmusic]

Here is another review I just read about the Altair that suggests different interfaces sound different....

 

More observations

4. Wireless sounds better than wired: I don't know why or how, but wireless just sings a different tune. When wired, I hear the same kind of cleanliness/etch with less bass and more flatness with the SOtM I had. I guess I like it dirty.

5. Tidal sounds inconsistent: Not related to Auralic, but some files from Tidal sound different compared to my ripped files. Just trying it out for a month, but so far not impressed.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

Here is another review I just read about the Altair that suggests different interfaces sound different....

 

More observations

4. Wireless sounds better than wired: I don't know why or how, but wireless just sings a different tune. When wired, I hear the same kind of cleanliness/etch with less bass and more flatness with the SOtM I had. I guess I like it dirty.

5. Tidal sounds inconsistent: Not related to Auralic, but some files from Tidal sound different compared to my ripped files. Just trying it out for a month, but so far not impressed.

 

I suspect this is all expectation bias-driven. Having gone through multiple tests of Wi-Fi -> USB -> DAC, Ethernet -> USB -> DAC, USB directly, and USB over Ethernet -> DAC, I can't tell the difference between them unless there's not enough bandwidth. The playback is then obviously interrupted with clicks and drop-outs if there's not enough bandwidth or large latency. I've finally settled on USB over Ethernet, but this is because I needed to move my audio PC into the adjacent room, with about a 25m ethernet cable.

 

[Ralf11]

8 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Take the little blue pill if you're experiencing performance anxiety (how about that, back on-topic for this thread! )

 

 

 

the MQA pill?

 

or the McIntosh blue meter pill?

[beerandmusic]

http://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/usb-vs-ethernet/

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, Spacehound said:

...

What sort of physicist is "the right one"?

 

start here:

 

http://store.doverpublications.com/048626484x.html

 

[beerandmusic]

Here's another thread I started over a year ago before enet was even half as popular as it is today...

 

 

[sandyk]

44 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Really, all four...or only if you do all four....

i suppose it matters the order you do it in too...lol

haha..not even worthy of a debate

 

Perhaps you should take that break that you promised everyone after all ?

Don't be a smart ass. Of course you would need to do it in that order when sending an uncompressed Zip to somebody else.

[beerandmusic]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

Perhaps you should take that break that you promised everyone after all ?

Don't be a smart ass. Of course you would need to do it in that order when sending an uncompressed Zip to somebody else.

 

but which of the four causes the degradation? or do you think any of the four causes the degradation.  My question was serious, in what do you think actually causes the degradation....

[Ralf11]

if Beer means the order that samples are listened to then he is correct

 

if he means the order of creating or transferring a digital file then that could be a source of bias if the that person knows it

[sandyk]

57 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

ok, so how would bit identical files alter current flow?

 

or are you not persuaded that they sound different, or can sound different?

 

 Peter, Mani and acg (Anthony) are already on record in C.A. threads as hearing differences between uploaded .wav files with identical .md5 checksums.

[beerandmusic]

5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Peter, Mani and acg (Anthony) are already on record in C.A. threads as hearing differences between uploaded .wav files with identical .md5 checksums.

 

It's not in the fact that they were uploaded, that they sound different....

at least as far as the context of this thread so far...they sound different because they are played from different interfaces...

 

tell the entire testing scenario...

 

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

7 hours ago, manisandher said:

 

One thing that I'd like to demonstrate to Mans is streaming vs. local (which was actually the stimulus for the invitation). We'd use Roon/HQPlayer for this.

 

Mani.

 

This really is at the heart of it IMO. IF either Mansr agrees and Mani "passes", then there are grounds for further enquiry.

 

 

7 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

In regards to this subject, we will know when engineering has properly dealt with noise, when there is a consensus that swapping out the digital source no longer causes a difference in SQ.

 

 

Disagree.Thats at the heart of the very problem IMO, consensus in perceiving SQ, and what I think mani's challenge is about.

 

6 hours ago, semente said:

 

Can I suggest that after @mansr has performed his listening test you point to aspects of sound or instrument or vocals that you think better express the differences you're able to identify, to see if he agrees?

 

Great idea IMO. Perception is after all subject to conditioning and learning.Paying attention to things previously not noticed.This is NOT a failure if something is only noticed when someone draws your attention to it.It is in the spirit of cooperation and open mindedness.

 

4 hours 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.

 

 

Are you familiar with John Swenson's work and if so, any comment?

 

3 hours ago, Spacehound said:

 

"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

 

 This sounds very plausible but that's precisely why theories are tested. Perhaps the signal has changed or perhaps there is another explanation hereto not known.Some variable that has been overlooked. I dont think anyone however is questioning bits is bits.

 

3 hours ago, Spacehound said:

 

Physics does not take your personal beliefs into consideration.

 

Precisely. However our understanding of it is malleable and subject to change dependent on new evidence.

 

3 hours ago, manisandher said:

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.

snip

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

 

Mani.

 

+1

2 hours ago, mansr said:

That's because is running on a filthy SMPS.

 

40 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

just lift the veil

 

and reduce the noise

 

who cares about darkness?

 

 

3 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

 

I suspect this is all expectation bias-driven. Having gone through multiple tests of Wi-Fi -> USB -> DAC, Ethernet -> USB -> DAC, USB directly, and USB over Ethernet -> DAC, I can't tell the difference between them unless there's not enough bandwidth.

 

 

So this is what this test with Mani and Mansr is all about IMO.

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

but which of the four causes the degradation? or do you think any of the four causes the degradation.  My question was serious, in what do you think actually causes the degradation....

 Your previous reply came across as mocking, not serious !

 Why not just wait until mani and mansr have completed their testing, and then analyse the results if they confirm what Mani is reporting ?

[pkane2001]

3 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

33 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:

I suspect this is all expectation bias-driven. 

 

So this is what this test with Mani and Mansr is all about IMO.

 

Yes!

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Yes!

 

 BTW, Mani's gear is well above average, and he obviously has excellent hearing too, as he was the person who noticed the audible glitch in a well known DAC that was later confirmed and rectified.

 

[beerandmusic]

13 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Your previous reply came across as mocking, not serious !

 Why not just wait until mani and mansr have completed their testing, and then analyse the results if they confirm what Mani is reporting ?

 

I was curious which of the 4 you believed caused the degradation, to which you still haven't answered. 

 

what they are testing has nothing to do with emailing a file.

I am 99% confident that it is possible to hear differences between different interfaces.  I am 100% confident that the "normal" emailing of a wav file will not change it's contents.

 

 

[sandyk]

37 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

 

It's not in the fact that they were uploaded, that they sound different....

at least as far as the context of this thread so far...they sound different because they are played from different interfaces...

 

tell the entire testing scenario...

 

 

 

 

I didn't say that the uploading caused the differences they reported hearing.  They were sent to them because they did sound different here, and all 3 participants confirmed that they did hear differences between both versions of " Ein Straussfes-Erich Kunzel  - Unter Donner und Blitz Polka,Op.324"

 

" I am 100% confident that the "normal" emailing of a wav file will not change it's contents. "

 

 I have uploaded many 100s of comparison .wav files over the years to numerous recipients and that hasn't been my experience. I have also had an E.E. in The Netherlands (Frans de Gruitjer) send back my files to myself and other recipients, where they sounded decidedly worse than those stored this end, or the uploaded files saved by the other 2 recipients.(U.K. and Spain)

That is why my preferred method of delivery is now via a USB memory stick, or on a good quality CD-R.

 

Let's leave it at that for now, and see what happens after Mansr visits Mani.