SQ or SNAKEOIL

[sandyk]

18 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Designed tests to prove subjectivists wrong? Please feel free to design tests to show the opposite thru measurements and then we'll compare notes... I've always been open and suggested others to do exactly this.

 

 Perhaps if you weren't so keen to prove Subjective reports wrong, you might come up with different types of tests, such as measuring the analogue output of a DAC with REAL music instead  of test signals ?

 In many cases you appear to have prejudged the results even before you start.

Do you perform extensive listening tests before dragging out the test equipment , and if so, what equipment do you use for listening purposes ?

It could also be interesting to compare your results in this poll against those of the majority of members who have participated.

[Archimago]

24 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Perhaps if you weren't so keen to prove Subjective reports wrong, you might come up with different types of tests, such as measuring the analogue output of a DAC with REAL music instead  of test signals ?

 In many cases you appear to have prejudged the results even before you start.

Do you perform extensive listening tests before dragging out the test equipment , and if so, what equipment do you use for listening purposes ?

It could also be interesting to compare your results in this poll against those of the majority of members who have participated.

 

Sure, I've recorded and done tests with the analog outputs too using real music...

 

See my DiffMaker Audio Composite test from a few years back where I used "standardized" musical segments from Rebecca Pidgeon, The Prodigy, Rachel Podger, and Pink Floyd. Showed that objectively I can demonstrate differences between the filter settings of my DAC (for example, NOS setting clearly changes the measurable null depth thus likely audible) as well as demonstrate loss of quality with different MP3 bitrates even though blind tests using MP3 320kbps equivalent may sound transparent to majority of people. One of the benefits personally of running these tests is that I get to hear the differences myself under these conditions so I can guage my own perceptual limits. A perspective I don't think most audiophiles would have.

 

I listen to music every day. And certainly spend weeks with the gear when I write the "subjective" parts of the reviews. Notice that I'm not primarily a "reviewer"; I test and review things I *own* which means I have them for months or years typically (a few things borrowed from friends like cables, Oppo BDP-105, which I would have here for weeks at least).

 

Here's something else: My Philips Golden Ears Certificate as of February 5, 2014. As the certificate verifies, I am an "elite Expert Listener". There, show me yours.

 

In terms of level of evidence, polls are great as a measure of opinion and sentiment. I'm not sure I would rate an informal poll that highly as representative of knowledge or facts.

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, Archimago said:

Here's something else: My Philips Golden Ears Certificate as of February 5, 2014. As the certificate verifies, I am an "elite Expert Listener". There, show me yours.

 

 I don't claim to have expert listener qualifications due to my age (79) but I do have verification via DBTs performed by a well respected E.E. and Technical Journalist, as well as highly respected Recording and Mastering Engineer Barry Diament that .wav files with identical checksums can sound different.

If your listening abilities and audio gear is as good as you claim, then perhaps you should ask esldude to forward you one of my MAM Gold CD-R with pairs of comparison .wav files on it ?

 You would need to have access to a decent quality CD/ Media player though to play the files directly.

[Archimago]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

 I don't claim to have expert listener qualifications due to my age (79) but I do have verification via DBTs performed by a well respected E.E. and Technical Journalist, as well as highly respected Recording and Mastering Engineer Barry Diament that .wav files with identical checksums can sound different.

If your listening abilities and audio gear is as good as you claim, then perhaps you should ask esldude to forward you one of my MAM Gold CD-R with pairs of comparison .wav files on it ?

 You would need to have access to a decent quality CD/ Media player though to play the files directly.

 

Okay, sure maybe @esldude can PM me. I dont't know if the MAM Gold CD-R will do me any good since I sold my Sony SCD-1 more than a decade ago and just have a Sony SCD-CE775 as my music disk spinner these days.

 

Can those WAV files be downloaded and still sound different (though checksum identically)?

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, Archimago said:

Can those WAV files be downloaded and still sound different (though checksum identically)?

 They could be , but the differences will be seriously degraded due to Uncompressed Zipping, TX, RX and Unzipping again.

 Yes, I realise that isn't supposed to happen, but neither is the influence of the type and quality of the PSU itself when ripping and saving supposed to change how a file sounds either. This has also been verified in several HFC Forum threads by Martin  Colloms, and a short article published in Hi Fi Critic Vol.6 No.1.

My preferred option is either CD-R for direct play, or on a USB memory stick, preferably using a USB Regen in line.

[Archimago]

10 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 They could be , but the differences will be seriously degraded due to Uncompressed Zipping, TX, RX and Unzipping again.

 Yes, I realise that isn't supposed to happen, but neither is the influence of the type and quality of the PSU itself when ripping and saving supposed to change how a file sounds either. This has also been verified in several HFC Forum threads by Martin  Colloms, and a short article published in Hi Fi Critic Vol.6 No.1.

My preferred option is either CD-R for direct play, or on a USB memory stick, preferably using a USB Regen in line.

 

Thanks for the note. @esldude just PM'ed me so will see if Alex is OK with sending me a copy.

 

Otherwise, I do have a private FTP server up and the WAV can be sent directly to me without any ZIP/compression if that's an issue...

 

[esldude]

10 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Thanks for the note. @esldude just PM'ed me so will see if Alex is OK with sending me a copy.

 

Otherwise, I do have a private FTP server up and the WAV can be sent directly to me without any ZIP/compression if that's an issue...

 

I think Alex would prefer it sent with zip compression.  We'll see what Alex wants.

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Otherwise, I do have a private FTP server up and the WAV can be sent directly to me without any ZIP/compression if that's an issue...

 Cookie Marenco in conjunction with C.A. member elcorso has found that sending as Uncompressed Zips does reduce the degradation of her Blue Coast files, not the opposite way around.

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, esldude said:

I think Alex would prefer it sent with zip compression.  We'll see what Alex wants.

Dennis

 I much prefer physical media such as CD-R or a USB memory stick, preferably using an Uptone Regen with it.

The results via the Internet are way too variable, and usually markedly degraded as I have found by downloading them myself and comparing with the original files.

 

Regards

Alex

[diecaster]

37 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Cookie Marenco in conjunction with C.A. member elcorso has found that sending as Uncompressed Zips does reduce the degradation of her Blue Coast files, not the opposite way around.

 

I can't wait to read this....

 

Please explain how one file containing digital data can sound sound different than another bit perfect copy of that file. Let's assume both are copied to the same make and model freshly formatted USB sticks, plugged into the same USB port, and then played one right after the other.

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, diecaster said:

 

I can't wait to read this....

 

Please explain how one file containing digital data can sound sound different than another bit perfect copy of that file. Let's assume both are copied to the same make and model freshly formatted USB sticks, plugged into the same USB port, and then played one right after the other.

This information has already been posted numerous times previously and I will not be repeating it now.

Use the Search Facility if you really want additional info.

[Rak]

11 hours ago, Archimago said:

Certainly not recommending blind faith in anything!

But the final judgement is noise measurements :-(
 

 

11 hours ago, Archimago said:

Enjoyment of music can easily and regularly be had out of a mono AM radio. That's no problem.

Yes, it is personal choice what hardware to use . AM radio is one of them. People in this site wants more.

 

11 hours ago, Archimago said:

But if we're already at the margins of arguable auditory acuity and a manufacturer is claiming that something is sonically better or is able to produce even higher fidelity/quality (ie. better time and frequency performance, more transparency, higher resolution, lower noise) with their device... Well then... Better break out the the high-def test gear and/or at the very least run some controlled listening tests.

Me and some friends of mine do not believe in manufacturers claiming.  Just sit and listen. And some are better than others.
Single tone and static measurements is just not enough. Music is more complex!
 

[Archimago]

6 hours ago, Rak said:

But the final judgement is noise measurements :-(
 

Who said that? Certainly not for DAC measurements which include many types of tests...

 

The reason noise is a big deal here is because we're talking about a USB hub (REGEN) improving sound difference. Since all that's going through the USB hub is digital data, what else do you anticipate will change by the time the DAC plays the analogue output?

 

As for jitter. Remember that we're dealing with asynchronous USB DACs these days. The internal DAC clock determines this ultimately. Conceptually the USB hub being able to change the output in this way is suspect and without objective demonstration of this effect, IMO, it would be strange to claim that any differences heard would be due to jitter improvement as such.

 

6 hours ago, Rak said:

 

Yes, it is personal choice what hardware to use . AM radio is one of them. People in this site wants more.

 

And so do I. Hence we're here discussing high fidelity audio products. My point being that the ability to enjoy is another matter and can be rated on a different dimension, subjectively different for each person, than what we're discussing here. That is, whether devices like the USB hub is capable of better accuracy (ie. lower noise and jitter as claimed in the advertising material).

 

6 hours ago, Rak said:

Me and some friends of mine do not believe in manufacturers claiming.  Just sit and listen. And some are better than others.
Single tone and static measurements is just not enough. Music is more complex!
 

 

Sure. That's fine and good that you and friends are enjoying and not depending on manufacturer claims. End of story and case closed. By all means, purchase whatever product you enjoy.

 

For me, that's not good enough. If a product is truly better, then I would enjoy it and also like to know why because these things are all engineered goods based on human design. If a product is good because the designer has discovered a certain attribute that makes a significant difference, then I would like to support him/her and perhaps future generations of products can be even better. Scientific progress is also good for the competition and will spur others to aspire to that higher level of fidelity.

 

Yes, music is more complex. Which is why as I linked about I have also recorded and measured with real music as well as a broad test suite over the years with digital filter measurements, jitter, multitones for intermodulation distortion, oscilloscope output for square wave transients, etc...

 

[sandyk]

3 hours ago, Archimago said:

If a product is good because the designer has discovered a certain attribute that makes a significant difference,

 

 In many cases this attribute will come down to Power Supply, Power Supply and Power Supply !!!

 Newer voltage regulators such as the .8uV noise LT3045 will eventually trickle down to many newer designs, with shunt regulators etc. no longer needed for improved results. 

[Ralf11]

14 hours ago, diecaster said:

 

I can't wait to read this....

 

Please explain how one file containing digital data can sound sound different than another bit perfect copy of that file. Let's assume both are copied to the same make and model freshly formatted USB sticks, plugged into the same USB port, and then played one right after the other.

 

there is no explanation, so don't waste time with the search

 

there is also not much support for the claim advanced

[OldBigEars]

18 hours ago, Archimago said:

 

Sure, I've recorded and done tests with the analog outputs too using real music....

See my DiffMaker Audio Composite test from a few years back where I used "standardized" musical segments from Rebecca Pidgeon, The Prodigy, Rachel Podger, and Pink Floyd.

 

Your choice of music qualifies you as having cloth ears.  The rest is B.S.

[Archimago]

4 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Your choice of music qualifies you as having cloth ears.  The rest is B.S.

 

Gee, that's nice :-).

 

Since when did music choice correlate directly with auditory perceptual ability? Seems a little snobbish to me, man... (BTW: the music segments were not chosen as representative of stuff I necessarily like or love... They represented different genres and had tonal characteristics I was interested in capturing.)

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Your choice of music qualifies you as having cloth ears.  The rest is B.S.

Come on OBE. That's a shot at him, not his argument and it's very snobbish. 

[OldBigEars]

46 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Gee, that's nice :-).

 

Since when did music choice correlate directly with auditory perceptual ability? Seems a little snobbish to me, man... (BTW: the music segments were not chosen as representative of stuff I necessarily like or love... They represented different genres and had tonal characteristics I was interested in capturing.)

 

 

Dear Mr Archimago,

 

You set yourself up by informing the world you've got Golden Ears, then in the next breath let out that you exercise your astonishing aural talent with moronic disco music (The Prodigy) - presumably musing on the astonishing fidelity of your audio equipment while pogo-ing around your living room.  Mate, you're a plonker.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Dear Mr Archimago,

 

You set yourself up by informing the world you've got Golden Ears, then in the next breath let out that you exercise your astonishing aural talent with moronic disco music (The Prodigy) - presumably musing on the astonishing fidelity of your audio equipment while pogo-ing around your living room.  Mate, you're a plonker.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't see my post above. 

 

This is your warning. Stop the personal attacks. Attacking arguments and positions is cool. Attacking people isn't.

[OldBigEars]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't see my post above. 

 

This is your warning. Stop the personal attacks. Attacking arguments and positions is cool. Attacking people isn't.

 

What's snobbish, actually, is our friend writing that he thinks he has a superior authority to critique sound quality on the premise of some bogus qualification that he apparently believes makes him an "elite Expert Listener".  How does anyone actually write that can of thing about themselves?  Not cool, bro.  Not cool at all.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, OldBigEars said:

 

What's snobbish, actually, is our friend writing that he thinks he has a superior authority to critique sound quality on the premise of some bogus qualification that he apparently believes makes him an "elite Expert Listener".  How does anyone actually write that can of thing about themselves?  Not cool, bro.  Not cool at all.

I encourage you to take a breath. I've communicated with @Archimago via PM and know others who've met him in person. He isn't the type of person to proclaim what you think he is proclaiming. 

 

I advise giving him the benefit of the doubt. Whether you believe his opinions or not is a different story and I encourage you to debate that aspect, just not the personal details. 

[Archimago]

12 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

 

Dear Mr Archimago,

 

You set yourself up by informing the world you've got Golden Ears, then in the next breath let out that you exercise your astonishing aural talent with moronic disco music (The Prodigy) - presumably musing on the astonishing fidelity of your audio equipment while pogo-ing around your living room.  Mate, you're a plonker.

 

Right... Personal snipe aside, realize that The Prodigy's Fat Of the Land album has been around and recommended by some audiophile sites since the late 90's early 2000's - for example this:

The Prodigy: a "prodigious" CD for HiFi components testing and breaking-in

 

I agree with the writer, it's certainly got energy and will give your subs a workout. I wouldn't call anyone "cloth eared" just because they like the album and play it loud...

[Archimago]

11 minutes ago, OldBigEars said:

 

What's snobbish, actually, is our friend writing that he thinks he has a superior authority to critique sound quality on the premise of some bogus qualification that he apparently believes makes him an "elite Expert Listener".  How does anyone actually write that can of thing about themselves?  Not cool, bro.  Not cool at all.

 

Dude... I think you missed the little smiley-like emoticon. That "elite Expert Listener" is just the certificate thing from Philips. I believe they don't even do the test anymore. Take it easy...

 

BTW: The message was directed at sandyk and I don't think he took offense. We chatted by PM afterwards.

[fas42]

40 minutes ago, Archimago said:

 

Right... Personal snipe aside, realize that The Prodigy's Fat Of the Land album has been around and recommended by some audiophile sites since the late 90's early 2000's - for example this:

The Prodigy: a "prodigious" CD for HiFi components testing and breaking-in

 

I agree with the writer, it's certainly got energy and will give your subs a workout. I wouldn't call anyone "cloth eared" just because they like the album and play it loud...

 

Most audio people don't, or can't appreciate that "extreme" music is excellent for highlighting system flaws and weaknesses - if a rig can do justice to high energy pop tracks, then 'big' classical pieces become trivially easy to reproduce.

 

A competent setup can handle all genres, with ease - which is a mighty big plus: all recordings show off their best; to the listener's benefit ....