Is this website about "computer" audio anymore?

[wgscott]

Whole-house audio streaming is most easily accomplished using the volume control.

[mansr]

8 minutes ago, sandyk said:

irrefutable evidence

In many instances, I'd settle for plausible or even vaguely believable.

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

In many instances, I'd settle for plausible or even vaguely believable.

 

 Like you did with Mani perhaps ?

[sandyk]

16 minutes ago, wgscott said:

Whole-house audio streaming is most easily accomplished using the volume control.

 

 LOL !

 

 Still using your DIY amplifier , and without further problems ?

[fas42]

Yes, I find it hilarious that they have these per room listening solutions - each person has a little transistor radio besides their bed, to add a bit of background burbling ...

[Ralf11]

46 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

With a properly implemented network any crappy old PC streaming to an optimized streamer will function as well as any “bespoke” PC assuming the PC has enough horsepower — 

 

prove me wrong

 

He can't

 

That would require data

 

+1 plisskin

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

a properly implemented network...

 

What part can't you understand about a large percentage of members not needing " a properly implemented network" and only needing  a means to access a large number of music files without the inconvenience of physical media  ?

[Ralf11]

You mis-quoted me - I never said that. 

 

Please retract your post above.

[rando]

7 hours ago, MikePM said:

Chris:  I have been a reader (mostly passive) for years.  Your website was always my goto when deciding how to set up a NAS, or network, upgrade my computer, or tweek my software.  Unfortunately, the articles are now mostly just digital audio reviews that I can get from any of a number of websites.  I know that any silicon is basically a computer, but in the sense of how Computer Audiophile was started and its early readership, I think it no longer addresses in any consistent way, the original focus on using a personal computer, and generally available hardware and software to access great sounding music.  

 

Is it you view that the PC is finished or simply at a deadend?  I will admit that since you started mostly posting sporadic reviews of digital servers and dacs, and dropping discussion of basic computer equipment, I tune in, or log in, a lot less.

 

Where is this site headed and should we just consider it "digital audiophile" with little or no emphasis on the computers, software, and accessories that originally made this place unique?

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt you are expressing genuine concerns.  At some point you appear to have missed a critical development (or lack of) that stagnated interest in the direction you were accustomed to.  Were continued development of the CAPS servers relevant across the wider readership it would not have been dropped.  

 

I think you are hinting at something wider which is actually disturbing you.  A fundamental change in the atmosphere and increased interest in backs against the wall industry treachery.  Dispiriting reliance on cunning having everything to do with nothing to do with being a computer audiophile.  My suggestion is to maintain your passivity and focus on the pockets of enjoyable dissertation.  You wouldn't be the first to suggest this site cannot go both ways and hope to survive.  

 

So let's dispense with the small talk.  If you are capable of fulfilling the large desire to see a custom motherboard through from conception to delivery.  If you can bend silicon wafers to your will in a small onsite shed.  If you can solve any of the highly restrictive problems which idled otherwise industrious hands to the point of abandonment.  Run, don't walk into any of the sub-forums dealing with them directly.  Those who are here in the hopes a new shoot will form out of the withering vine will form a circle around you.  

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

You mis-quoted me - I never said that. 

 

Please retract your post above.

 NO !

 You agreed with, and quoted that comment.

[wgscott]

46 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 LOL !

 

 Still using your DIY amplifier , and without further problems ?

 

I took your advice (and @Bob Stern ) and rebuilt it, and put the power supplies and toroid into a separate (metal) box.  It genuinely sounds better now (much lower noise floor). I bought parts to do it several years ago but never got around to it, so thanks for the encouragement!

 

Here is how it looked when I was testing (before I sealed it up):

[plissken]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

This is exactly the point.

Far too many like yourself ignore the experiences of numerous other members in other areas of the forum, and consider them as purely anecdotal,

 

Well it is purely anecdotal. 

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 

and believe that any old laptop or desktop in standard guise, even a purpose built Server, results in exactly the same audio quality when exported to an affordable DAC.

 

Not particularly hard to do.

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

You also refuse to accept the experiences of many members with different USB cables, improved PSUs and clocking etc. and regard them as nothing more than EXPECTATION Bias.

Correct ?

 

I refuse to accept sighted evaluation. 

[sandyk]

Just now, wgscott said:

 

I took your advice and rebuilt it, and put the power supplies and toroid into a separate (metal) box.  It genuinely sounds better now (much lower noise floor). I bought parts to do it several years ago but never got around to it, so thanks for the push!

 

 Hi Bill

 That's pleasing to hear. That is why I also have my Class A Amplifier PSUs , as well as the 2 toroidal transformers for my Preamp in a separate 2U metal rack case.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, plissken said:

I refuse to accept sighted evaluation. 

 

 But the simple fact is that many members do use NON SIGHTED evaluation.

 You don't accept that either, as you weren't present to verify that it was non sighted, and even if you were present ,you would demand  a large number of repeats to obtain a high statistical probability of it being correct !

 However, that is no different to the requirements of several other prominent posters from the Objective side.

[Ralf11]

56 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 NO !

 You agreed with, and quoted that comment.

 

Stop lying nutso

[jabbr]

2 hours ago, sandyk said:

 I wasn't talking about an optimised streamer. You appear to believe that most members feel the need to stream Audio through the whole house, at the control of a remote button push..

 This may apply to many of the frequent posters, but I doubt that it applies to the general readership..

 Many simply want high quality audio directly from a PC or Laptop into a decent DAC, without having to rummage through numerous CDs etc. stored in the " mancave" or wherever.

 This is possibly the point the OP was trying to make ?

 

I'm not telling anyone what they have to do, rather making a statement about an PC server, and in the larger context, discussing they way I (and others) have found to organize one's media in a central location, searchable without rummaging, nor loading CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays etc, and accessible for listening or viewing, not only in a "mancave" but both around the house as well as wherever you are.

 

In 2018, computers and computer audio, mean computers connected by networks, and audio over networks. The isolated non-networked PC of today is essentially the same as the CD player of 1984 (or whenever those archaic times were  )

 

The OP wants to talk about computers (and by extension networks), right?

 

But by all means use whatever media you prefer ?‍♂️

[Teresa]

6 hours ago, crenca said:

I suspect there are many more computer audiophiles than is apparent, that is to say folks who simply plug in a cheap USB cable into their "noisy" computer with its "noisy" USB hub, directly into a DAC. They don't run fancy "OS tweaks" either.  Some of them even have "soundcards" plug directly into their computer ?.

 

In other words, the subjectivist audiophiles quest for more decrapifier, tweaks, and allegedly isolating boxes is so much "old school" audiophiledom…

 

Hey, I'm a subjectivist audiophile / music lover and I would still be using the built-in DAC in my Mac Mini plugged directly into my pre-amp using a Monster Cable mini stereo to R+L RCA cable if Apple would have included DSD playback. They didn't so I had to get a Teac DSD DAC instead for DSD music files. I am most interested in SACD and DSD. 

 

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

...the experiences of numerous other members in other areas of the forum, and consider them as purely anecdotal, and believe that any old laptop or desktop in standard guise, even a purpose built Server, results in exactly the same audio quality when exported to an affordable DAC.

You also refuse to accept the experiences of many members with different USB cables, improved PSUs and clocking etc. and regard them as nothing more than EXPECTATION Bias.

Correct ?...

 

I'm a subjectivist and IMHO all listener reports are anecdotal. Personally I have to hear whatever it is in my system, in my room, with my ear / brain system before I can determine if I like it and if it sounds more like real music to me. Plus I expect no one else to hear exactly what I did as we are all different people. 

 

2 hours ago, mansr said:

In many instances, I'd settle for plausible or even vaguely believable.

 

I won't, as I don't believe anything audio or music related I have not heard with my ear / brain system no matter how many positive reports or how well it measures. If it measures well enough and enough people have a positive response I might consider auditioning it myself if I find it of interest. If I don't find it of interest I don't care.

 

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

...inconvenience of physical media  ?

 

I keep reading this here and I don't understand why!? Except for LPs I don't find physical media the least bit inconvenient. As I type this I am listening to an SACD, I took it out of the case put it in the machine and it starts playing right away and I don't have to get off my lazy butt for over an hour to put in the next SACD. Personally, I find computer music more inconvenient.

 

1 hour ago, plissken said:

...I refuse to accept sighted evaluation. 

 

I refuse to accept sighted or blinded evaluations, I only accept what it sounds like in my system using my ear / brain system and only if I am interested enough to try or purchase. Otherwise I don't care! You all can do all the sighted or blinded evaluations you want as it won't affect me at all.

 

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

But the simple fact is that many members do use NON SIGHTED evaluation...

 

I don't accept those either, I don't believe anything being relevant to me I have not heard with my own ear / brain system. As a subjectivist I don't understand why so many people need outside vindication of how they enjoy music. IMHO just sharing experiences should be enough.?

[Teresa]

2 hours ago, wgscott said:

Whole-house audio streaming is most easily accomplished using the volume control.

 

Thanks, this made me laugh. I live in a studio apartment and music plays everywhere. However for people who live in larger apartments and houses and who have children perhaps whole-house streaming makes sense, especially if they can play different music in different rooms. Parents and Kids tend to like different music.

[sandyk]

31 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Stop lying nutso

 

 Your never ending insults have no place in this forum , or any other forum for that matter.

 

Quote

      2 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

With a properly implemented network any crappy old PC streaming to an optimized streamer will function as well as any “bespoke” PC assuming the PC has enough horsepower — 

 

prove me wrong

 

Ralf11 replied

" He can't

 

That would require data

 

+1 plisskin"

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

In 2018, computers and computer audio, mean computers connected by networks, and audio over networks. The isolated non-networked PC of today is essentially the same as the CD player of 1984 (or whenever those archaic times were  )

 

The OP wants to talk about computers (and by extension networks), right? 

 

Quote

6 hours ago, crenca said:

I suspect there are many more computer audiophiles than is apparent, that is to say folks who simply plug in a cheap USB cable into their "noisy" computer with its "noisy" USB hub, directly into a DAC. They don't run fancy "OS tweaks" either.  Some of them even have "soundcards" plug directly into their computer ?.

 

[jabbr]

1 hour ago, Teresa said:

 

Hey, I'm a subjectivist audiophile / music lover and I would still be using the built-in DAC in my Mac Mini plugged directly into my pre-amp using a Monster Cable mini stereo to R+L RCA cable if Apple would have included DSD playback. They didn't so I had to get a Teac DSD DAC instead for DSD music files. I am most interested in SACD and DSD. 

 

Apple has targeted the convenience/quality ratio toward maximal uptake, and is perhaps singlehandedly responsible for popularizing (not creating) moving songs off of plastic discs and onto computers/ipods as well as the ability to purchase and download songs (at the time Amazon had already (largely) killed off stores that sell CDs.

 

So the mini can be either a music server or streamer, likewise the mac book either a server,streamer or controller.

Airplay, Airport Express, Mac Mini etc etc etc maybe not the very first, but brought it to the masses.

 

https://www.wired.com/1996/12/esgage/

[Kal Rubinson]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

Far too many like yourself ignore the experiences of numerous other members in other areas of the forum, and consider them as purely anecdotal, and believe that any old laptop or desktop in standard guise, even a purpose built Server, results in exactly the same audio quality when exported to an affordable DAC.

You also refuse to accept the experiences of many members with different USB cables, improved PSUs and clocking etc. and regard them as nothing more than EXPECTATION Bias.

Correct ?

Correct.  But there's no reason that either  side should be excluded from CA because of the convictions of the other.

[Bystander]

19 hours ago, crenca said:

I suspect there are many more computer audiophiles than is apparent, that is to say folks who simply plug in a cheap USB cable into their "noisy" computer with its "noisy" USB hub, directly into a DAC. They don't run fancy "OS tweaks" either.  Some of them even have "soundcards" plug directly into their computer ?.

 

That's me. Old, remote controlled MacBook strategically placed next to my speakers, bog-standard version of OS X (admittedly running my own software and scripts, but nothing that would affect or is intended to affect the sound quality), a really nice set of properly placed active speakers with a capable DAC. Some room treatment. And, voilà! You're in audiophile heaven. Computer audio doesn't have to be much more complicated than that. I'd rather spend time listening to or making music than worry about USB cables.

 

edit: Of course the downside is that there isn't really much left to talk about in that case except for discussions about music.

[jabbr]

15 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

What part can't you understand about a large percentage of members not needing " a properly implemented network" and only needing  a means to access a large number of music files without the inconvenience of physical media  ?

 

Alex,

 

I really have no problem nor criticism for anyone who wants to plug in a DAC to a laptop and just listen -- in fact I often plug a portable DAC into my iphone and listen with IEMs -- what I am addressing is the meme being spread about needing a "special" high priced server to get the best SQ, and have provided many examples and instructions of ways to use off the shelf PCs and hardware to get great SQ -- network isolation is part of that, but again if you or anyone else are happy with your laptop and DAC then no problem (and there shouldn't be). I am suggesting that instead of ripping apart your PC and replacing with a network of DC power cables and LPS and special clocks, that you or anyone can use a bog standard PC and a proper network (perhaps fiber).

 

Now, for you or anyone who wants to build your own LPS, more power to you! I think building DIY LPS is terrific. I'm addressing my comments more to folks who aren't inclined to build their own LPS (or who understand the differences between different LPS schematics) and instead of investing $1000s in multiple name brand LPS for the PC, I'd say best to instead invest in a proper network and then invest in a good LPS for the audio area e,g, network renderer (lots of examples).

 

That said there's a lot to be said for plugging your USB cable into your battery powered laptop and DAC and just listening.

[vmartell22]

On 8/31/2018 at 9:12 AM, plissken said:

 

Data?

if no data the alternative is to add at the end "assuming it can be proven it causes an audible difference"

man I am in a troll mood today - apologies...

 

v