Popular Post incus Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 17 hours ago, Advieira said: If you need to have two unities to get the best SQ, there was a little project failure. I never said you need two for best SQ. Simply that my set-up resulted in positive enhancements. 13 hours ago, Yo-yo said: I’d like to see more hard data on this device and less subjective testing. There is no reason a switch transferring a file would effect another devices audio output. In the future I would suggest using audio recording to verify the results and or blind a-b tests. any device that claims what it claims and costs what it costs should make measurable differences. I also don't see that it's very productive for anyone to state outright without any A/Bing of their own that switches by definition cannot make a difference. Especially when the bleeding edge of - yes - subjective reporting - has prompted Swenson and others to try to create ways to - objectively - measure what so many are hearing. You will get your data. Objective always trails subjective. 13 hours ago, plissken said: That's not a parallel setup. It's serial. I've done ad-hoc runs were we need to get to something 800 feet away and using two switches to do it where fiber wasn't an option. The frames get rebuilt 100% from the ground up as the go from port to port. So with the play back machine being Windows 10 but I don't see the playback software other than Tidal or Qobuz I'll mention this: When I went out to Denver years ago to a roughly $50,000 setup, the participant, using Tidal, couldn't tell when the customer $1500 12 cable or the 100 foot $14 cable was in use. Another tidbit: They didn't even know they were listening to entire tracks from Tidal where I removed the cable 30 seconds in and let entire 5 to 11 minute tracks play. I call shenanigans on this. Never said it was parallel. I just stated what I have in my system. 13 hours ago, jtwrace said: Lots of foolery there and any company that makes such a device. Many audiophiles are very gullible. Then you by no means need to buy from them! But I don't see how this kind of comment is helpful in any way. I have bought and rejected MANY components and accessories and cables, etc. over the years based on poor performance relative to expectations. In the end, you keep the ones that enhance your system. In the end, we're all just chasing a certain sound relative to an ideal, so your ears are the true measure. If it gives you peace of mind to buy on specs alone, then totally go for it. Doesn't mean that it sounds better. adamaley, Albrecht and spotforscott 1 2 Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 minute ago, incus said: Never said it was parallel. I just stated what I have in my system. I believe he was referring the this statement in the review: "May Park just sent me a note. Having done some internal testing they found that under this parallel configuration there was a dramatic sonic improvement." Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
incus Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Ah, yes, I see now. Sorry. Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, incus said: Ah, yes, I see now. Sorry. No worries. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Archimago Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 11 hours ago, firedog said: I don’t know if devices like this make a difference or not. If you look at Archimago’s blog, he’s measured similar stuff that audiophiles think is important and found it to have no measurable effect. In any case, the SOTM devices and accompanying PS are quite pricey. If I was going to try this stuff, I’d go with less expensive products from Sonore or Uptone first. Assuming they do make a difference, I’d bet the result per dollar on them is a lot better than for the SOTM ones. Audiophilia is a classic area of diminishing returns, You get a lot of performance for lesser sums, and improving that performance tends to cost lots of money for very small increases in performance. And the more upscale a component is, the more you spend on cosmetics instead of performance. Nothing against cosmetics, but they don’t contribute to performance. Oh my... There's this article from awhile back looking at the "noise" when plugging a Pi/DAC into a router vs. just WiFi. Hmmm, maybe I'll try that one more time with my even better RME ADI-2 Pro FS ADC to see if I can detect any noise or distortions out to near 200kHz plugged into my 10GbE-capable switch ($200) in the next few weeks. I have yet to see any company release data to back up claims that there's any extra noise being produced by a DAC when plugged into a wired ethernet (other than my experiment above which shows very minimal difference). Would be nice if SOtM produced some information as to what issue a >$1000 switch actually addresses? Then we can talk about facts and consider actual benefits instead of ruminate over vague claims? Nonetheless, I do like the music suggestions used for the evaluation though... Archimago's Musings: A "more objective" take for the Rational Audiophile. Beyond mere fidelity, into immersion and realism. R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press. Link to comment
thyname Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 11 hours ago, firedog said: If you look at Archimago’s blog, he’s measured similar stuff that audiophiles think is important and found it to have no measurable effect. I have found that whatever he measures has no measurable effect. I am starting to think that whatever is measuring, with whatever measuring tool he is using, is totally irrelevant in Audio. To use a crude analogy: does measuring the sperm count matter for a patient with a heart disease? Albrecht 1 Link to comment
incus Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 If you follow the various threads on this forum about clocking, re-clocking, phase noise, etc. I think you'll see that a) John Swenson appears to be building a measuring device capable of showing what he and the folks at Uptone are addressing with their switch and why, and b) this goes beyond the current ways one understands "noise" in a system. The way I look at it, streaming-based digital audio has ushered in a new era of research - subjective and objective - that cannot really be equated to older analog ways of looking at noise. Link to comment
incus Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Older assumptions about measurability based on analog systems, is what I mean. I know you are measuring in the digital realm - but like thyname just said - those measurement tools are not addressing the actual problems introduced by streaming audio. Link to comment
Popular Post Archimago Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 10 minutes ago, thyname said: I have found that whatever he measures has no measurable effect. I am starting to think that whatever is measuring, with whatever measuring tool he is using, is totally irrelevant in Audio. To use a crude analogy: does measuring the sperm count matter for a patient with a heart disease? Not true. There was a measurable difference as you can see in that post! And for most devices tested, there are actually differences I highlight - even between some cables! DACs easily show jitter differences. What's more important is for folks to actually recognize that maybe... Just maybe... The power of the mind to produce and claim differences and attribution theories is way more powerful than what is actually there. Ran, tomjtx, plissken and 1 other 4 Archimago's Musings: A "more objective" take for the Rational Audiophile. Beyond mere fidelity, into immersion and realism. R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press. Link to comment
Archimago Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 7 minutes ago, incus said: If you follow the various threads on this forum about clocking, re-clocking, phase noise, etc. I think you'll see that a) John Swenson appears to be building a measuring device capable of showing what he and the folks at Uptone are addressing with their switch and why, and b) this goes beyond the current ways one understands "noise" in a system. The way I look at it, streaming-based digital audio has ushered in a new era of research - subjective and objective - that cannot really be equated to older analog ways of looking at noise. Bring it on. Did Swenson even produce any of the promised measurements that he said he was going to from back in the day of the USB Regen (mid-2015)??? AudioDoctor 1 Archimago's Musings: A "more objective" take for the Rational Audiophile. Beyond mere fidelity, into immersion and realism. R.I.P. MQA 2014-2023: Hyped product thanks to uneducated, uncritical advocates & captured press. Link to comment
Popular Post incus Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 15 minutes ago, Archimago said: Bring it on. Did Swenson even produce any of the promised measurements that he said he was going to from back in the day of the USB Regen (mid-2015)??? That I don't know - sorry - but I do think he's pursuing this new tech in earnest. 18 minutes ago, Archimago said: Not true. There was a measurable difference as you can see in that post! And for most devices tested, there are actually differences I highlight - even between some cables! DACs easily show jitter differences. What's more important is for folks to actually recognize that maybe... Just maybe... The power of the mind to produce and claim differences and attribution theories is way more powerful than what is actually there. This is such a tired and circular argument, man, I gotta say, heard it soooooo many times on sooooo many forums about all manner of sound reproduction. "Actually" there. Careful -- because who gets to decide what is and isn't actually there? Just the measurement devices? Does that go for all realms of life? All subjective experience is bunk? Of all the components I've tried and rejected and those I've accepted, do you really think the ones I like are the ones that are going to "measure" better? Does it really matter in the end? thyname and 89reksal 2 Link to comment
89reksal Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 This is a new review from Hans Beekhuyzen: Link to comment
firedog Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 30 minutes ago, lasker98 said: This is a new review from Hans Beekhuyzen: Let's just say that after his ignorant posts about MQA (and I'm not referring to his sonic opinion of MQA), I wouldn't trust anything he says. Sonic77 1 Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three . Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, firedog said: Let's just say that after his ignorant posts about MQA (and I'm not referring to his sonic opinion of MQA), I wouldn't trust anything he says. We all make mistakes. I hope you don’t throw this baby(me) out with the bath water after I “F” up 😁 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post firedog Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, The Computer Audiophile said: We all make mistakes. I hope you don’t throw this baby(me) out with the bath water after I “F” up 😁 There's a difference between making mistakes and posting a long "in depth" video where you arrogantly explain the technical aspects of MQA and why it is superior - where it's clear you don't know what you are talking about. And then defending his ignorance. That's not a "mistake", it's incompetence at best, something else at worst. I don't ever remember you doing something like that. And you seem to be willing to admit factual technical mistakes, and don't pretend to be an expert about stuff you aren't expert on. 4est and Sonic77 1 1 Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three . Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
Popular Post gordec Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 13 minutes ago, firedog said: Let's just say that after his ignorant posts about MQA (and I'm not referring to his sonic opinion of MQA), I wouldn't trust anything he says. He's Dutch. Everything is different after hash and brownies. The auditory neural stimulation is likely permanently altered. The Computer Audiophile and left channel 1 1 Alienware R7 with Paul Pang V2 USB PCIE -> iFi Pro iDSD -> McIntosh MHA100 -> Hifiman Susvara. Keeping it simple! Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 15 minutes ago, firedog said: There's a difference between making mistakes and posting a long "in depth" video where you arrogantly explain the technical aspects of MQA and why it is superior - where it's clear you don't know what you are talking about. And then defending his ignorance. That's not a "mistake", it's incompetence at best, something else at worst. I don't ever remember you doing something like that. And you seem to be willing to admit factual technical mistakes, and don't pretend to be an expert about stuff you aren't expert on. Understood. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post thyname Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Archimago said: Not true. There was a measurable difference as you can see in that post! And for most devices tested, there are actually differences I highlight - even between some cables! DACs easily show jitter differences. What's more important is for folks to actually recognize that maybe... Just maybe... The power of the mind to produce and claim differences and attribution theories is way more powerful than what is actually there. Except for, even when you measure some difference, you come with the conclusion that is beyond the audible boundary levels for humans, or even worse, to copy paste from your famous review of Chromecast Audio that all "deniers" wave all over the Internets: ".... And I don't believe anyone is really going to notice the jitter in day-to-day use. " Elberoth and LowMidHigh 2 Link to comment
plissken Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, incus said: All subjective experience is bunk? Nope, just opinion and uncorroborated. Link to comment
Popular Post incus Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 13 minutes ago, plissken said: Nope, just opinion and uncorroborated. Actually pretty corroborated if you read up on switches. And as for opinion, well it's all "just" opinion, isn't it? One opinion says only currently-existing measurement devices tell the truth. Another says that ears/brains might possibly be able to access truth as well. We could just as easily play a mental game where instead of demanding that someone have something-other-than-subjective "proof" of what they are hearing, the hearing itself becomes the starting point for a new type of scientific research that then produces the machinery necessary to make sense of it. That is the essence of scientific inquiry - the hypothesis first - utterly subjective - then the work to prove it. And apropos cheap parts vs. expensive parts and all that - I totally get the desire to debunk a product by lifting the hood. Just like I totally get the desire that some have to upgrade parts over and over in search of that elusive ideal sound. However, parts make up a whole, and the whole creates the experience, not the parts. You can't "listen" to a clock chip, just like you can't actually "listen" to a capacitor. They require a circuit, which in turn has many other parts, and then an audio system, which in turn has many components, each with many parts, etc. I guess what we are listening to is the synergy of the parts in unison, right? So to critique SOtM for using some recognizable parts that have a certain dollar value is hardly fair as every single audio component company does the same. How those parts are implemented and what the outcome of that implementation is - those are the things we are talking about. And just think how thrilled so many of you/us are when we find a "cheap" component that sounds great. Do we then say wait, no it can't sound great, because look it's just made up of these crappy parts? So if the argument comes down to cheap stuff inherently sounds worse, then I can't get on board with that. As for how much SOtM charges, well, it's too much for everyone, meaning even those who buy the products would RATHER spend less. But I can't get what I'm getting from the SOtM switch from any other product that I've tried, not yet at least. 4est and 89reksal 1 1 Link to comment
plissken Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 7 minutes ago, incus said: Actually pretty corroborated if you read up on switches. And as for opinion, well it's all "just" opinion, isn't it? One opinion says only currently-existing measurement devices tell the truth. I'm willing to bet you money you fall apart in a single blind evaluation. Link to comment
incus Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Single blind evaluation of the TP-Link switch I used to have vs. the SOtM switch?? Ha. You obviously don't know the difference in sound or you would not offer to pay me for my time like that. Same goes for generic CAT6A cable vs. the SOtM LAN cables... Anyway, I am going to move on from trying to prove to you or anyone that what I hear is there. Doubt all you want, please. Doubt is good. Just don't let it kill your curiosity! 89reksal 1 Link to comment
jtwrace Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 5 hours ago, incus said: Then you by no means need to buy from them! But I don't see how this kind of comment is helpful in any way. I have bought and rejected MANY components and accessories and cables, etc. over the years based on poor performance relative to expectations. In the end, you keep the ones that enhance your system. In the end, we're all just chasing a certain sound relative to an ideal, so your ears are the true measure. If it gives you peace of mind to buy on specs alone, then totally go for it. Doesn't mean that it sounds better. In your opinion of course...just like I stated mine. Your ears aren't the objective device which is science based. That's fact. If it was, then I'm sure every network switch company would use audio to "design" their network equipment. Guess what, they don't because it's total BS! W10 NUC i7 (Gen 10) > Roon (Audiolense FIR) > Motu UltraLite mk5 > (4) Hypex NCore NC502MP > JBL M2 Master Reference +4 subs Watch my Podcast https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXMw_bZWBMtRWNJQfTJ38kA/videos Link to comment
Popular Post incus Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, jtwrace said: In your opinion of course...just like I stated mine. Your ears aren't the objective device which is science based. That's fact. If it was, then I'm sure every network switch company would use audio to "design" their network equipment. Guess what, they don't because it's total BS! Whoa. Okay. Ears are not objective - we are saying the same thing. But a device is not objective either. It is put to use in a certain environment with specific goals in mind. It is made to measure for X and not Y because you tell it to. Therefore you have made a subjective prerequisite decision setting parameters of its objective functioning. This is the limitation of any discreet science. Audio is the overlapping quadrant of many different sciences.... We could debate this all day... But I will say that if packet loss if your goal, then perfect packet transmission is all you will care about in a system. Great. That's a baseline which the switch company need not exceed. But to say that all other possible transmissions that may accompany the packets and influence sound are "total BS" is not electronically true nor borne out by subjective listening experience. To figure what those transmissions are and how to measure them - and eradicate them! - seems a worthwhile endeavor. I'm not calling your instruments BS please don't call my ears BS. 89reksal, 4est and spotforscott 1 2 Link to comment
Popular Post jtwrace Posted February 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, incus said: Whoa. Okay. Ears are not objective - we are saying the same thing. But a device is not objective either. It is put to use in a certain environment with specific goals in mind. It is made to measure for X and not Y because you tell it to. Therefore you have made a subjective prerequisite decision setting parameters of its objective functioning. This is the limitation of any discreet science. Audio is the overlapping quadrant of many different sciences.... We could debate this all day... But I will say that if packet loss if your goal, then perfect packet transmission is all you will care about in a system. Great. That's a baseline which the switch company need not exceed. But to say that all other possible transmissions that may accompany the packets and influence sound are "total BS" is not electronically true nor borne out by subjective listening experience. To figure what those transmissions are and how to measure them - and eradicate them! - seems a worthwhile endeavor. I'm not calling your instruments BS please don't call my ears BS. Please tell me where sotm or any other company that makes one of these devices has shown any real objective data? LowMidHigh and plissken 1 1 W10 NUC i7 (Gen 10) > Roon (Audiolense FIR) > Motu UltraLite mk5 > (4) Hypex NCore NC502MP > JBL M2 Master Reference +4 subs Watch my Podcast https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXMw_bZWBMtRWNJQfTJ38kA/videos Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now