Paul's view on Cables, Audio Precision Analyzer, etc.

[Ralf11]

In a properly designed and isolated DAC, I'd put your life on the line, yes.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Saying it in the original form is just asking to be criticised, makes it very easy to attack his viewpoint.

Saying anything makes it very easy to be criticized. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

32 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

In a properly designed and isolated DAC, I'd put your life on the line, yes.

Has anyone ever listed the specifications for this “properly designed and isolated” DAC? It’s something I hear discussed frequently but I’ve never seen anyone put forth anything more than a belief statement.  

[opus101]

11 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Has anyone ever listed the specifications for this “properly designed and isolated” DAC? It’s something I hear discussed frequently but I’ve never seen anyone put forth anything more than a belief statement.  

 

Its a mythological beast. I have asked on at least one other forum whether there is in reality a category of such ('competently designed DAC' is a popular synonym), but precisely zero people have offered a checklist so that any particular DAC can be included in (or excluded from) the mythical category. A category without such a means of inclusion/exclusion only exists in the imagination.

[tmtomh]

 

On 2/4/2020 at 7:01 PM, mansr said:

As a rule of thumb, if you're looking for the truth, you can take whatever Paul McGowan says and invert it.

 

On 2/5/2020 at 9:08 AM, tapatrick said:

is this an objective statement...?

 

Not necessarily - but it is a statement with plenty of empirical evidence to back it up.

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Has anyone ever listed the specifications for this “properly designed and isolated” DAC? It’s something I hear discussed frequently but I’ve never seen anyone put forth anything more than a belief statement.  

 

for noise on the USB line you just need to isolate it - very simple & easy

 

- which likely explains why there are few or no(?) DACs that susceptible to it anymore

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

for noise on the USB line you just need to isolate it - very simple & easy

 

- which likely explains why there are few or no(?) DACs that susceptible to it anymore

Sounds anecdotal to me. 

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Sounds anecdotal to me. 

 

is this make up your own oddball definitions night?

 

I gave you a description.  It is hardly an anecdote.  If you specify what you are looking for maybe you can get an answer.

[fas42]

4 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

In a properly designed and isolated DAC, I'd put your life on the line, yes.

 

Note that I said, "a USB link to any audio device" - I presume I could find a label on DACs, that specified that it was "properly designed and isolated"; as compared to ones that weren't.

 

As regards the situation where dealing with "noise on the USB line you just need to isolate it - very simple & easy" - I take it that I would just have to mention that to an EE, and he would know precisely to what level the isolation needs to be?

[marce]

And so it goes on...

The myths will continue, as you may be aware I don't post here often, because I believe that any non belief based view will be expunged from the history books (well threads), discussion is not an option...

And so consumer audio move backwards a little more...

 

I was going to comment on USB,noise etc. but to be honest as my above sentence points out it is a waste of time.

As many keep saying digital audio has been going for decades yet does not seem to follow the same development as all other fields of electronics, look at what has been achieved in electronics since the CD first appeared and ask yourself why commercial/domestic audio is still surrounded by myths, unfounded beliefs and the fact that many can't accept the fact bits are bits...

[mansr]

8 hours ago, opus101 said:

Its a mythological beast. I have asked on at least one other forum whether there is in reality a category of such ('competently designed DAC' is a popular synonym), but precisely zero people have offered a checklist so that any particular DAC can be included in (or excluded from) the mythical category. A category without such a means of inclusion/exclusion only exists in the imagination.

I don't think there are any specific traits that are necessary for or prohibitive of a competent design. The presence of certain design elements are at best indicative one way or the other. Reality is not made up of simple categories defined by checkboxes. That's marketing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, marce said:

And so it goes on...

The myths will continue, as you may be aware I don't post here often, because I believe that any non belief based view will be expunged from the history books (well threads), discussion is not an option...

And so consumer audio move backwards a little more...

 

I was going to comment on USB,noise etc. but to be honest as my above sentence points out it is a waste of time.

As many keep saying digital audio has been going for decades yet does not seem to follow the same development as all other fields of electronics, look at what has been achieved in electronics since the CD first appeared and ask yourself why commercial/domestic audio is still surrounded by myths, unfounded beliefs and the fact that many can't accept the fact bits are bits...

So you don’t post here often because there is discussion on both sides?

[marce]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

So you don’t post here often because there is discussion on both sides?

No I think discussion has been stifled, we cannot have an open discussion anymore because some are offended when beliefs are questioned, I think audiophilia is becoming more of a religion than a technical hobby... And it is a technical hobby whatever anyone says, I know many will disagree, but it is... Listening to music is not technical... But messing around with the kit is, if claims of improved fidelity are made.🙂

I did use the work expunged for a reason...

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, marce said:

No I think discussion has been stifled, we cannot have an open discussion anymore because some are offended when beliefs are questioned, I think audiophilia is becoming more of a religion than a technical hobby... And it is a technical hobby whatever anyone says, I know many will disagree, but it is... Listening to music is not technical... But messing around with the kit is, if claims of improved fidelity are made.🙂

I did use the work expunged for a reason...

Ok, understood. I have some changes for the site, almost ready to announce. People will be able to discuss things without the other side stifling discussion. It will work both ways. 

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Ok, understood. I have some changes for the site, almost ready to announce. People will be able to discuss things without the other side stifling discussion. It will work both ways. 

Oh, great. Echo chambers. Just what we need more of.

[tapatrick]

10 hours ago, tmtomh said:

Not necessarily - but it is a statement with plenty of empirical evidence to back it up.

I'd be curious to see the evidence...

[The Computer Audiophile]

27 minutes ago, mansr said:

Oh, great. Echo chambers. Just what we need more of.

There are large percentages of objective and subjective people here who have zero interest in talking to each other or who show zero ability to talk to each other. Both are driving the other away. 

[Racerxnet]

Great,

 

The Left against the Right. POLITICS

 

MAK

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

There are large percentages of objective and subjective people here who have zero interest in talking to each other or who show zero ability to talk to each other. Both are driving the other away. 

 

Audiophile hobbyists who are involved in their own system improvements can benefit from both an objectivist and subjectivist viewpoint, but alas emotional religion gets in the way too often.

 

John

 

[marce]

3 hours ago, marce said:

No I think discussion has been stifled, we cannot have an open discussion anymore because some are offended when beliefs are questioned, I think audiophilia is becoming more of a religion than a technical hobby... And it is a technical hobby whatever anyone says, I know many will disagree, but it is... Listening to music is not technical... But messing around with the kit is, if claims of improved fidelity are made.🙂

I did use the work expunged for a reason...

As proven by the posts disagreeing with my comment...

The labels used are meaningless, subjective/objective most are a bit of both. Its the hard core beliefs, that can't be questioned, yet it is these that must be questioned if the improvements are really to be made in musical reproduction...

 

[charlesphoto]

In another forum on ethernet cables and switches, the 'subjectivists' were compared to anti-vaxxers by an 'objectivist' which I found incredibly insulting. The assumption becomes that those who hear differences beyond the DAC are totally anti-science which couldn't be farther from the truth. Personally I believe we just haven't figured out what to measure yet, in regards to sound (not data throughput), if ever.

 

It's like camera lenses - MTF charts and coma and fringing measurements don't tell the whole story, of how the lens actually renders in real life situations. Sure, one can tell how sharp, soft etc but not the things that render an image as an emotional experience via that particular pice of glass. That can only be determined with actual use, and it will vary depending on camera body used, the various lighting situations etc and the photographers final intent. 

 

Granted if a user 'perceives' no change in a device, how is that any different than somebody who 'perceives' one? If we could just leave it that - 'the eR made no change in my system" or 'it changed it for the worse' or 'the eR made the sound so much better' that would be great. But too often the objectivists seem to go on some sort of recalcitrant campaign to prove the other side delusional-  it gets really tiresome. And of course its human nature to then defend ones own experiences. 

 

John has it right above - it would be great if both sides could learn from each other. But from my experience its sadly been mostly a one way street. 

[Iving]

5 hours ago, marce said:

unfounded beliefs

 

3 hours ago, marce said:

beliefs are questioned

 

14 minutes ago, marce said:

beliefs, that can't be questioned, yet it is these that must be questioned

 

You are obsessed with the "beliefs" of others.

 

I, for one, don't have any for present purposes. I wouldn't say that expressing my spontaneous self in the wake of a satisfactory tweak qualifies as a "belief".

 

As I see things, most so-called subjectivists don't post "beliefs" - even if you think that their stated experiences render them deluded.

 

Your language ("must be questioned") gives you away. You want to insist upon yourself by challenging others. In most human affairs such intrusions are unwelcome. Here is no different. There are strong words for those who impose themselves unsolicited on others.

 

You say "I don't post here often". That is what we have in common. I don't post here often because of people like you.

[The Computer Audiophile]

23 minutes ago, marce said:

As proven by the posts disagreeing with my comment...

The labels used are meaningless, subjective/objective most are a bit of both. Its the hard core beliefs, that can't be questioned, yet it is these that must be questioned if the improvements are really to be made in musical reproduction...

 

This is an example of why changes are coming. People feel stifled if others disagree, leading people to stop posting altogether. Not everyone and not every disagreement, but too often the disagreement just can't be said in a way that's acceptable. Many people are just rude to others. The only answer is to give them their own space to be rude. 

[mansr]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

People feel stifled if others disagree

I don't feel stifled if others disagree. I feel stifled when they tell me to shut up.

[Iving]

3 minutes ago, mansr said:

I don't feel stifled if others disagree. I feel stifled when they tell me to shut up.

 

You seem to be missing the point @mansr