Audiophiles: Dead or Dying?

[sandyk]

5 hours ago, firedog said:

Hell, you can get great results using a Raspberry Pi as a streamer and that's less than $100. Even $50.

 

You just proved his point !   😜

[sandyk]

7 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 
Really? I thought Gumby's claim was that all low-priced audio equipment is shite. 

 Streaming, especially using the above mentioned is nowhere near as good as can be obtained  locally with good source equipment when playing even CDs from before the Loudness wars, no matter how pleasing it may sound to easily satisfied people like yourself and Frank .😜

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Archimago said:

Streaming lossless vs. local playback/CD with the same original data obviously doesn't make a difference if it's bit-perfect to your DAC. It's not whether it's "pleasing"; it just doesn't factually matter.

 

 

 Utter rubbish ! Even the PSU area of a computer can  change a little how a Digital Music file sounds, even changes to the PSU area for the OS SSD such as a much cleaner low noise +5V supply.(see attached +12V to Dual +5V PSU <4uV noise)

I am by far from the only member that has reported marked improvements by using a Linear PSU, or improved voltage regulation to the ancillary devices such as SSDs and USB areas. for a PC or Server too.

The front end matters whether you want to believe it or not. Do you really believe that the 100s of A.S. members that retrofitted the Uptone Linear PSU and reported marked improvements in SQ were hearing a different stream of 1s and 0s before and after the changes ?

I don't doubt that you believe that all the reports were due to EXPECTATION  BIAS , which is highly insulting to those many members, as well as the majority that post in Rajiv's massive thread in the Music Servers section of the forum.

A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming 

I note that you also appear to believe that high res is also a waste of time, despite the numerous reports to the contrary , and measurements by highly qualified members like Jussi , and YES, I was able to hear and report back ,clear and accurate differences between Frederick V's posted X and Y files where an original 24/96 file was converted to 16/44.1 and back again.. 

  A recent suggestion by one and a half to securely earth the cases of the internal SSDs in my Desktop PC by measuring the mV difference between their cases and the 0 volts of the internal SMPS PSU, and reducing it by earthing improvements resulted in MARKED improvements in SQ via Coax SPDIF WITHOUT any change in the exported Binary Data. In fact, the original saved file on my old internal HDD, now sounds markedly worse than when this file is copied from there  to another internal SSD/HDD  or USB Memory stick when played from System Memory after these changes, when played with JRiver 26.

 NO, I did NOT expect any more than minimal changes at best, when I followed Gary's advice.

 

I would also recommend that other members using Desktop PC's try one and a half's suggestions. It won't cost them any money either, just a few minutes of their time.

(The 0 volts of an SSD or HDD is internally connected to their metal case)

[sandyk]

18 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I didn't see anything in your post that addresses "streaming lossless vs. local playback/CD".

Tom

You appear to believe that the converted file that they are playing was created using a very low noise perfect server, and that there is no degradation in the TX and RX paths.(Jitter etc.) You don't even know that the music you are listening to hasn't had some degree of compression or is even a bit accurate copy of the original Music CD or file. Add to that ,that no WiFi connection which of necessity uses modulation and demodulation techniques is completely blameless, any more than a conversion to Toslink and back again either, as much as we would like to believe it is . That is why many now prefer an Ethernet connection, where even then, many get improved results when using an Ethernet Regen.

 

Are you able to directly save any of your streamed music for comparison purposes ?

 

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

You appear to be confusing local streaming like Rajiv and many, many other members here are doing with streaming from services like Tidal, Amazon Music, Qobuz, etc.

 

I am, of course, asking about the former.

 

 

The 1st and 2nd sentences still apply, as does the question I asked

[sandyk]

23 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

I don't stream music but even, if I did, it would be music that I ripped or downloaded myself so the idea of saving the streamed data seems to make little sense to me.

 

The fact that numerous members here locally stream their music suggests that the benefits greatly outweigh the issues you have raised.

Many people just like the convenience and variety.

Don't forget too, that the files saved on their servers will have been highly compressed before you get to hear them to reduce storage space. If it doesn't matter, why don't they just have one compression size for .flac files (the most compressed setting) and why did they eventually provide a non compressed version if these things don't matter ?

For that matter, why did JRiver eventually cave in to demands and provide a play from System Memory option ?

 Clearly, a lot of customers demanded it because it sounds better to them.

Perhaps North Americans have more disposable income and don't mind paying for the same music every time they play it ?

I seriously doubt that Streaming is anywhere near as popular in many countries such as Au. and N.Z. 

In fact, in Au. recently there has been a marked increase in the sales figures of CD and Vinyl since the Covid 19 lockdown, .which was a surprise.

 

I asked about the saving of the files so that you and others are able to do a comparison with their own locally ripped copies.

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

Again, you are confusing streaming services with local streaming of your own music.

 

 No I am not. I am talking about directly listening to music "from the Clouds"

 You are still at the mercy of the compression and file size reduction techniques used by Subscription  services, with no guarantee that the content is a bit perfect replica of the original CD etc. track. , which is why I suggested doing a listening and Binary comparison with a locally ripped CD track of the same album . Bear in mind too, that many of the streamed tracks are likely to be remastered versions from after the start of the loudness wars in some genres, perhaps even  MQA corrupted ? 😝

[sandyk]

15 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I am eternally grateful that not all digital experts and engineers were of the same mindset because if they were we would still be listening to 80s digital "perfect sound forever" which in "fact" sounded like garbage.

 Ditto..

Firedog brought up streaming with very cheap gear.

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

Reports of my untimely demise have been greatly exaggerated...

 IIRC, you prefer LP over most digital offerings too, which suggests perhaps that mainstream Digital must need further improving ?

[sandyk]

10 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

Its not necessarily due to sound quality, I enjoy the process and the memories that my vinyl albums bring back as well.

 

 

 I felt the same about Laser Disc and would have liked to seen it further improved due to technological advances.

 In fact, due to contactless reading, it could have ousted LPs due to no degradation after several playings , as well as good artwork.

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I genuinely believe and without doubt that technology has evolved such that much more modestly priced gear can produce excellent sound. I also believe that the expensive high-end area has equally evolved to the point of breathtakingly good sound quality if you are willing to chase the price line curve of diminishing returns.

 Yet there is "still a vast difference between "excellent and what I heard with your system.

[sandyk]

41 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

As I said already, I'm not talking about this kind of streaming and neither are the folks in Rajiv's thread you keep mentioning. 

 

They are typically streaming their own music from a NAS unit attached to their own network although they may also use streaming services as well as another source of music.

 

I would very surprised if any serious audiophiles use streaming services as their primary source for music.

There appears to be quite a few members that are doing that these days judging by numerous posts.

If you are talking about local streaming of your own rips, I have already covered both types in my original post

 The use of the word STREAMING suggests making it accessible at many or non fixed locations in the premises, NOT a single location, usually via WiFi, or wired to a number of different locations.

[sandyk]

8 hours ago, botrytis said:

I mean Benchmark has stated period that Linear PS are not need as a well designed switching supply gives less noise than an LPS. I can't argue with them.

 

 Unfortunately, the majority of Consumer switching supplies are cheap generic Asian junk, and also inject quite a bit of junk back into the A.C. mains sewer, which may affect other lower signal devices .

My PC still uses a 600W SMPS, but I further clean up the residual noise to the SSDs and LG BR writer., without needing to use extra Linear PSUs like many do, which gives the likelihood of minor earth loops.

[sandyk]

7 hours ago, plissken said:

I use a VPN Client on my Phone to my PFSense box and use the JRemote app to stream music from my local server while on the go. If I have the needed cell coverage (which I do in town) it's no problem. 

 That's fine if you feel the need to have music wherever you go. An I.T. friend of mine from DIY Audio has been doing similar for years before it even became fashionable here, but only the whole house.

[sandyk]

4 hours ago, Albrecht said:

I think that one of the bigger mistakes is that people mis-apply digital file playback, - thinking that they are going to get "better" playback for less money. This is disproven significantly when proper testing occurs....

 I agree. Some members spend a small fortune on Vinyl playback, optimise the tracking ,reduce all vibration etc. and then spend only a small fraction of that on the digital side, and wonder why Digital disappoints them.

[sandyk]

7 hours ago, John Dyson said:

I have the feeling that those who do love legacy recordings, their hearing must be suppressing the -50dB of hiss, when the actual tape is -60dB or better. 

 

 Perhaps, but it still creates a mush around everything. Most would be aware of the much poorer quality, but the contents matter more to those who lived through that era. The same applies to movies and Video where the quality can be vastly better these days with every single blemish showing, even a " 5'oclock shadow ": at 2'oclock.

[sandyk]

32 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

social change is inevitable but music and its appreciation will always be part of our cultural fabric I believe. Whether it's gathering around a piano in the parlour in the 1800s, listening to a radio set in the 1930s, or now listening to music on one's phone.

 Or gathering around listening to a Pianola being played and watching the rolls being changed

( I  have a CD of Gershwin Plays Gershwin The Piano Rolls. )

[sandyk]

44 minutes ago, firedog said:

MO, you need more experience listening to equipment under unsighted conditions. I bet you and many other audiophiles would fail to differentiate or pick out the the so called "lo-fi", "mid-fi", and some much more expensive pieces in many cases if you did unsighted comparisons: sources, DACs, and amps. It's easy to convince yourself you have golden ears under sighted listening conditions.

 

And I'm not saying everything sounds the same. I am saying that audiophiles both hear non-existent differences when using sighted listening, and also exaggerate very small differences into something that "totally changes the sound" they are hearing. That's what sighted listening does. It's been demonstrated multiple times. For whatever reason, many audiophiles are unwilling to test this for themselves. 

 All of the listening sessions that Audiophile Neuroscience and several friends, including a qualified E.E. have been involved in have been under NON SIGHTED conditions.

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Read the Harman research.

 Why ? 

 

 

Quote

 Are you trying to say biased results from sighted listening don't exist? I'm sorry, those "golden ear" audiophiles can - and do - fool themselves also. The "listening sessions" don't mean much in the face of actual resrearch and multiple demonstrations of the effect of sighted listening over decades. 

I neither said or implied anything like that.

 You appear to be conducting a vendetta against  "golden ear" audiophiles and more expensive Audiophile products to justify your own choices, and apparently believe that non sighted listening .will show that there is very little value (if any) in paying any more for audio than your typical budget,

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, kumakuma said:

 

Maybe for you. My self-esteem isn't as fragile as yours appears to be. 👺

 

 Perhaps it's higher than it has a right to be though ?  😋