Bit perfect software changing sound. How?

[PeterSt]

5 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

Well, I'm not the one saying RAM is noisy.

 

I'm just the one confused about how some kinds of access are noisier than others

 

All access is noisy. Noisy for ground-plane coupling in over at the DAC from all sorts of angles and backdoors and direct lines including galvanically isolated ones. From there the least what happens is oscillator influence, hence jitter. And there we have it.

[manueljenkin]

2 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

All access is noisy. Noisy for ground-plane coupling in over at the DAC from all sorts of angles and backdoors and direct lines including galvanically isolated ones. From there the least what happens is oscillator influence, hence jitter. And there we have it.

Just to add, by jitter, the point to probe is the clock and data pulses being fed to the dac unit.

[March Audio]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

All access is noisy. Noisy for ground-plane coupling in over at the DAC from all sorts of angles and backdoors and direct lines including galvanically isolated ones. From there the least what happens is oscillator influence, hence jitter. And there we have it.

Its all a nice story but have you got any evidence to support effect in the dac output?

[March Audio]

1 minute ago, manueljenkin said:

Just to add, by jitter, the point to probe is the clock and data pulses being fed to the dac unit.

Wrong.  The point to probe is the dac analogue output.

 

Nonetheless, do you have any evidence of issues being shown in the areas you mention?

[manueljenkin]

Just now, March Audio said:

Just now, March Audio said:

Its all a nice story but have you got any evidence to support effect in the dac output?

 

Well well, we have someone claiming something to be a story when yours is based on a fairytale.

[manueljenkin]

3 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Wrong.  The point to probe is the dac analogue output.

There are ways to fake low jitter at dac output (and it'll affect sq poorly even though it'll improve sine squiggle numbers). The parameters to measure at the dac analog output to judge fidelity at present is not very conclusive. Measuring at the input will show the differences for what they are.

[March Audio]

9 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

Claim?

That SSDsand screens are bad for sound quality.

[PeterSt]

5 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Got any evidence to back up either claim?

 

OMG. Well, the one is that you seem to be lively there:

 

 

 

and for the other you can read a full forum with shyt.

1000s of recurring customers feel like a nice backup. And I don't count the cable ones (hey, a good one for you because these are about shielding !!).

 

Further more

 

22 minutes ago, March Audio said:

What utter nonsense.  Is this like the "no one uses SSDs because they sound awful" comment you made the other day?

 

you twisted my words somewhat, but if you again start being more heavy on the wanking, ... the other day I asked you whether any of the products you sell have been created by you. There was no answer. Now, you could attest that this is irrelevant, but since we apparently need to listen to you and not to me, it is relevant. There's nothing in the audio chain I don't design or produce in-house, except for power cables. And if that were utter nonsense, I think we should be able to find some real testimonials of that.

[manueljenkin]

Just now, March Audio said:

That SSDsand screens are bad for sound quality.

SSD has access noise. Screens are not bad as long as you don't have the transport being given the job of driving it 😅.

[idiot_savant]

8 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

All access is noisy. Noisy for ground-plane coupling in over at the DAC from all sorts of angles and backdoors and direct lines including galvanically isolated ones. From there the least what happens is oscillator influence, hence jitter. And there we have it.

 

So my contention is that there are huge amounts of access that you have no control over, and a *very* small amount that you can.

 

So why are we introducing this noise-ridden thing into our precious listening rooms then? It obviously isn't for the screen ;)

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

[March Audio]

1 minute ago, manueljenkin said:

There are ways to fake low jitter there. The parameters to measure at the dac analog output to judge fidelity at present is not very conclusive. Measuring at the input will show the differences for what they are.

No there aren't.  Please explain these faking methods.

 

Anyway, as I asked, do you have anyvevidence that problems feed through to the areas you mention?

[March Audio]

21 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

SSD has access noise. Screens are not bad as long as you don't have the transport being given the job of driving it 😅.

So you claim.  So please provide some evidence that this causes a negative effect in the dac output.

 

Peter says screens are really bad.  You say not.  Which is it?

[manueljenkin]

6 minutes ago, March Audio said:

No there aren't.  Please explain these faking methods.

 

Anyway, as I asked, do you have anyvevidence that problems feed through to the areas you mention?

I can just put a 1khz oscillator at the analog section, send a 1khz input but with noisy clock and data lines. And it can still give me very low deviation at the output 😁. Now tell me if it'll produce nice song if I input a song.

[manueljenkin]

2 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Peter says screens are really bad.  You ay not.  Which is it?

We said the same thing 😂

[manueljenkin]

15 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

 

So my contention is that there are huge amounts of access that you have no control over, and a *very* small amount that you can.

 

So why are we introducing this noise-ridden thing into our precious listening rooms then? It obviously isn't for the screen ;)

 

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

Huge vs small is mostly your perception. It's about reducing issues in any area that is feasible. There's also something known as correlation. Certain types of noise correlate more to audio issues (8khz tizz from 125us polling if the system priority is too high, or other issues which cause sudden spike during these polling) than others. So it's not quite as direct as things may seem, and of course this area is too profound so we don't have any well established conclusive correlation metrics yet (and unlikely anytime soon, we haven't even figured out human hearing beyond a certain basic abstraction).

 

If you don't want "this" noise ridden thing, maybe get a vinyl record player (but live with its own flaws).

[March Audio]

8 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

I can just put a 1khz oscillator at the analog section, send a 1khz input but with noisy clock and data lines. And it can still give me very low deviation at the output 😁. Now tell me if it'll produce nice song if I input a song.

So you are saying that everyone is just measuring an analogue signal gen and not the dac output.  All dac measurements are fake.

 

Hahahahahahahahhahahahaahahhhahaaaaaahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

Please get a grip. 

[idiot_savant]

Just now, manueljenkin said:

Huge vs small is mostly your perception.

Huge: 2Gbytes/second

small:  176.4kbytes/second.

 

I don't think that's perception, that's pretty simple math.

 

So I can't use a CD player then?

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

 

 

[March Audio]

6 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

Huge: 2Gbytes/second

small:  176.4kbytes/second.

 

I don't think that's perception, that's pretty simple math.

 

So I can't use a CD player then?

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

 

 

It's like we have entered some kind of parallel universe. 😁

[manueljenkin]

2 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

Huge: 2Gbytes/second

small:  176.4kbytes/second.

 

I don't think that's perception, that's pretty simple math.

 

So I can't use a CD player then?

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

 

 

You surely can use a cd player. But then it's got its own problems that you may have to correct and could get expensive and I can't turn it to a pc to do general purpose computation when I need it to (when I'm not listening to music).

[PeterSt]

11 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

So my contention is that there are huge amounts of access that you have no control over, and a *very* small amount that you can.

 

That could be correct. And I say this genuinely because give me a new 6 months and something new will have emerged improving again (eh, vastly). This can only happen if boatloads are still present.

Btw, I am going to invest constellations (which btw is true for noise source that may let computers fail (falling stars)).

 

12 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

So why are we introducing this noise-ridden thing into our precious listening rooms then?

 

I'm afraid you must help me on that one. What do you mean ?

OK, you mean the playback PC itself, right ? well, because everything else is worse ? (I recall to be a first with "network player" experiments instead of CDP, although Squeezebox was there too at the same time.

Not that money is telling, but I came from a Teac P1 transport. And mind you, people these days are still claiming CDP transports to sound better than PC's. But then people also try to tell that Vinyl is the way to go.

 

Nobody said it is easy and in fact I claim (all over the place) that it is mighty difficult to let sound digital right (as in: surpasses vinyl by many audio miles).  One thing: where needed I /Phasure can supply the whole shebang. But this thread is not about that.

[idiot_savant]

1 minute ago, manueljenkin said:

You surely can use a cd player. But then it's got its own problems that you may have to correct and could get expensive and I can't turn it to a pc to do general purpose computation when I need it to (when I'm not listening to music).

 

What problems does the CD player have that I have to correct?

Why can't I have a PC, that I turn off when I'm listening to music, *and* a CD player, that I can listen to as well?  Maybe even both at once?

 

Or is it better to create loads of alleged problems with "access noise" for myself, and then have to keep plugging and unplugging screens etc whenever I want to switch tasks?

 

I'm genuinely confused - we apparently add noise, that we apparently have to jump through hoops to ameliorate when we don't have to at all?

 

your friendly neighbourhood idiot

[Racerxnet]

24 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

Well well, we have someone claiming something to be a story when yours is based on a fairytale.

I'd suggest that you are the one with fairy dust at the end of a rainbow, looking for a pot of gold. This is a objective forum, show proof or take it elsewhere. You deleted my reply like a wimp with no credible evidence. They pushed March Audio out on the other thread. Provide evidence on the software you are supporting. 

[March Audio]

6 minutes ago, manueljenkin said:

You surely can use a cd player. But then it's got its own problems that you may have to correct and could get expensive and I can't turn it to a pc to do general purpose computation when I need it to (when I'm not listening to music).

So considering that pretty much all audio recordings are made with computers these days I suppose you think that the quality is stuffed before we replay it at home?

[PeterSt]

11 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

small:  176.4kbytes/second.

 

Audio words. 2x 32 bits. And it is quite common to have that at 705.6 (768) these days.

I don't like to be your pain.

 

12 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

Huge: 2Gbytes/second

 

Maybe I should ask someone in the room over here what he thinks about this (with his current course "Terra Hz systems".

All is relative.

Sadly, it is such idiotic bandwidths I wok with myself.  6MHz interlink -0.5dB over 130 meters.

Oh, especially for March Audio: Single Ended coax.

 

Of course I am crazy !

But if it improves sound, no matter it implies a theoretical spitting of HF only ...

Ah wait, this brings be to the subject of (March Audio's) slew rate again. ... Yes, and that at a DAC's slew rate of 2000V/us.

If you want more I can spit more. I never stop. 

 

If I only could be banned.

[PeterSt]

8 minutes ago, idiot_savant said:

and then have to keep plugging and unplugging screens etc whenever I want to switch tasks?

 

Huh ?

Time for a break !