Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tmtomh

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I apologize in advance for not recalling all the details of everything you have tried earlier in the process. That said, I would recommend you forget telnetting into the Sony and trying navigate its file system and such remotely. The Sony's own menus (I forget exactly where) will identify the USB stick for you and tell you if it's mounted as sda1, sdb1, or sdc1, etc. Also, I honestly cannot recall for sure, but isn't the Sony's disc drawer supposed to open automatically a few moments after you install the USB key? If it is supposed to, and yours is not, then I would suspect a problem with the files in the AutoScript folder on your USB key, or perhaps a formatting issue with your USB key. If the USB key does make the Sony's drawer pop open (or if I am misremembering and it's not supposed to make it pop open), there still could be a problem with the script file in your AutoScript folder. There are universal scripts out there that enable both telnet/local ripping, and remote/server ripping - but.I could not for the life of me to get SACD ripping on my Sony to work with those scripts. I had two use a super-basic, remote/server-only script (that has like three lines of code and only one or two commands in it), which @MikeyFresh supplied (or perhaps linked to) before I could get it to work. You should use whatever method you prefer of course, but my recommendation is to forget telnet and rip remotely to your computer using the server method. Use a simple, server-only script, and for good measure unplug the Sony from AC power and then plug it back in, so it will again mount your USB key as sda1 - if you don't turn the Sony off (not just sleep, as far as I know, but turn it off - hence unplug and replug it), it will mount the USB key as sdb1 when you re-insert it, and sdc1 after that, and sdd1 after that, and so on - and that will break the SACD ripping script.
  2. In my experience - both my own direct experience and seeing others' experiences reported here - the most likely problem with a Sony unit is not tenet/IP/networking. Rather, it's a problem with getting the Sony unit to unmount and "give up control" of the SACD so the SACD ripping app can do its thing. This is totally consistent with the problem you are having: You can see the Sony on your network; you can ping it; it's reachable at its IP address - but the actual SACD ripping executable won't work. These are not the symptoms of a network problem, but rather of a problem with not having set up the Sony machine to ensure it doesn't monopolize control of the SACD once the drawer has been closed. You won't be able to rip using the local/telnet method or the remove server method as long as this is the problem. The difficult, manual way to make the Sony "let go" of the SACD is to navigate its menus into the settings and toggle the stereo/multichannel setting. @Phthalocyanine discovered this trick when he first spread the news that the Sony units can do SACD ripping: it doesn't matter if you toggle from stereo to multichannel or the reverse - the act of doing the toggle forces the Sony to unmount the SACD, allowing the ripper to take over. But the easier method is what @MikeyFresh has elaborated earlier this thread: the "sleep" method. Set the Sony to "quick start" mode. Then instead of pressing the eject button to close the disc drawer and load your SACD, press the power button. That will put the machine to sleep, loading the SACD but preventing the machine from taking control of it - therefore allowing the SACD ripping executable to function. I am grateful and filled with respect for those who've helped us be able to rip SACDs. I will say, though, that after a couple of dozen pages of discussion about Sony machine SACD ripping in particular, there's entirely too much discussion of telnet, network issues, and IP address stuff - that's not the major issue with the Sonys. It's the SACD unmounting/control issue, almost every time.
  3. tmtomh

    CD players are back ?

    Thanks for the link! And some sensible points from Schiit in that post too:
  4. tmtomh

    Subjective / Objective , Philosophy of Science

    What you say here is quite reasonable. And if your statement - that you have no "belief" in tubes but just find you prefer their sound - was where most subjectivist statements and claims ended, I don't think there'd be any issue. But as you well know, that's often not where the claims end. Instead, many folks will expand on their preferences to further claim that tube amplifiers have higher fidelity to the source than better-measuring solid-state amplifiers. Again, if they were fine with the notion that tubes are less linear but that their predominantly 2nd-order distortion can make them more pleasant to listen to, that would be fine. But the claim often is that tubes have more fidelity - and at times the claim goes even further: such gear has more fidelity because of the features that make it measure worse, or else because of some other mysterious characteristic that we haven't thought to measure or figured out how to measure. Now, with tubes this discussion/debate still is relatively easy to have, because the distortion characteristics of tubes (along with the distortion characteristics of, say. Class A/B solid-state amps) are well-known. But when it comes to something like, for example, computer hard drives, then the discussion becomes impossible. "X brand of hard drive produces a much better soundstage image than Y brand of hard drive" cannot reasonably be interpreted as a mere subjective preference. It's a claim based on a belief, namely, that there's something about different hard drives that can impact the subtle, analogue-style qualities of sound. That "subjective experience" of hard drives' alleged sonic differences requires an underlying belief in unspecified differences that are somehow in the bits and bytes and yet not in the bits and bytes; that are not in any discernible or measurable way transmitted through the very well-known mechanism by which a hard drive's data ends up in a computer's RAM buffer, and yet are somehow transmitted nonetheless. And the reason I know that an underlying belief system must exist for these "in my experience hard drive X sounds better" claims, is that whenever someone who claims to hear differences between hard drives gets challenged on that, they don't respond with "well, I just happen to prefer this hard drive." Instead, they respond by challenging the basic principles of data storage and digital data transmission. Now, to be clear, I am not trying to saddle you personally with this belief system. I'm only saying that, respectfully, I don't think your (and others') subjective preference for tubes is sufficient evidence to claim that subjectivism is not a belief.
  5. tmtomh

    Newest iMac i5 top spec quiet?

    Evidence or documentation for this claim?
  6. tmtomh

    Chromecast Audio is Dead

    Yes, just snapped up two of them, because for the price it's worth having them around even if I'm not yet sure exactly what I'm going to do with them. Google store already was out of stock, but Staples has them (as of this comment, anyway).
  7. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    Still no simple, unqualified apology, from you on behalf of LHL, to the customers who paid money and have gotten nothing. Why is that so difficult for you to do? Why is it so difficult for you to understand that a customer's tone in their messages, or their level of visibility on forums, has absolutely, positively nothing to do with whether or not they deserve an apology? Why is it so difficult for you to understand that even if an apology won't quell all their complaints, it's still the the necessary, expected, and right thing to do? Why is it so difficult for you to understand that an apology needs to be made without strings attached? (By making such an apology you would not give up your prerogative - you still would be free to defend the company in other, separate statements/comments.) And why is it so difficult for you to understand that by vilifying and trying to isolate a "small group of unhappy people," you are only reinforcing the cycle of people posting across multiple forums, continually weighing in on threads, and continually sending you nasty notes? So long as LHL won't give them even a token or symbolic bit of satisfaction to help relieve some of their frustration, and so long as LHL keeps poking them with a stick as you have here, the cycle will continue. You are LHL, you are the company - you are the one who needs to be the adult and de-escalate. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?
  8. tmtomh

    Cable differences are real

    So then would all the cables' responses look different when used in an actual analogue audio interconnect situation?
  9. tmtomh

    Cable differences are real

    Very interesting! So the Audioquest wasn't 9 or 11, but I'm glad Audioquest hasn't fully let us down, since #8 has that bizarre, enormous dip! 🙂 What do you think causes that? It's also interesting that - if I read the images right - the 1.5m and especially 3m Maplin cables' frequency responses are a bit more ragged than most of the others. So in general, it seems to be: - Shorter and coax cables look pretty good - Mid-length Maplins look okay but not as good - Audioquest and long cables look bad Yes?
  10. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    If there's nothing you can do, then why are you here? So far all you've done is vilify your own customers - accusing them of telling lies about your company and characterizing them as a tiny group of "main offenders," impossible-to-please cranks who "cross-pollinate across forums." If your purpose here is simply to try to defend a company with no reputation left to defend, then @The Computer Audiophile might want to consider bouncing your user account (or I should say your two accounts, which violates the forum's policies I believe) right out of here. The only thing worse than a PR flak is a PR flak who claims they're something else.
  11. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    The finances aren't there to do anything on a massive scale - and yet you claim that only 30 backers are really upset at this point. So why not offer those 30 at least a token recompense, instead of vilifying them as a way of trying to minimize the awfulness of what LH has done? Seems like a win-win.
  12. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    I told you no such thing, and I do not think you shouldn't work for LH/L (although it would help if you clarified if you work for LH, for LHL, or both, since apparently they are separate companies). I merely asked a question. If you can't answer it, just say so. This isn't about you. Stop trying to win arguments and start acting like the customer service expert you claim to be.
  13. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    Can you verify that none of the money that's paying for your salary/consultancy has come from the pockets of the IGG backers?
  14. tmtomh

    LH Labs. No delivery after 2.5 Years

    This is the aspect of your approach and attitude, as someone with "10 years Customer Service background," that just stuns me. This isn't a debate where there are "both sides." This is a company - LH/LHL - and a group of people who are a customer/investor hybrid. This is not a contest of peers or equals, nor is it a situation in which two parties have a symmetrical level or degree of responsibility to each other. Folks have paid their money already, sometimes $1,000s, and have been waiting for years, only to get nothing. As customers the evidence suggests that many of them have been fleeced. As investors, they've simply made a bad bet - but as you surely know, when there is evidence of incompetence, poor performance, or possible false representations, even investors have cause to sue and seek redress (and they certainly are not shy about expressing their displeasure). So either way, LHL - which you are part of by virtue of getting paid to represent them - owes something to its backers, and its backers owe LHL nothing. While neither you nor LHL should simply accept lies told about you, or ad hominem abuse directed at you, when it comes to questions, serious concerns, and claims that are reasonable and logical, your job is to clearly and apologetically acknowledge claims about LHL that are accurate or substantively true, and to correct the record specifically, precisely, and non-defensively when they are not. Your role is not to introduce yourself as someone who is "here to help" and then act as though you are an unaffiliated, neutral mediator between two sides that are equally irrational and/or equally prone to bad actions or false statements. In this regard, it's quite striking that you haven't once apologized to any of the backers who've posted in this thread. No, no, no, no. "When 100% false things are aimed at a company" - that is a terribly misleading and deflecting statement, and you know it (or should know it). So too is this: This makes it sound like you have tried every reasonable manner of handling updates, which you most certainly have not. It is a norm in backer-based campaigns, across all the platforms, for backers to get regular, direct emailed, periodic updates on the campaign. I never backed an LHL IGG campaign (thankfully), but I've done others and of course some of the updates are dressed-up nothing-burgers. I've also backed one campaign that is 2-3 years behind the original delivery date. But the company provides updates directly to the backers - they don't require backers to search out threads on specialist web forums, and then scold backers with "I've said this over and over" - that's just appalling customer service behavior. And while you might not have had any control over prior direct-communication opportunities, you are the one who's now scolding your backers and making it sound like the problem is that your irrational backers will complain "no matter how you handle updates." Shame on you. You know full well that you are in the position of getting inevitable complaints not because of communication, but rather because of a failure to deliver the products themselves. The correct response is to apologize repeatedly and offer some form of recompense, even if limited finances make it a token offering. The correct response is not to paint yourself as a hapless victim of a mob of angry people. If there is no accurate timeline - in other words no timeline at all - then any stated commitment to fulfill orders is by definition not meaningful. This is the same as your "both sides" deflection and your "I volunteered my time, I am getting paid" formulation. You can engage in doublespeak, or you can engage in the "I'm going to be straight with you even if it comes off as not very customer-friendly" approach. But you can't engage in both at the same time. I will be happy to do this. Simply pre-pay me $3,000 via PayPal, and I will fly to the Asian cities in question, personally survey their inventory, and send you any photographic evidence I might find. I can't say right now exactly when I'll get to it, but you can rest assured that I have a meaningful commitment to follow through.
  15. Very generous of you! If you have one or more 128GB SSDs remaining after sending stuff to dragon_vibe, I could use a couple. Thanks!