Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GUTB

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Actually I'm totally agnostic about digital vs analog, and if I could I would prefer to be able to eliminate my turntable system which is very fiddly -- since it's an open arm pod configuration if it moves even slightly it's now out of alignment and I have to bust out the $500 high accuracy SMARTractor and go through re-alignment. Of course one must go through a two-pass cleaning processes the records using ultra pure water and enzyme solutions, static brush at a minimum if I don't wash the record. Very gently clean the $4k cartridge needle tip. I'd rather just sell it off and be happy with digital...IF the quality was up to par. So my current inventory of DACs: the tube DAC (Space-Tech Labs DSD512), Mytek Liberty + linear PSU, Holo Cyan DSD. Not counting my little dongles and el-cheapo Chinese Sabre job which is happy in my TV setup. The Cyan is a DSD ladder DAC; it can take PCM but it goes through a DSD conversion process. The Liberty is a 9018KM-based DAC so it takes both PCM and DSD without conversion, but it's the older Sabre. Are these DACs just not good enough? Setting aside the tube DAC which even though is equipped with a choke isn't going to compete with a solid-state DAC in terms of noise, but what else do I need to look at? Power supplies? Clocks? I'll also mention that the DAC as well as the pre is plugged into a Chinese 500W balanced transformer, and my listening room has only sound equipment plugged into its circuit...I do have a LED lamp which I turn on at night but I hope between the isolation transformer and the amp's power filtering accessories (LessLoss noise filtering cable + in-line filter) this is taken care of. Mechanical isolation capabilities are butcher blocks, brass carpet spikes and some rollerblocks (currently under my PC speakers) and some of those Mapleshade cork and rubber footers. Right now my DAC is just sitting on a butcher block without any footer floating ontop of my carpet.
  2. This subject isn't remotely difficult. Just listen to a given cable to hear what differences there are. In my case I've listened to a bunch of different cables the experience ranged from a negative impact, no impact to a positive impact. However, the subject isn't about cables making a difference to begin with. I understand that. The issue is class warfare and social aspects of the hobby. For example, no one is stopping you from listening to a cable except yourself. If good OCC copper and high end dielectric and shielded cables with quality terminals cost $1 a foot there wouldn't be a "debate" because everyone would own them.
  3. Well, after over a year of playing around with digital some more -- DAC with an all-tube output stage, MQA-CDs through a Mytek Liberty (+ Chinese linear PSU of course), my vinyl is still superior. All of my efforts at improving digital playback help...but not in improving the gap in dynamic performance, the thing which makes my music stand out so much. Currently my digital simply consists of my CD player + the all-tube DAC (Space-Tech Lab DSD512). Oh, it claims 512 but opening it up reveals an Amenaro controller which requires a ROM flash to make that 512 work from a Windows source, something I'm not going to bother with since it's all glued on and I'm not going to power on this thing with a big bottle rectifier and a pair of KT150 big bottles while messing around with the internals). My custom built Roon+HQPlayer PC with its linear PSU, SDD isolation, 100% fanless, etc, is languishing. If I want to listen seriously the turntable setup (Triangle Arts + Chinese all-tube phono and the great Hashimoto SUT) is spun up. If I want to sit and listen while reading a book (currently studying for an exam I needed to take months ago...sigh) I'll put on a CD instead. Just to be clear, I *do* enjoy my better CDs. The Chinese CDP is crap compared to my "real" DACs and when using regular CDs going to my tube DAC it's can be quite nice still. Tonal color, density, sound stage, etc, quite nice, no complaints in that area. The Mytek and MQA playback is currently servicing my PC and headphone setup. My trusty Fostex 900s are still with me for when I want to listen to high quality MQA streams off Tidal. The PC speakers are run by a nice little Cherry amp, among the best class D I've heard and good enough for my PC speakers. My Schiit Mjolnir 2 is vastly superior to the Mytek's built-in amp. I haven't given up completely on digital, I just don't what to do to bring it up to the level of my record player.
  4. "Frequency is the number of occurrences of a repeating event per unit of time." This is the first sentence of the wikipedia article on Frequency. If it's incorrect please assist the world and make an edit.
  5. No, the ProAcs are superb speakers and I'm very happy with them. I probably won't upgrade until/if I get something TADs, Magico, Raihdo, etc. Or if I end up doing the radial speaker thing.
  6. Switching power is the enemy of audio because it gets high-frequency hash into the audio circuit and AC mains, has problems with ground loop formation, etc.
  7. Yes. Sound is energy over time. Energy from one peak to another peak over a certain period of time is the frequency, ie, the how many times these peaks arise over an arbitrary period of time (Hz). 20 kHz can be seen in the time domain as 0.05 milliseconds. Humans can react to sound energy in moments of time much lower than that, even though we can't hear the tone as a frequency of sound.
  8. Nyquist is mathematically correct, but it requires an arbitrary limit -- in reference to audio, the limits being between 20 Hz and 20 kHz. In reality, humans react to moments of sound far beyond our frequency-domain acuity would otherwise suggest. Additionally it was shown that humans do in fact respond to high-frequency music information even though we cannot consciously detect high-frequency sound. If our audio sensory system deals with frequency and time-domain elements differently, the reliance on frequency sampling as a way to get to "perfect sound" becomes problematic. This is catching up with the FACT that people can perceive the benefit of high-resolution audio and various types of filtering. I think many people in this thread have heard the benefits of high-resolution audio for themselves.
  9. And your experience with listening to reel-to-reel tapes is...?
  10. It's been a while since I watched this misinformation video. I note that comments have been disabled. For those who are confused by misinformation like this, it's just tired BS about how digital audio is perfect because of lines on an analyzer. Based on this junior-grade explanation no DACs sound different from one another and there is no benefit to any resolution of audio above Redbook. If anyone of you have have heard one DAC being better than another, or who use various filters and DSD conversion schemes to get better sound, or you find high-resolution audio sounds better than you should discard this video. If you think this misinformation is authoritative than forget about MQA you appear to think there is no such thing as high-resolution audio whatsoever. A sinewave cannot be transformed to and from a square wave without change of data. There is nothing wrong with Nyquist from a mathematical standpoint but only between two arbitrary limits (ie, 20-20k). Liken it to a circle -- no such thing exists in nature, it's a series of lines close enough together that our brains can summarize the shape as a circle, but that is an illusion. However, when Shannon-Nyquist developed the sampling theorem it was at a time before human's time-domain (and high-frequency) acuity was widely understood.
  11. Yes, thank you for some reason I didn't see the original response.
  12. I'd like to think my ProAc D30Rs are among the better values. But the point is, why can't someone make something like the ProAc but at a quarter of the price? EDIT: The latest version, the D30RS, is up to $7.8k, so I don't know if I'd still call them a better value. ProAc dealers do not offer price cuts either.
  13. If so why won't anyone describe their MQA playback chain?
  14. You only had to say "I don't have MQA". You're anti-MQA activism appears to be ideological and/or social. Why not? Weren't you curious about the sound quality improvements being reported?
  15. Well I just compared the MQA CD and regular CD version of Portrait in Jazz (Bill Evans Trio - Riverside). My initial impression listening primarily to the 2nd track is that there little difference. I think the MQA-CD has better tone on the cymbal and the cymbal decay is more defined against the background / longer lasting. Definitely one of the least different MQA vs non-MQA tests I've done. I'll do a more comprehensive test later, maybe demag the discs too. I'll note that MQA-CDs you get out of Japan like this one is are technically MQA on UHQCD media. UHQCD is a new CD media which has a priority physical mastering process and produces media that returns a much stronger signal from the laser head of a CD player. Someone on here tested it last year I believe and was able to verify this claim. Using a sampler disc I found the improvement of UHQCD is most heard in lower frequencies. I bought a non-Japan MQA CD the other day so we'll see how that sounds.
  • Create New...