Jump to content

kdubious

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kdubious

  • Rank
    Freshman Member
  1. I assumed this hack was a marketing tactic. I'm certainly a byte cynical.
  2. I've been dreaming up a backup solution, and wonder if anyone would find it useful / affordable / worth it. I think I've worked the features and costs out like so: The tool indexes your music library. It tracks changes (file moved or renamed) in a local index that is backed up to the web. It tracks deletes by setting a flag in the index. Removing from cloud backup storage requires a manual step to reach out and actually delete the file. This would address accidentally deleting a file / folder. It tracks additions by re-indexing each night, and incrementally uploading the changes. It can be throttled for performance and bandwidth usage. Certainly open to input on features. Still with me? Restoring Can be done by download. This will be SLOW. Can be done by requesting an HDD Pricing Storage: Google Drive does 10TB / mo for $99 / mo. I think I could work things out to be $5 / TB / Month. Restore: This would probably cost $30 / TB for the download option and $30 / TB + $300 to put the data on a drive and ship it. Think of this like a safety deposit box for your audio library with some built-in automation. Please ping me if you're interested to learn more. And please let me know if this is too commercial for me to post. Glad to move the post if it's not appropriate here.
  3. I knew what you meant, I was asking which ones. I haven't played with source and sink. My philosophical view is "you don't have to filter noise you don't create." and a powered sub to suck out bass feels like a filter. Have you heard this done really well?
  4. By far, the most life-changing experience I've had with audio gear came when I built a few "wide band traps" out of industrial insulation (OC704, I think), measured my space with RoomEQ, located them properly to alleviate the issues I had with a few nasty reflections and, somewhat related, decay. Total investment was a few hundred bucks, and a couple of days time. (I even hung 2 4' x 4' panels with suspended ceiling hardware to kill a nasty reflection off the ceiling) No single component change has ever been so drastic as properly treating a room. Some speaker upgrades have come close.
  5. I agree, the ADC, whatever effect it has, should be mostly consistent. (that thread about playback software break-in has me re-thinking everything I know about everything!) What I was hoping to convey is this: If the ADC "softens", then a wonderfully neutral DAC will sound soft. And a bright / harsh DAC may end up sounding wonderful. Not yet, but I'm curious, so I will when I get a chunk of time. I'll give it a serious listen, too. I've had an issue or two along the way. But in general, yes, it's a wonderful set up. Not the only thing I ever listen to, but definitely my go-to system. I've learned to live without the ultra-low end. I can't get myself to use a sub. And the "esl" in "esl"dude refers to?
  6. I'll do my best to avoid the rabbit hole.... but there are many. Let's assume "Tweak A" changes the sound of our system. Is it likely that it changes the sound in one hyper-specific way? Or is it likely that it changes it in many different ways? In the case of multiple subtle changes, what do we say when one is more accurate and one less accurate? Does it sound better? Just different? A little better and a little worse? What about the Escher Staircase effect? I like tweak A better than tweak B (or it's more accurate). I like tweak B better than tweak C. I like tweak C better than tweak A. Again, ignoring the double-blind test, it still *really* helps to have a numeric rating and an entire set of criteria upon which to assign those numbers. I can recall a few humorous times when a few of us were hyper focused on improving the realism of highs. We had a few reference tracks we would use (with cymbals, bells, flutes, etc.). And we had a few tweaks that were quite impressive. But when we took off the blinders, and again evaluated the musicality of the sound as a whole (across a ton of parameters), our tweaks had to be tossed out in favor of overall sound. -- In a test like this, if DAC A has harsh highs, and the ADC tends to soften highs, then DAC A may appear more accurate. DAC E, with it's wonderfully accurate reproduction of highs is ruined by the ADC. (in my fictitious example). Or assume the ADC is totally neutral, but my DAC trashes highs (ok, please don't assume that my DAC trashes highs, that would hurt my feelings, but you get the point). I may still pick A over E if I'm focused on highs. Now, let's assume the ADC and my DAC are neutral... but my room, and all it's gloriously shiny windows, is a little bit bright (sonically, not visually). You see where I'm going. -- So why didn't I vote? On the one hand, I love this type of thing, in general. But in this case, there are too many variables that make the results not very meaningful. Invite me to sit down (blind folded or not) and listen to a few pieces of gear and evaluate them on a numeric scale with a well thought out checklist: I'm there.
  7. Thanks for the level headed / balanced post, Cormorant. Maybe we could call it a "Swiss Army Knife" approach, since "kitchen sink" doesn't sound nearly as sexy? And on a camping trip, a Swiss Army Knife makes perfect sense. Preparing a fine meal, I'll take a 10" Henckels.
  8. Have you read the UPnP spec? The problem (sonically) with open type systems (like USB, PCI, and UPnP) is that since they are designed to accommodate all sorts of communication with all sorts of devices, compromises are made that would not need to be made if you were to create an audiophile only spec. The advantage is that they are easy to adopt. The question at this point is why does "proprietary" mean "worse still?" Can you really immediately equate "proprietary" with "sounds bad?" JRiver and JPlay are proprietary, right? Same with Windows and Mac. Anyone else can take a shot at developing (open or closed source) an audiophile focused data transfer protocol. My point is, in my opinion (which is derived from my experience and collected data), when we borrow an existing "open" / "universal" means of transferring audio data/signals there is a sonic price to pay.
  9. In this case, "the same applies to" is referring to the sentence immediately preceding: "increased adoption of the standard, but there was a sonic price to pay". So, I'm making the claim that RCA based S/PDIF, USB, PCI and USB are easily adoptable but with a sonic price to pay.
  10. I'm not entirely familiar with iSCSI, so I can't speak to it. I can speak to USB, PCI, UPnP and RCA based S/PDIF. There's a downside (at least one) to taking an existing standard, one that you don't control, and trying to adapt it to high end audio. For RCA based S/PDIF, a digital transfer method was developed that made use of the already existing RCA connector. But doing so meant that the clock and data had to be combined. It certainly increased adoption of the standard, but there was a sonic price to pay. I think people are starting to agree that the same applies to PCI based sound cards, USB DAC inputs and UPnP based audio. Of course I'm biased, but I think the Roon approach is fundamentally quite sound... er, solid. (I'm not biased because I'm a Roon partner, I'm a Roon partner because I'm biased). This is a very-much-not-universal approach -- in other words, you can't print over the RAAT protocol, or watch TV. What you can do is send audio data (from storage, be that local or cloud) from "standard PC" type gear in the most efficient, accurate and cost effective way possible. Then, on the receiving end, you can literally isolate yourself from that dirty pc gear, clock the data as tightly as you possibly can then send it to a DAC (device or chip) for conversion to analog over I2S or another audio protocol. There are no universal bus translations in the way, no extra conversions.
  11. Assume: A filter that is influenced by the prior 100 samples, a 100000 sample track ("Track 1") that starts at sample 1 (and ends at sample 100000), and a second track ("Track 2") that starts at sample 50 (relative to Track 1) and ends at sample 100000 (relative to Track 1, for a total length of 999950). Once you get to sample 150, the preceding 100 samples are the same in each track. So you'd have slightly different sound between the point where Track 2 starts in Track 1, and the actual intro in Track 2. But the outros, and the entire remainder of the tracks, (again assuming a filter that is only influenced by the preceding 100 samples) would sound the same. Maybe you left out something in the explanation of your filter?
  12. I think different people get different things out of their participation in "high end audio." Musical Enjoyment A feeling of success in The Pursuit of Better The pleasure of Visual Aesthetics Bragging Rights / Status Does a silver fork make a steak taste better? Maybe it does a little. There's no hint of rusty iron. It's certainly better than a plastic fork that breaks. How about eating it at the country club? You can draw similar analogies with cars (I'm quite fond of Lamborghini), homes... furniture even. I was chatting with someone recently who hand-crafts bowls out of native North Carolina woods. It takes her HOURS to make one, days even. Her material costs are relatively low, using local wood. And they are beautiful. But in the end, she has to sell the thing for a couple of hundred dollars if she wants to make a living. And her bowls can't even hold soup all that well! It's really expensive to manufacture custom items in low quantity. We live in a globalized world that's set up for high volume. (Try to get a prototype of a good looking custom aluminum chassis made and you'll see what I mean!) All of the overhead setup expenses get dumped into the few you make, not spread out across 10,000. All of your component orders are at the highest price, lacking volume discounts. It's just more expensive. If we're talking purely about Musical Enjoyment, that can be had in rather high quality on the cheap (both relative terms were intentional). If we're talking about bragging rights, that involves giving up a bit more of what you've got. For the avid DIY'er, that means time, technical know how, trial and error and a graveyard of failed parts and projects. For the uber-wealthy, that means dropping a bunch of their cash on a piece (audio gear, watch, car, house, furniture) that one of their friends doesn't have. I've spent plenty of time in my life angry about the "haves", thinking I was a "have not." But in some ways, we're all "haves" and we're all "have nots." Oh, and for honesty's sake, I have not a Lamborghini.
  13. "computer sending stream over galvanicly isolated Ethernet to a DAC where it is received without further processing or conversion back to a problematic USB output/input--sounds better." In my experience, having a purpose built protocol (like Roon) pass audio data over Ethernet to a processor, then have an isolated clock board drive a processor to clock the data to an I2S signal, then pipe that (also galvanically isolated) to the DAC chips sounds best in practice. All of the "U"'s in audio have a major downside to their universality, sound quality. Something needs to pick up the packets on the Ethernet cable and assemble them into something clockable. The question is what, and how well can you isolate it from the signal itself.
  14. Not sure if I'm allowed to answer, but I think I can. We (Musica Pristina) sell a Roon Ready DAC with an isolated (internal transformer galvanic isolation up to 4kv) Ethernet input. It's the Virtuoso Network DAC. There's Roon's RAAT protocol pulling in audio data, then we clock it and pass i2s to our DAC board. No UPnP, no DLNA.
  15. When we were building PC based servers, I used to start with a ham radio linear supply, then tweak it a little. I had tried acopian, condor, and about a half dozen or so other industrial supplies. I also tried a few of the "pico-pc" style dc adaptors, and landed on 2 good ones that i had to import. Somewhere in storage I've got a box of these. I think I have a few 12a/12v linear psus as well. PM me if you're interested in one.
×
×
  • Create New...