Jump to content

sdolezalek

Premium
  • Content Count

    1167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About sdolezalek

  • Rank
    Intellectually Curious Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Bay Area, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

9576 profile views
  1. As long as you don't ask whether we know how to use it...
  2. Looks good, but in a minimum order quantity of 25 units it definitely isn't cheap. Know anyplace to get just one?
  3. sdolezalek

    HQ Player

    Jussi: After a multitude of threads discussing the digital to analog conversion, I still don't think that most visitors to this site understand the three simple principles you have laid out above: 1) If you ears are highly sensitive to time domain response -- choose [these] filters; 2) if your ears are frequency response sensitive -- choose [these] filters; and 3) if your computing or DAC system allows for conversions to occur far outside the audible band you can have the best of both worlds, but should still pay attention to which modulator you are using, so use [these] filters...(filling in the [these] designations in HQPlayer would also be helpful ) It also provides a great rationale for why many of prefer using HQPlayer for these conversions -- because we can make the choices that best suit our ears, not those of our DAC designer.
  4. That I've stopped listening to live music, other people's systems, audio shows, or any other source of fake audio quality...
  5. You don't say why you think you can/should "do better." I assume that you chose the Yggy, Pass, Martin Logan combos because you liked their sound signatures. If so, there is no reason to change any of those. It would be very helpful if you said something about where you thought your current listening was falling short. Or is it that you just want to know where an additional $3k would give you the most bang for the buck? If that is it, then the Aurender solution is not a bad one, particularly if you don't want to have to learn about noise, specifications, configurations, etc. in computers, software, upsampling, DSP, power supplies, NAA's, etc. But I might pay particular attention to what other Yggy owners here use as a front end that matches well with their Yggy as you want to make sure that your streamer outputs matches what your DAC does best with.
  6. Ted: Although it may not be possible, my original question would essentially say "What would it take, in combination of computer/HQP/NAA outputting the same signal to a Hugo TT2 to equal what an HMS does. In other words, leave the DAC static. A separate test would be to say what computer/HQP/NAA/NOS DAC combo might equal the HMS/TT2 combination in sound, but that introduces a bunch of DAC variables on top of the upsampling. Lastly, I have found that my taste in filters might not be the same as that of others. Software gives me the option of choosing the one I like best; hardware tends to lock me into the filters the designer likes best.
  7. Other than the fact that it is its own piece of hardware, does the Hugo M-Scaler do anything more than what HQPlayer does when running on a standalone computer (assuming you set its outputs to match those of the M-Scaler)? If I remember correctly, you don't use upscaling in your reference system, but it would be interesting to compare hardware vs software solutions. My guess is that the purpose designed hardware of the Hugo has some noise benefits, but the software solutions is far more easily upgradeable on a continuous basis.
  8. Just curious, are there specification data that reflect why silver would/should/could sound different than copper? I'm not disagreeing as I've heard the same thing, but I can't recall someone showing that the response curve for a siler cable is deomstrably different than the same cable but in copper.
  9. That's a weak response. Any legal action would go to whether or not LH Labs defrauded their customers. You are simply trying to legitimately gather information on how many customers deposited their money in the expectation of receiving a product and got nothing in return. That, without or without fraud, is something any subscriber/visitor here or on Head-Fi should want to know about. Thanks Jud, for at least keeping this audience informed.
  10. I think we are jumping to a lot of conclusions on limited data... 1. If you have Roon with both Tidal and Qobuz pick out some individual songs or classical pieces and check how many versions of each one (not that recording, but the piece, i.e. Piano Sonata No.3 in B-Minor) are listed for each of Tidal and Qobuz. At least in the U.S., Tidal almost always wins out (has more albums containing that piece). That being said, in looking through my own collection I have been surprised that, particularly as to Classical, there are far more albums that are only in Tidal or only in Qobuz than I would have thought. 2. Using just the standalone Tidal app or the Standalone Qobuz app (on a built for music PC and through headphones), I hear significant differences and prefer Qobuz. 3. BUT, comparing Tidal through Roon, Qobuz through Roon and ripped 16/44 through 24/192 through Roon they sound extremely close (with the "Roon Sound" being in the middle between the more euphonious Tidal and the leaner, more articulate Qobuz. I do prefer 24/192 in Qobuz over the same album in MQA through Tidal, but I really have to listen extremely carefully to think I can hear a difference between native 16/44 played as ripped, Tidal or Qobuz. 4. Adding either Audirvana or HQ Player changes things once more, but it soon becomes clear that what matters are my Izotope settings or HQP filter settings, more than what the source material was. 5. SO, while I was looking to drop one of Tidal or Qobuz in the next month or two, that now looks like a less obvious conclusion. 6. I 100% agree with Miquelito that Ethernet (in my case fiber and hopefully soon through the OpticalRendu) to the DAC is the way to go!
  11. The discussion about Roon 1.6 is so civilized here. I think in part because this audience was waiting for the Qobuz integration and we may better understand what scale of effort was required to put together the new release and integrate both Qobuz and Tidal seamlessly. By contrast, check out this thread on Roon's site: https://community.roonlabs.com/t/roon-1-6-feedback-thread/58664/613 -- the cacophony of voices screaming from 100 different, extremely personal perspectives, can't be pleasant for folks at Roon who have put a lot of effort into getting this done in time for the Qobuz US beta trial. Compared with how angry I often get at a new release of Microsoft Windows or Apple OX, I have just been sitting back and listening to Roon 1.6 with a big smile on my face....
  12. sdolezalek

    HQ Player

    Fixed the issue. Upgrading Roon to version 1.6 reset the setting in my NAA from HQ Player as "Active" to Roon ready as "Active." Just needed to find that setting and reset it to HQ Player.
  13. As to the above: 1. I notice that if I favorite the hi-res version in the Qobuz app itself, when I open Roon it shows up as say 24/192 and plays as such. If, on the other hand, I'm in Roon and search for that title, even though it shows as 24/192 when I choose it that way it plays as 16/44. So it appears that Roon isn't distinguishing between low-res and hi-res licensing rights when you search in Roon, but Roon does pick up the difference for albums selected in Qobuz itself. I have tried this across about a dozen albums and the difference is holding up. 2. Interestingly when I listen to the Tidal standalone app versus the Qobuz standalone app, i hear significant differences. When I listen to Tidal vs Qobuz vs actual downloaded files, all three sound more alike and I'm having a hard time telling any difference at all between a Qobuz 24/192 file and the same album downloaded in 24/192 from ProStudioMasters (which is as it should be). Similarly, I can hear the same minor differences between Tidal 16/44 and Qobuz 24/192 as I hear between originals at 16/44 and 24/192 (again as it should be). 3. Give me unadulterated 24/192 over MQA any day...
  14. I fixed it. Upgrading to version 1.6 seems to have reset my NAA to Roon ready rather than HQ Player as the default. Going into the NAA setup and resetting it to HQ Player fixed the problem.
  15. sdolezalek

    HQ Player

    For some reason Roon 1.6 with Qobuz seems to have broken the ability to work with HQ Player. I'm now getting an error message in Roon: "Playback failed because $ couldn't connect to HQ Player." In HQ Player under settings I also suddenly can't see my DAC anymore even though in my NAA settings the DAC clearly shows up. Any ideas?
×
×
  • Create New...