Jump to content

sdolezalek

  • Content Count

    1238
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About sdolezalek

  • Rank
    Intellectually Curious Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Bay Area, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

11290 profile views
  1. As a statement of "philosophy" I think this was actually a good start. I think Firedog is jumping the gun on where we go from here. I would certainly agree that measurements aren't everything (particularly because we don't know exactly what to measure and our instruments require us to choose certain data points to ascribe imporance to). Nor, of course, is a set of "golden ears" particularly when my bronze ears are different from your silver ones and so and so's platinum ears. But, if we do something that sounds good but measures poorly, I like to understand "why?"
  2. You know, if we strip away all the clutter around HQPlayer, upsampling, filtering, etc. this boils down to a good objectivitist subjectivist test: a) a lot of people really like the sound of the Denafrips DACs, particularly the Terminator models; does this new (incomplete) technical information make you like the sound less? b) for those who only want the purest in numbers, are you now disqualifying yourself from liking a Denafrips until the question of how it sounds the way it does is cleared up? Advanced test: c) Chris, having just written the Terminator review, do
  3. Based on the reviews I have read there is a huge step up between the Ares II and the Pontus and then smaller step ups to the Venus, Terminator and Terminator Plus. So the recommended first step in that approach is probably the Pontus II (see also George Graves review here):
  4. Consumer attitudes about how companies should treat them have clearly evolved. In certain cases, like Facebook, Google, Instagram, etc. where we the consumer is the product that the Company sells to its advertisers, we ought to have a lot of voice in what those websites look like, do with our data, respond to us...but the reality is that they are so big, that we individually have no voice whatsoever. By contrast, on a site like this, where we, as consumers, also provide much of the content, Chris is very much involved in wanting to hear from us and make improvements to the site that matter t
  5. No the rating is for ambient temperature. Yes, the panel gets quite a bit warmer than that, but in order for consumers to be able to use the rating they need it in the form of ambient temperature so they can compare for the temerature ranges of where they live.
  6. Unless you live in areas where the temperature gets very hot (over 100 degrees Farenheit on a regular basis) the temerature effect is not that large. See table below. The temperature coefficient is the percentage decrease in energy production for each increase in degree Celsius over 25, or 77 degrees Fahrenheit. The reduction in output is minimal, so you will probably not notice your solar panels performing any worse. For reference, the temperature coefficient from major solar panel manufacturers’ data sheets is below. Panel Brand
  7. I went through this decision process about a decade ago -- so my data could well be out of date. At the time I had the benefit of working directly with the CTO of SunPower so we carefully considered the variables and decided to go with larger inverters rather than on-panel microinverters because they produced a cleaner wave form. Even though I also have a Tesla S, we decided not to do Powerwalls, leaving the solar system as grid connected. I separately added a gas generator, but only sized to power the core of the house so that we had heat, ability to cook and refigerate food. Most importa
  8. Maybe a few higher level principles could turn this endless debate into something more useful: 1) Complete and accurate measurements are useful and important, but: a) first problem - we often don't know what all the relevant measurements should be; b) second problem - we may not be able to measure all that matters; c) third problem - selective use of data can turn valid measurements into non-helpful conclusions; d) fourth problem - even engineers don't always measure correctly; 2) The listeners ear ultimately determines what is useful and im
  9. Ted: Thanks. That was the lightbulb that went off in my head when I was reading a thread on NAS configurations -- in that I was always assuming I needed another computer to separate Roon from HQPlayer, but putting it on the NAS right next to the Music Library seemed like an easy fix.
  10. Miska: Thank you. A further question: If I prefer to keep computer noise out of listening room (realizing that I could build a fairly powerful passively cooled computer with HQPlayer Embedded, but perhaps at more cost) that pushes me toward the first solution (putting Roon on the NAS), but it does add a switch and the Ethernet to fiber conversion before the DAC instead of a direct pc-to-DAC connection. Do you have a personal view of how much that might degrade signal quality? Obviously, there are other variables to be considered, but i'm currently using the same Cisco SG350 switches that
  11. I am amazed at the amount of creativity being applied to building various configurations to maximize the combined use of Tidal/Qobuz/Roon/HQPlayer in ways that provide upsampled, reclocked, noise isolated, clean digital input to the DAC. But I'm wondering whether there is any degree of agreement as to an optimal layout of the various pieces, recognizing that the answer may well differ for different price points. Two such possible layouts are pictured below, but I'd love to hear opinions on not just which of these two is better, but on whether there is a layout that truly gets the best out of
  12. For the first few days I hated Version 1.8. But it slowly dawned on me that what I was really hating was "CHANGE." So I forced myself to simply explore the new stuff rather than try to cling to the old. The more I did that, the more I found things i really like about 1.8. Most of the positives are about new ways of exploring music I don't yet have in my Roon collection, but want there based on the new exploration tools. On the negatives, I'm relying on the histry of the Roon engineering team and their willingness to listen to us users (particularly the power users)
  13. This is a really interesting configuration, but I'm wondering how you might use it in the form that Miska sems to be favoring of putting Roon and HQPlayer on two separate CPUs? Could the downstream PCIE to USB interface be on a machine that handles the HQP processing and still function in the way that Larry/Pareto intends? Or is the whole idea that you have simply used fiber to allow you to make a local fiber to usb connection to the DAC while leaving the computng horsepower in another room?
  14. Sorry typo, I meant to say "and I have NO reason to doubt them." In fact, most of you who have noticed the difference are people whose opinion about what sounds great/bad I really trust (you, AustinPop, Audio Doctor, K6Davis). That is precisely what makes this interesting inasmuch as I also highly respect Miska (Jussi).
×
×
  • Create New...