Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Strange problem with 48kHz material
Upgrading LMS to something more current might help. Stratmangler's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=20387 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97305 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Strange problem with 48kHz material
+1 Try more current LMS and player fw ! ( if it/was a bug it could have been fixed ages ago and everyone have already forgot about it ) , I have no trouble running 48khz or 96khz or 44.1 or 88.2 What are the file formats involved ? If you haven't try flac , this is a good baseline and no weird settings in file types . Also the wifi strength at 50% and 38% does not look good to me , if any kind of transcoding is involved it should be to flac ,not PCM to conserve bandwith . Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97305 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: in fact all the reasoning you cited (cant find that post ) is clearly the usual spiel from someone who actually don't understand the sample theorem and is influnced by audiophile beliefs . Yes - the next thing he will be claiming is that you get a clearer and shinier sound by using USB cables with silver instead of copper wires. A lot of old-school audiophiles don't understand digital technology, but still apply their analog-age beliefs to digital. The usual audiophile myths is that time resolving is limited to 1/44.1 for CD this is not true ,just look at the reconstructed analogue signal it looks continues to me and will be identical to to the original -bandwidth limited- signal. I still hurt from the bad beating I got on Computer Audiophool when I tried to explain that, even using waveform plots... Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Julf wrote: Yes - the next thing he will be claiming is that you get a clearer and shinier sound by using USB cables with silver instead of copper wires. A lot of old-school audiophiles don't understand digital technology, but still apply their analog-age beliefs to digital. I still hurt from the bad beating I got on Computer Audiophool when I tried to explain that, even using waveform plots... :) And this used to be a nice hobby and past time , something really bad happened a couple of decades ago . Most things that people read about audio these days comes from these kinds of cult sources , so it is a good idea to piont out whenever this happens and at least try to separate the issue from the person ( they migth not know better ) but that is hard . What did you call them confused audiophool instead of computer audiophile :) it is hard to not ridicule . But they are not open to real arguments as any pseudoscience like homeopathy etc . If they do some simple blind tests and listen to sane arguments they would understand that they are indeed wrong on most occasions ,but no do they . All kinds of audiophile arguments follow the same lines as any pseudoscience like there are things that you can't measure and it is not possible to understand everything and I just know that it is working but cant explain why blatantly ignorant about that it was debunked properly decades ago... So today the audio hobby is a pseudoscience just like alternative medicine . A proof of that is the absolute sounds effort to spread the myth that blind testing does not work ! this is typical of pseudosciences that any kind of proper testing would ruin the result , the spirits won't come if you try to photograph them etc :) Kudos to such person as the late Peter Walker of QUAD , that in the ELS63 manual states that no special speakers cables are needed . Now most speaker brands cowardly provides biwire terminals even thou they know better, to not offend their costumer base and thier silly cabling practices . As I have pointed out in these forums before I once did belong to the cult faction to some degree , The tipping piont was probably cable lifters and very expensive power cords , then I saw that emperor was indeed very naked . Why not some mpingo discs or some of Peter belts products :) anyone want some green rings to have on the edge of thier CD's still got some around ( I thrown away most of them ). Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: And this used to be a nice hobby and past time, something really bad happened a couple of decades ago. You might be right. The National Science Foundation stated that pseudoscientific beliefs in the U.S. became more widespread during the 1990s, peaked near 2001, and declined slightly since with pseudoscientific beliefs remaining common But I am sure the other side would maintain that This used to be a nice hobby and past time, but then a bunch of arrogant objectivist engineer types started to aggressively question what people were hearing :-/ Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Good times and we're all in agreement :) But. The one-liner scientific argument (Nyquist) doesn't carry through to the end (the analog outputs of Your DAC). While Nyquist is a very nice result, its theoretical and for practical purposes, non-constructive. So an implementation is forced to take another route on which there lies traps that are not so simple anymore. So there are issues which aren't simply true-false in the math kind of sense (like Nyquist), and so there can be room for discussion. The problem I suppose, is that as soon as we are talking real-life devices, the implementation matters. bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What is the best top end player now ?
ralphpnj wrote: will only invoke lots of nasty comments because the simple fact is that regardless of the DAC and the audio system used the sonic differences between that DAC and the Transporter's analog outputs will be, at best, subtle. Please leave all the hyperbole and the greatest thing since sliced bread comments to the audio rags. I do believe that you did hear and experience a very real and audible difference, I only have an issue with your placing these differences into the realm of night and day. Well, had I not heard a night/day, then I'd have passed on the expenditure. Not many of us likely have $6 grand or more to burn. I can't describe my own experience in a way that will allow any given reader of this forum (or any other) to truly grasp exactly what I'm getting at. I can add that my non-audiophile neighbor who heard the Transporter in my system many times, was under the distinct impression that something other than a CD player upgrade had taken place. But look, there are a lot of factors. My system had a single weak link as it turns out and Focal Utopia line speakers are not forgiving. The DAC upgrade (and by DAC, I mean the whole design including digital stage, power supply, analog stage) was a significant leap up the food chain and the impact on the sound of my system was FAR beyond what I'd have been able to grasp had I not heard it. I wish I could do a better job articulating this. Bottom line: go out and borrow a Cary 306 or one of the world class units (dCS Puccini, etc) and if your system is up to it, then you will be overwhelmed. That is my honest view. Finally, I find it disappointing that we are so overwhelmingly suspicious of the RD carried out by the likes of dCS. Further, is it truly rational to believe that those shelling out $50, 80 or 100 grand for elite products from dCS are simply nuts or confused or showing off, etc? Really? jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
bhaagensen wrote: Good times and we're all in agreement :) But. The one-liner scientific argument (Nyquist) doesn't carry through to the end (the analog outputs of Your DAC). While Nyquist is a very nice result, its theoretical and for practical purposes, non-constructive. So an implementation is forced to take another route on which there lies traps that are not so simple anymore. So there are issues which aren't simply true-false in the math kind of sense (like Nyquist), and so there can be room for discussion. The problem I suppose, is that as soon as we are talking real-life devices, the implementation matters. Of course in reality things are recorded in hirez and when the stuff is in the system and mastered it could then mathematically be reduced these algorithms are damn near perfect implementations these days . And then of-course the DAC oversamples to a very high rate to use some real world affordable and cheap filters et all . But the dat carier could be near perfcet these days . So given modern studios the CD's or downloads is a mathematical exercise so imo it is close to the theory A good home experiment is to take some of your hirez downloads ( i do have hundreds of them ) and use SoX in some of it's good best settings ,not some weird audiophile aproved apodizing emulation (shallow fillters do attenuate the treble to early if you are young you will hear this ). And have a listen , in practice I do this now and then I must admit that I have yet to find a definitive difference and for kicks try both 24/44.1 and 16/44.1 of you precius 24/192 master. And do not be surprised if the cd version on a hybrid disc or similar does not sound anything like this ;) In best case these hirez files are cut from much better masters ,but it is a complex issue better to approve the thing with the popular hirez moniker to improve sales . Remastered is usually a label of the exact opposite process making old stuff sound modern and abuse them the way new stuff are done, so audiophile would not buy remastered a better label is something like 24/192 studio master and yes these can be much better version but not for the reasons you might think . But all this is surpased by the real world soundquality of most recordings , hence we are all discussing the wrong problem we get back to this topic when recording quality in general is up to it :) or even up to lowly CD spec ? Some audiophile labels and classical labels may cut it sometimes ,but they are exceptions sometimes we must have real music too Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: So given modern studios the CD's or downloads is a mathematical exercise so imo it is close to the theory Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the main point of my first post. Mnyb wrote: And have a listen , in practice I do this now and then I must admit that I have yet to find a definitive difference and for kicks try both 24/44.1 and 16/44.1 of you precius 24/192 master. Definitive is a strong word, but how about maybe...? Mnyb wrote: Remastered is usually [a label of the exact opposite...] Usually, but not always, and by who's count - oh my head hurts :) Mnyb wrote: But all this is surpased by the real world soundquality of most recordings , hence we are all discussing the wrong problem we get back to this topic when recording quality in general is up to it :) or even up to lowly CD spec ? That begs the question - suppose there *is* a difference - then how good does a recording have to be in order for it to be up to it...? bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
bhaagensen wrote: Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the main point of my first post. Definitive is a strong word, but how about maybe...? Usually, but not always, and by who's count - oh my head hurts :) That begs the question - suppose there *is* a difference - then how good does a recording have to be in order for it to be up to it...? He he all good questions especially the last one :) the recording can be up to it but then again your mere human hearing may not Are we done with the ibit obsession yet , now I'm having coffee and will sit in my not so perfect listening room with some but not near enough acoustic treatment and some DRC but again could be better and I'm to close to the back wall trying to remedy that by using absorbent... And who knows how the chosen recording is done.. Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: Well, funny enough, I downloaded a bunch of 24-bit hi-res downloads Bowers Wilkins Society of Sound site after a bunch of audiophiles described them in superlative terms and wrote about how much better they were than the normal 16-bit material. I guess you are not surprised to hear that I discovered that several of them were actually 16 bit material that happened to be delivered as 24-bit FLAC files... Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
bhaagensen wrote: Maybe, but you can't argue that by referring to (only) Nyquist - the main point of my first post. I think you can. Remember Nyquist (or, more formally, the NyquistShannon sampling theorem) states that If a function x(t) contains no frequencies higher than B hertz, it is completely determined by giving its ordinates at a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds apart. Completely determined means completely reconstructible, but I might be missing your point. Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
:) enjoy your coffee mnyb! I am listening to some recently released stuff i havent bought yet on Spotify in shrug Mp3... bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Julf wrote: I think you can. Remember Nyquist (or, more formally, the NyquistShannon sampling theorem) states that If a function x(t) contains no frequencies higher than B hertz, it is completely determined by giving its ordinates at a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds apart. Completely determined means completely reconstructible, but I might be missing your point. I do agree ( coffe + whether report is enjoyed ) but in reality no clock does 1/(2B) perfectly so the actual nyqkvist frequency may fluctuate slightly so in practical implementation you leave a little slush margin . But that the extent of my knowledge I can't do z transforms :-/ an eternity ago I could do Laplace ( in university ). I do understand some simple things like completely determined . And actually the limited bit resolution 11/14/16/24 and whatnot of a digital,system actually means that the residues above fs does not need to be complete damped but say a finite xx dB is enough but this usually is a whole lot of dB 100dB or much greater (140dB) in most filters I've seen in the layman software I ever used . There may be no thing as a perfectly bandwith limited signal so some extremely small aliasing residues may be there ,but hey this is not radio astronomy or cat scanners or anything sensitive just good old audio :) Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Julf wrote: Well, funny enough, I downloaded a bunch of 24-bit hi-res downloads Bowers Wilkins Society of Sound site after a bunch of audiophiles described them in superlative terms and wrote about how much better they were than the normal 16-bit material. I guess you are not surprised to hear that I discovered that several of them were actually 16 bit material that happened to be delivered as 24-bit FLAC files... I think I have one that is upsampled from 44.1 to 48 for better compatibility with computers or some such nonsense I emailed them about it , but they may have a piont suppose an old win XP system and a punter not using asio or kernel streaming etc and other workarounds to avoid the kmixer , the algorithms used by the OS to do this may be tuned more to use less resources than perfect audio quality . Not to mention some soundboards my old sound blaster from my old pc has clear aliasing artefacts :P feed it signals close to 20k and cheerful noises will be heard . And then we have a squeezebox that bypasses all that :) sad that the Beaty and simplicity of this is not apriciated by more audiophiles . Get squeezebox unpack conect install LMS scan enjoy Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: in reality no clock does 1/(2B) perfectly so the actual nyqkvist frequency may fluctuate slightly so in practical implementation you leave a little slush margin. Sure - engineering is applying the science in real world situations. But that doesn't make the science invalid or irrelevant in any way. The NyquistShannon sampling theorem still applies 100%. Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Julf wrote: Sure - engineering is applying the science in real world situations. But that doesn't make the science invalid or irrelevant in any way. The NyquistShannon sampling theorem still applies 100%. Yes i agree 100% and that extends to all laws of physics there is no special laws of electricity for audio they are the same as in any electrical engineering or physics . If that where the case many things claimed by cult hifi would greatly interest people at CERN etc , the Nobel prize will be a given. For example hearing differences between different spade lugs for speaker cables ? Or wall plates for electricity . There is no special quantum dimension for audio where things can't be determined or measured or understood a transistor does not know that the electrical current passing by is music . This reminds me of the radium craze in beginning of the century, you could by water bottles coated in uranium ore or similar to vitalise the drinking water and of course radium cigarettes and soap :) Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Mnyb wrote: quantum But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded, its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and then they quickly jump onto the last 1. bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
bhaagensen wrote: But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded, its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and then they quickly jump onto the last 1. In science, the burden of proof rests on those making a claim, not on the critic. Pseudoscientific arguments may neglect this principle and demand that skeptics demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that a claim (e.g. an assertion regarding the efficacy of a novel therapeutic technique) is false. It is essentially impossible to prove a universal negative, so this tactic incorrectly places the burden of proof on the skeptic rather than the claimant. (from 'wikipedia: pseudoscience' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Over-reliance_on_confirmation_rather_than_refutation)). Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
Neh :) Of course, a claim - wether positive or negative - presented without argument is not worth a penny. But this just resolves into what constitutes an argument. Here traditions vary depending on the science, and I'm sure some audiophile story-tellers are in fact able to present sequences of words that can be counted for as arguments*. This, in principle is fine. Moreover the [generally accepted] philosphical basis for science is [as you touch upon] that one can hypothesise anything provided it is falisifiable (and you don't actually have to be able to do this yourself to post the hypothesis). Now a hypothesis such as 24/192 is audibly different from 16/44 does occur to me as valid in this sense - but I'm sure it can be debated. To then support any claims on this matter obvioiusly requires arguments, and this brings be back to what I've already said. So in the context of science, it boils down to what a valid hypothesis is and what a valid argument is. This brings us far beyond the rigidity of math and Nyquists theorem and I guess quickly becomes philosophy. Not that I'm capable of such a discourse, but surely its not difficult to see why the train gets off tracked at your average hifi internet forum... This stuff will never get resolved there - and for good reasons - IMO. * Not counting the recently presented sawtooth argument, there are other arguments in favour of high-res that are more solid. bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] 24/192kHz capability for Transporter
bhaagensen wrote: But I guess this is the point. There is some wiggly room in the interface where science meets the real world. And I know, in the sciences its usually controlled and abstracted using some kind of error-model, but such error models can't be denied of being extremely complicated if you dive into them, and in fact, not always that well understood. And I guess in a way, its in this little space of uncertanity that the audiophile story-tellers thrive. They can come up with anything to fill the error-term and for the scientifically minded, its very hard to provide rigid arguments against. We are basically saying, look it holds 100% from here to the end of the universe - 1, and then they quickly jump onto the last 1. we don't need the quantum in audio (yet) maybe down in the -400 dB range :) macroscopic evidence about our hearing sets limits already not in the quantum, sane equipment already have performance beyond our hearing abilities so normal macroscopic signal theory will do fine . is it agreed that humans can hear 0.1% distorsion if they are sensitive in best case in the midrange ? and 120dB range in best case still macroscopic levels . All that is needed is the decades old listening test where the bloody obvius is confirmed that all low noise low distortion and flat frequency response equipment sound the same when operated -within it's spec's- * the wiggle room is in speakers who always has a house sound and can't ever be transparent and they interact with your room too ,and relatively economical power amps that are driven out of spec with many of todays hard to drive speakers . Also equipment miss-match , if they where standards for signal levels and gain and impedance and if some one cared about that . you can get tons of hiss and noise with to much gain for example anyone can hear that Yea there must be a plancksound the smallest possible sound 6.626068 × 10^-34 dB :) and planckdistorsion 6.626068 × 10^-34 thd :D but it probably drowns in the brownian motion of the air molecules , I suggest a zero kelvin listening environment . * The real non sequitur , the cult manufacturers knows this and provides distorting non flat equipment with very complicted transfer functions that ofcourse sound different . The perfect circular argument, with luck the design is so bad that it reacts on perfectly normal cable choices too so that you can hear difference in cabling :P Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=69882 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] What is the best top end player now ?
jh901 wrote: Well, had I not heard a night/day, then I'd have passed on the expenditure. Not many of us likely have $6 grand or more to burn. I can't describe my own experience in a way that will allow any given reader of this forum (or any other) to truly grasp exactly what I'm getting at. I can add that my non-audiophile neighbor who heard the Transporter in my system many times, was under the distinct impression that something other than a CD player upgrade had taken place. But look, there are a lot of factors. My system had a single weak link as it turns out and Focal Utopia line speakers are not forgiving. The DAC upgrade (and by DAC, I mean the whole design including digital stage, power supply, analog stage) was a significant leap up the food chain and the impact on the sound of my system was FAR beyond what I'd have been able to grasp had I not heard it. I wish I could do a better job articulating this. Bottom line: go out and borrow a Cary 306 or one of the world class units (dCS Puccini, etc) and if your system is up to it, then you will be overwhelmed. That is my honest view. Finally, I find it disappointing that we are so overwhelmingly suspicious of the RD carried out by the likes of dCS. Further, is it truly rational to believe that those shelling out $50, 80 or 100 grand for elite products from dCS are simply nuts or confused or showing off, etc? Really? And that those independently reviewing these products around world are colluding with the industry in order to continue a decades long charade!? I didn't mean to offend or even question that you did, in fact, hear a very noticeable difference. Since the analog and digital outputs on the Transporter are both active were you able to do a simple A-B test? Not even double blind, just a simple A-B test. It is truly amazing what a simple test can show you regarding perceived night day differences. Then again, I do believe that a modern, state of the art DAC would offer a significant improvement in sound over the Transporter. But that's the great thing about digital - the $300 Touch (or even the Transporter) feeding a digital signal to a modern, state of the art DAC will sound the same as mega-buck CD transport or mega-buck music streamer feeding the same DAC. In addition one can also throw away the $1,000 digital interconnect since a good $5 digital interconnect will produce the same results. I know that the above is anathema to the high end audio press but since cable vendors make up the bulk of these dying magazine's advertising revenue, how could they possibly tell their readers these simple truths about digital? ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Linn Majik any good?
I've been looking for a small integrated amp with a digital input to put in a bedroom system with a Squeezebox Touch and some Martin Logan Electromotion ESLs. I've found the Cyrus 8QX amp and Perreaux 80i (which is made locally here in NZ) and I have also been recommended the Linn Majik DSM at more $$$ as a single box alternative. I was going to hook up the Squeezebox Touch via it's digital output to whichever amp I chose, and was looking for a better performing DAC. So my questions are: Does anyone have any experience with any of these units and would care to comment on their performance? Is the Majik DSM really usable compared to the Squeezebox? I usually use a transporter and 2x Touch units via their remotes but do use iPeng and Squeezepad from time to time. Seeing as I have LMS set up and working reliably with several players, is getting a separate Linn player really a workable option? Linn has software that allows a Majik unit to follow a Squeezebox but I'm a bit hesitant because of their oBnOXiouS KaPItaliZatiOn and SpellInG and the high $$$. If you've done this already please let me know how you got on. Cheers, Steve. Steve Agnew's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=840 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97310 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
