Anyone using a Regen with a Touch that cares to stick their neck above
the parapet?
Touchy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=57784
View this thread:
You've got to laugh, really
Arny tries to paint products that contravene USB 2.0 electrical
specification as a few trivial problems with non-mainstream gear and
tries to exaggerate my original statement into A missing diode does not
equate to instant bench fire and serious damage.
Yet, on the
jkeny wrote:
OK, let's clear something up - what is being tested here - pre-echo on
all frequencies in the audio band or the Gibbs effect which only results
in ringing at frequencies around 22.05KHz?
Seems you don't really understand the Gibbs effect either.
To try to judge the real
doctor_big wrote:
As an aside from all this nastiness, an observation - I honestly think
that ABX is the tipping point on the seesaw between the Os and the S'.
Audiophiles mightily distrust ABX, and with good reason, I think. I've
taken part in two of those hateful experiments, and found
doctor_big wrote:
So John's only in it for the money? He never gives info or help?
Probably just like triode and Michael too, the freeloaders.
Here's the definition of a troll:
A person whose sole purpose in life is to seek out people to argue with
on the internet over *-extremely
arnyk wrote:
You're deflecting. There are two questions that you need to answer to
proceed logically:
Here they are again:
What free offers of hardware and/or software were made?
Were the postings real world problem solving or sales pitches for the
benefit of a commercial venture?
SBGK wrote:
then you and JULF would step in and shout about audiophoolery and how
the manufacturers were ripping off the poor innocent customers, but as
it doesn't cost $1750 the only contribution is to imagine if it did.
Boy do you seem to be carrying a grudge. I guess you really don't like
doctor_big wrote:
Hey all (and not Arny)
I just took a peek at Mr K's profile, and every post he's made in the
short time he's been here has been in regard to some sort of measurement
wankery.
This would be evidence of ignorance of the difference between
measurements and subjective
arnyk wrote:
Umm Give. Doesn't that mean offer for free without hope of remuneration
of any kind? What free offers of hardware and/or software were made?
Were the postings real world problem solving or sales pitches for the
benefit of a commercial venture?
Can you link any posts that
doctor_big wrote:
No.
I'm discussing you as a troll with this community that you know nothing
about.
That would be a very presumptuous claim on your part, it is akin to
claiming to be able to read my mind.
I see your refusal to respond to my polite simple logical questions as
tacit
jkeny wrote:
Right, so your statement No DAC playing back 176.4kHz should touch the
audible band was meaningless to this test only confuses matters. A
minimum phase filter
Let's see what Archimago did then - *I took ~1 minute of these three
24/44 or 16/44 recordings and using SoX,
jkeny wrote:
WHy not get it in green then see if it's fixed
Look I followed your link John, and it led nowhere because you didn't
check it out. That is your problem.
Truth is I'd buy the hub in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the fact that I
don't currently need anything else from Monoprice
jfo wrote:
Bump. Anyone out there who can deal with these trolls?
Just because someone disagrees with your point of view and is not going
to back down to you does not make them a troll.
'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
jkeny wrote:
You've got to laugh, really
Arny tries to paint products that contravene USB 2.0 electrical
specification as a few trivial problems with non-mainstream gear and
tries to exaggerate my original statement into A missing diode does not
equate to instant bench fire and serious
arnyk wrote:
To me this makes very good sense. SP/DIF is a very simple and generally
reliable and low-overhead protocol, whereas USB is not.
USB is obviously superior in the very many cases where there is no
SP/DIF port at hand, but the Touch addressed that problem long ago.
I'm of the
jkeny wrote:
Yes you share the same inability to understand the device as ralphpnj -
who is also a poster on the thread for the afflicted disaffected
Reformed Audiophile True Confessions - so you share a lot in common
That may be a good thing if he is not as ignorant of digital audio
arnyk wrote:
One of the so-called improvements that I am aware of involved Improved
bass.
THE IDEA THAT SUBTLE CHANGES IN THE DIGITAL DOMAIN BY A DEVICE THAT DOES
NOT OPEN THE DATA PACKETS COULD AFFECT SPECTRAL BALANCE IS UTTERLY
INCREDIBLE TO ANYBODY WHO UNDERSTANDS HOW DIGITAL AUDIO
jkeny wrote:
Wow this coming from a guy who created a so-called listening test of
high resolution audio - your jangling keys which stood for 15 years as
your challenge that no one could differentiate 16/44 from high-res. Then
when Amir produces a positive ABX result you suddenly find a flaw
Perhaps we should ask a question that a reasonable person who knew very
little about digital technology could still answer, such as What is
unclear about the above paragraph?
Indeed, but I would also love to hear how the Gibbs effect only results
in ringing at frequencies around 22.05KHz...
jkeny wrote:
No, again it's only utterly incredible to someone who has no concept
of noise it's affects in both the digital analogue domains of a DAC
All things considered that would be humorous if it weren't just another
personal attack.
Please ask me a question that you have made up
ralphpnj wrote:
The SB Touch has both optical and coax digital outputs and many
computers (like the one I use) have either an optical or coax digital
output along with the USB output. Therefore I use any of these non-USB
outputs to feed my DAC. The cost, aside from the cable, is ZERO.
To me
jkeny wrote:
No, what's well before the horse here is your rush to condemn a product
that you know nothing about.
That's a personal attack on my technical competence which i will not
dignify with any response but to explain why no further discussion will
be forthcoming until civil discourse
arnyk wrote:
So you're telling me that in your view, the need for science and
technology are eliminated by this odd kind of popularity contest?
I guess you are unaware of the millions of copies of utterly useless and
even harmful products (based on legal actions by various governments),
arnyk wrote:
NO, AT BEST IT IS SYMPTOMATIC OF A PRODUCT THAT RUSHED TO MARKET WITHOUT
ENOUGH DEVELOPMENT.
Wow this coming from a guy who created a so-called listening test of
high resolution audio - your jangling keys which stood for 15 years as
your challenge that no one could
arnyk wrote:
Look I followed your link John, and it led nowhere because you didn't
check it out. That is your problem.
Truth is I'd buy the hub in a heartbeat if it wasn't for the fact that I
don't currently need anything else from Monoprice and their minimum
shipping fee is as I recall,
SBGK wrote:
considering the first 3 batches are sold out enough people seem to be
convinced by the pedigree of the device.
So you're telling me that in your view, the need for science and
technology are eliminated by this odd kind of popularity contest?
I guess you are unaware of the
Julf wrote:
Indeed, but I would also love to hear how the Gibbs effect only results
in ringing at frequencies around 22.05KHz...
Of course, but I'm trying to create a situation where honest sincerity
would work for the person asking the question without making demands on
a resource that seems
arnyk wrote:
I think that the cart is well in advance of the cart.
Where is the independent certification of the device we're discussing as
being fully USB standards-compliant? How do we know that it is any
better than your average USB hub?
As I understand things, we have zero
Touchy wrote:
Anyone using a Regen with a Touch that cares to stick their neck above
the parapet?
Bump
Touchy's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=57784
View this thread:
JJZolx wrote:
This audiophile forum has been a joke for a long time. And now here
comes Arny. Figures. Like a fly to shit.
I agree completely - many of the regulars on this audiophile forum
would indeed be considered fools on most normal audiophile forums
since we have mostly stopped drinking
JJZolx wrote:
This audiophile forum has been a joke for a long time. And now here
comes Arny. Figures. Like a fly to shit.
If you look at the actual timing of things, what attracted me to this
forum was Archimago's Blog thread about his Internet Blind Test - Linear
versus Minimum Phase
arnyk wrote:
If you look at the actual timing of things, what attracted me to this
forum was Archimago's Blog thread about his Internet Blind Test - Linear
versus Minimum Phase Filters post. If you have been following the
action you will noitice that we share an common interest which is
arnyk wrote:
Is Archimago a pariah around here?
Just as much as anyone else who dares to use evidence-based and
audiophile in the same sentence...
To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
arnyk wrote:
Is Archimago a pariah around here?
Julf wrote:
Just as much as anyone else who dares to use evidence-based and
audiophile in the same sentence...
Actually Archimago is more like a hero, since he proves that there is
such a thing as an evidence based audiophile.
What I wonder
ralphpnj wrote:
Actually Archimago is more like a hero, since he proves that there is
such a thing as an evidence based audiophile.
What I wonder is if Archimago's blog continues to get the attention it
so richly deserves will Archimago resist the efforts to co-opt him and
turn his blog
ralphpnj wrote:
Actually Archimago is more like a hero, since he proves that there is
such a thing as an evidence based audiophile.
What I wonder is if Archimago's blog continues to get the attention it
so richly deserves will Archimago resist the efforts to co-opt him and
turn his blog
adamdea wrote:
Although your other sentences are quite accurate, there actually is such
a thing as echo (distinct from ringing)
see para 2.1 of this and Graph E relating to each filter.
http://www.nanophon.com/audio/antialia.pdf
That said, I think that these days the FR rippling can be
Wombat wrote:
The test is clearly explained and i don't know what you talk about.
There is no such thing as pre-echo at all frequencies. I doubt you
understand the basics. A DAC playing back 176.4kHz should not have a
filter doing anything to content at 22kHz. For anything higher there is
Archimago wrote:
Did the image get fixed? I'm seeing the pre and post-echo as it should
with the steep linear phase filter in the thread after applying the
20kHz filter (2nd column)...
Wombat wrote:
I don't think the picture was different before. The ringing is nicely
shown at the filters
Wombat wrote:
I just did the ringing pic lately like posted before.
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?103537-Internet-Blind-Test-Linear-vs-Minimum-Digital-Filtersp=816463viewfull=1#post816463
The resolution of the pic was -110dB but i have to recheck. Using SoX
with -v there.
adamdea wrote:
I'm intrigued as to why the echo only appears with the sweep in the
example and not with the castanets or impulse. I wonder whether there's
more energy in the sweep as it does seem to glow brightly.
That is it! By definition an impulse being infinitesimally narrow but
with
This audiophile forum has been a joke for a long time. And now here
comes Arny. Figures. Like a fly to shit.
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread:
Thanks Arny
adamdea's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37603
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103537
___
audiophiles
ralphpnj wrote:
Arny - what you will find (and are finding) around here is that the many
us are trying to bring back some respect to the term audiophile. As it
now stands the term audiophile, outside of audiophile circles, is one
of derision and scorn,
I've already found that Audiophile
Many here are reformed Placebophiles I personally heaved a whole snake
nest of audioquest cables in the recycling bin... it felt good . I
choosed not to try to recoup some of the $$$ by selling second hand that
would be to promote this bizarre world view and if do, you have to use a
burner phone
Mnyb wrote:
Many here are reformed Placebophiles I personally heaved a whole snake
nest of audioquest cables in the recycling bin... it felt good . I
choosed not to try to recoup some of the $$$ by selling second hand that
would be to promote this bizarre world view and if do, you have to
ArnyK...if your goal is to educate non-technical people, such as myself,
with regard to the true efficacy of any particular piece of hardware or
software, I'd suggest that you're going about it all wrong. If your
goal is to denigrate and cow the great unwashed (which includes a lot of
us) into
arnyk wrote:
I googled his name in conjunction with Stereophile and was provided with
a list of reviews of recordings.
I also obtained what appears to be review of one of his reviews in
Stereophile:
rgro wrote:
Pretty much what I expected. I could care less about JKeny (I have no
idea who he is or what he does) and/or your feud with him. I'm
officially done with you. You are, truly, one of the most amazing
people I've ever come across here.
Indeed, he has endeared himself to this
arnyk wrote:
I'd suggest that I look at your advice in the same light as a fracking
driller looks at advice from his local Greenpeace rep. ;-)
If an audio product can possibly demonstrate a reliable ability to
improve sound quality, I can do pretty good at getting the best out of
it and I
ralphpnj wrote:
Pardon my ignorance but what is CA?
Computer Audiophile.
I've lurked there from time to time, sifting the wheat from the chaff
for myself.
arnyk's Profile:
ralphpnj wrote:
Rave reviews from where? Links please
Yes I'm guilty as charged and damned proud of it!
Yes Mr. Swenson was once a contributor to these forums but then he was
hired as a consultant by Stereophile and his contributions ceased.
Coincidence?
As for my
jkeny wrote:
Can you copy my quote saying that?
It is a paraphrase not a quote. For further reference, if I post a
quote, there are quotation marks.
Since you are nearly 100% unresponsive to my questions - back at you!
arnyk wrote:
Given that JKeny has said publicly that *he would do anything to keep me
from ever testing one his DACs,* I can only guess what treatment I'd get
from one of his fellow travelers.Can you copy my quote saying that?
arnyk wrote:
Right. Like so many here, in your mind there appears to be one easy set
of rules for you and another draconian set of rules for me.
When did I present my full or even partial credentials? OK a little
crept out, but you seriously think that was my life?
No, what I see is
SBGK wrote:
I think he posts on CA, if you'd like to ask him a question.
Pardon my ignorance but what is CA?
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign.
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon
rgro wrote:
What you suggest is pointless and pretty much renders useless one of the
major benefits and points of forums such as this.
Right. Like so many here, in your mind there appears to be one easy set
of rules for you and another draconian set of rules for me.
I'm willing to
rgro wrote:
ArnyK...if your goal is to educate non-technical people, such as myself,
with regard to the true efficacy of any particular piece of hardware or
software, I'd suggest that you're going about it all wrong. If your
goal is to denigrate and cow the great unwashed (which includes a
ralphpnj wrote:
Yes Mr. Swenson was once a contributor to these forums but then he was
hired as a consultant by Stereophile and his contributions ceased.
Coincidence?
I googled his name in conjunction with Stereophile and was provided with
a list of reviews of recordings.
I also
SBGK wrote:
I thought Americans celebrated success, here is an innovative product
which people are raving about and what do we get, the usual crapola.
Rave reviews from where? Links please
jkeny wrote:
Yes you share the same inability to understand the device as ralphpnj -
who is also a
60 matches
Mail list logo
