I don't know how you create these pics. If you do it with DAC output you
should make sure no further resampling is done and for comparison it
should be nice to see both results with SoX, one with dither and one
without. Maybe this hints to something. Sorry if that makes you busy
only because i
Somehow i can´t believe that just comes froms integer/non- integer.
Isn´t it that you get such spikes as the DAC1 shows when you ignore
dither?
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View
Thanks, i pretty much think that is it. SoX for example does a gain drop
by 3dB when automaticaly guarding for clipping. Like Julf and others
already mentioned the DAC designer itself should already think about
such things when he has processing in mind.
Somehow Benchmark is now the first time i
netchord wrote:
well, SC is converting ALAC to FLAC using faad/sox, so i guess the
difference I'm hearing is actually between FLAC and AIFF, both of which
are converted natively by the TP.
and would it surprise you to learn i hear a difference between wired and
wireless to the TP, and
mc heisenberg wrote:
An interesting thing happened to me yesterday. I've purchased Les
Nubians Princesses Nubiennes CD and ripped it to AIFF and then sat
down to listen in amazement. Why in amazement? Because I've previously
had that CD ripped in 320 kbps mp3 format and was listening to it
Not that i am interested in this to much but reading about this
headroom it must be something en vogue since the DAC2 arrived.
My brainfart makes only sense if you don´t already use your player with
digital volume control or you are afraid about normal digital volume
control.
My idea is to pad
Julf wrote:
And why would the headroom be an issue?
For example
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=98753hl=benchmark
Look closely in the sig of the member John_Siau.
Most likely they created a problem we didn´t had before we knew it :) I
don´t worry about it to much but my
Julf wrote:
Intersample peaks are not a problem as long as you are in the digital
domain. They only become an issue if the analog stages after (or in)
your DAC have no headroom. It is very, very unusual for analog stages to
have no headroom - usually distortion just increases ever so
ralphpnj wrote:
1) Used a flac file instead of a wav file
2) Used 16bit/44.1kHz file not high resolution file
3) Flac file was encoded using PCM not DSD
4) Flac file stored a standard, i.e. non-solid state, hard drive
5) Hard drive connected to computer running SBS via standard, i.e.
Heh! Thats why it is still marketing writing by benchmark. They must
mean simply Aliasing with this image fold back
What is for sure that this so called Apodizing/minimal phase filters
often are used together with filters that don´t filter strong enough at
22kHz so these do alias for sure.
If
Archimago wrote:
Hi VK!
Nice seeing you around. Thanks for your work. I have been using your
suggested settings a while now.
Intellectually and empirically we know what's being done with the
upsampling and pre-ring suppression... But do you think this is
perceptible? I'd be curious to
JJZolx wrote:
Claims that WAV or AIFF versions of the same track sound better than
FLAC have been made for years by many, many people. I doubt that there's
a single audio magazine or audio forum where it hasn't been said.
Of course that doesn´t make these claims more valid. Unfortunately flac
netchord wrote:
i don't find it surprising; without knowing what system he used, some
artifact in the unpacking of FLAC for playback could have an audible
effect.
Wasn´t that even worse? Writing reviews about something without even
knowing how to decode it correctly?
You had the idea of artifacts from unpacking flac.
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98630
There is enough bad music out there that can't be played back silent
enough to please. You even may argue this music sounds best when not
played back at all.
Wombat's Profile:
mc heisenberg wrote:
So in my mind, all three formats were cut from the same cloth, by the
process of dithering down from the original 24 bit/192 khz.
I often see here re-sampling and dithering used a bit confusing. If you
lower the samplerate from lets say 192kHz to 44.1kHz you do resampling.
heisenberg wrote:
Sadly, I'm on the Mac so I don't have dbpoweramp.
There are many ways to reduce bit-depth, must be even possible on a MAC
:)
SoX should work fine.
Don´t worry about correct dither to much with this Beatles stuff the
noise in the lower bits must be already high enough to
ralphpnj wrote:
And what exactly is self-dithering and should we even be discussing it
on an open, public forum?
Self-dither is a term often used when adding much dither is not
necassary. If enough noise is already existing at the bit-depth you cut
the data it doesn´t need additional dither
heisenberg wrote:
Just reading instructions about this SoX thing gives me headache.
You may try:
sox.exe input.flac -b 16 output.flac dither -a
Dither -a is only there to tell sox not to add dither on silent parts.
heisenberg wrote:
I've been doing some comparative listening to the same tracks, only
rendered in different digital formats. For example, I was comparing some
Beatles tracks issued as 24 bit/44.1 khz to the same tracks issued as 16
bit/44.1 khz. In addition to that, I've been comparing
mlsstl wrote:
I've always been puzzled by statements like the one above which clearly
imply that, on those rare occasions when a subjectivist admits that
their perception might have been influenced by their own mind rather
than only outside technical factors, that said influence is limited
mlsstl wrote:
Not sure what to make of your comment.
However, when it comes to my preferences, I hear what I hear and like
what I like. I don't spend time trying to pretend that my perception
yields some universal truth that deems others inferior if they don't
hear the same thing. And I
jh901 wrote:
Which of Hoffmans re-releases sound like shit compared to which
recordings done right today with recent equipment?
Thanks ralphonj, you pretty much summed it up.
Just try one of his latest things like Yes, Close To The Edge .I
really don´t know what is high resolution or great
jh901 wrote:
Wow. You might want to ask yourself if your experience is due to
inadquate gear. What SACD player do you use?
I'd definitely feel comfortable grabbing this SACD to audition my system
for any of you. I can guarantee that it won't be a ho-hum experience.
The other way around
jh901 wrote:
You might want to look into some real speakers though. Clearly, you are
missing out.
i won´t discuss it much deeper because my experience with die-hart
golden eared audiophiles disappointed me often enough if you needed hard
evidence from them. I only want to tell you i build
ralphpnj wrote:
And by the way, a classic jazz collection would include works from every
decade from the 1920s up until the 2010s because unlike rock music jazz
has not sucked since the Beatles broke up. Here's a name for you, since
you are such a name dropper, Jim Anderson.
Archimago wrote:
Interesting description... Can't say I've ever experienced this. Not
sure how this can be a function of presumably bit-perfect data transfer.
This delaying of frequency response also doesn't seem to jive with
jitter effects around timing. Almost sounds like you're saying
Archimago wrote:
Good point...
To be honest i really have a problem finding a reasonable reason for a
beahviour that creates such an effect described. There comes me some
tape pre-echo to mind you could hear back in the good old days :)
here is a test of the Orion against some 300#8364; active Behringer
http://de.scribd.com/doc/103681479/SLReport10-05
Not a bulletproof one-by-one test because of EQ used but shows how well
simply correct done hardware can do. The Behringer i stumbled across
sometimes already and the really
Julf wrote:
If you are talking about CA, I beg to differ. It is still dominated by
some very loud and obnoxious subjectivists, and the moderator pushes a
you can't question someone's subjective impressions policy. I think
Eloise summarizes it very well in her comment: I'm sorry but when
darrenyeats wrote:
Yeah I've seen that report before. My statement is just personal
opinion, of course, not research, take it as you will!
Darren
Sorry, i did not mean it in that negative way. These Orions are for sure
well thought out speakers that impressed many people with their natural
ralphpnj wrote:
You wouldn't happen to know where I get a large frilly collar, an orange
afro wig and a big red stick-on nose? If I'm going to join the circus I
need to look the part.
ROFL!
Something interesting. The second time i link to that side in a short
time :)
Seems this place has
Archimago wrote:
For example, in 2012/2013, in order to get the best sounding version of
a new album like fun.'s Some Nights, the digital audiophile is forced
to seek out a vinyl rip because both the CD and hi-rez 24/44 HDTracks
versions come from the same disgusting DR6 overcompressed and
This is really becoming very entertaining in here! Thanks for the show
Archimago!!
Interesting someone that is not prone to hear terrific paranormal things
is backing some things up with measurements and more. The Clowns (as
ralphpnj calls them) often only use even more woozy wordings when asked
ralphpnj wrote:
Now if only I could manage to get more audiophiles (with money to
spend) to realize the truth and start calling the high end audio press
clowns.
Good idea! We only need some cool folks that travel the world in good
old Mythbusters (Earbusters) style :)
Any bored but cool
Archimago wrote:
Now that's a clean trace!
:)
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=97950
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
But I like the 24bit versions (less quantization error).
This is a typical example of audiuophile gibberish. How does this
mysterious Quantization Error in 16bit matter against 24bit?
Wombat's
ralphpnj wrote:
Not to mention some of the choices for what recordings get the high
resolution audiophile treatment which is more often than not merely a
question of licensing. There are quite a few audiophile releases which
leave me scratching my head wondering what makes this POS worthy of
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
That is theoretically speaking.. You can do the research for yourself.
I did. We once had a link to an interview with Daniel Weiss himself and
one of his knowledgeable statements was that worrying about more then
16bit on playback is not worth it. I only talk about bit
Archimago wrote:
BTW: If anyone has the CD copy, it would be interesting to check if
there's evidence of high signal into 22kHz. This is a case where not
only is 24/192 questionable, but the unfiltered unusual ultrasonic
content above 22kHz could really make this sound worse than the CD.
I
garym wrote:
192kHz digital music files offer no benefits. They're not quite neutral
either; practical fidelity is slightly worse. The ultrasonics are a
liability during playback.
Now after this is some older news and some discussion was raised due to
it i want to mention one thing that comes
cdmackay wrote:
i.e. it might be possible that people choose what sounds familiar, and
relate that to better?
mp3 should have no sound on its own, no matter what many people claim.
Recordings underneeth sound much more different than some recording
against ist mp3 version.
What mp3 for sure
The second generation Airport is a nice device. It has a native and
clean 16/44.1 digital output that should be the majority of files most
users own. So it may be a worthwhile digital transport, why not?
The HiRes files you have you can resample yourself to 16/44.1 for daily
use and don´t let
Hmm... seems like no one is reading my posts. Nonetheless if still
someone is interestet. Now i link to another side i thought i´ll never
do but this one is interesting.
Airport Express has native 16/44.1 digital out:
pippin wrote:
The rationale is that counter to conventional audiophile wisdom my
experience when testing 96/24 playback in iPeng was that the raw PCM
data actually caused a noticeably _higher_ system load compared to FLAC.
What this means is, that he system load caused by decoding FLAC is
Such slow filters like -3db@50kHz will produce lots of aliasing that is
outside the audible band but is of no benefit either. Daniel Weiss
himself crpiticizes such filtering. That's why Saracon uses very early
filters when going to PCM with DSD. A 24/88.2 Saracon convert will have
a cutoff at
Mnyb wrote:
trying to calculate extra data-points with some sort of triangulation
Hi boys and sorry to disturb your discussion with OT stuff but now that
i read that one i start to imagine what is next and i hope i am wrong.
This attempt sounds really like they now start to add harmonics to
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Now for the part about , jitter is not audible - similar logic goes
into the premise behind mp3 (psychoacoustics). I guess you are all happy
with mp3 (?).
These are completely different things. It makes no sense.
mp3 is indeed not perfect, there will always be isolated cases were it
shows its limitations.
Just go to Hydrogenaudio and look for several reports about samples that
add smearing to transients. Not hard to find this on music with many
hard transients, especially some synthetic stuff. For
Binaural is nothing new the way i understand it. I lately saw a
documentary about Karajan and some older, wise recording engineer talked
about the way he positioned the microphones already back then. He placed
them as if they were the ears of a head. He was working for EMI when i
remeber right.
I really don´t know what is new now. The EMI engineer i quoted didn´t
talk about headphone listening so he had some advantages for normal
speaker listening in mind i guess. Maybe digging deeper on some Chesky
promotional material will tell us.
I also wonder about these Diablo Utopia. All measurements i find on the
net clearly show their NON-LINEARITY!
This one for example:
http://img.hifitest.de/lautsprecher_stereo_focal_home_diablo_utopia_bild_1302691515.jpg
There are these nasty peaks in the 2-5k region that can make some voices
and
I didn´t look up all devices jh901 listed but on first sight none of
them can serve as streamer for your digital music collection as the
Transporter does. I doubt the Transporter will be considered as good
enough transport for all these DACs even ;)
jh901 wrote:
That list is not comprehensive or official. I'm sure we have members
here who prefer to believe that the Transporter is the best DAC ever and
if you are satisfied, then I have no argument. As for others looking
for far superior sound quality in all areas (transparency, freq
Archimago wrote:
Do you mean music streamers?
If so, I assume the Linn DS series must be high on the list. These will
play hi-res files up to 24/192. Have no idea how good the interface on
this works...
IMO, I still prefer the Transporter for its flexibility, capabilities
and very cool
You can´t simulate the Meridian apodizing filter with sox, only some
minimum or immediate phase things that all add smearing to highs that
are audible. The Meridian filter is linear phase up to 18.5kHz afaik.
Wombat's
michael123 wrote:
24-bit version has more meaningful data that its CD version, that's the
fact.
For humans and audio there is not anything meaningtfull in the 8bits
more. 16bits is more thenm enough. You can´t hear anything of these
added 8bit if the 16bits above play music. Masking alone
michael123 wrote:
Phil is techie.. he just took a difference between the tracks and
amplified it to the desired level... until he began hearing speech
It is not a noise, I remember it was something around -60db.. you can
search this forum..
Yes, we had exactly the same discussion more then a
michael123 wrote:
Good setup will excel with quality recordings.
Same Phil Leigh posted the difference between Beatles EMI recordings -
plain CD and 24-bit USB version.
When he amplified the difference, Phil could actually distinguish the
words of the song!
I think that this pretty much
One may get the impression this part of the forum is under-moderated by
purpose.
What is much more likely is that the moderators decided one day to use
this section as kind of Recycle-Bin because at some point a growing
percentage of posts was just that, a big waste
This is easier as always to
I may misunderstand but my post did not try to discredit Triodes work in
any way. It is of coarse the other way around. Triodes mod actualy does
something for good! There are enough mods that most likely do nothing
and it makes fun to have people like him around.
Keep up the good work Triode!!
different and blows the others away with so much better
sound you better run, don´t walk :)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile
.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http
Mnyb;696382 Wrote:
This was your 666'th post you most now enjoy Iron Maiden number of the
beast on your squeezebox ;)
Cool you noticed! Before i harm myself or my cat in a satanic ritual i
better rise the number to a safe value :)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde
If someone likes i can add the sox dithernoise samples with these 50dB
for easy comparison. I am a bit unhappy with the offered original
sample because it has already shaped noise in but it should be ok.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks
So i ask you again. Can you tell us where you have the samples in the
dithertest you offered over filedropper?
Did you create them yourself, then please tellme how so i can compare.
I think when you drop in samples you should explain a bit.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde
Jeff Flowerday;695516 Wrote:
Well I'm back to no subs today. Got my brand new Focal 1028BEs.[/IMG]
Nice shape your listening room seem to have. I can imagine this is a
very resolving setup, enjoy!
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer
.html
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http
is common. If you don´t say sox to alias, it doesn´t.
You should better ask yourself if we should allow a controlled amount of
aliasing like Sarcacon for example.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
the audible things tiny changes in the settings of a
resampler do :)
Thanks for the dither samples, now others can have a listen how it
sounds.
Did you amplify the noise by +48dB or around that? If so i still prefer
the sox Shibata dither curves over the ones in these samples.
--
Wombat
Transporter
:)
Something like the noise down 180dB isn´t exactly needed at all but
most use the stopband so low becaus with todays processing power it
comes easy. Saracon even uses more then these 180dB even but don´t
expect any change especialy when we cut down to 16bit with this
resampling.
--
Wombat
Transporter
/index.html
This test is pretty outdated. Sox uses the much more refined rate
effect meanwhile. It is superior to the polyphase effect in several
ways.
With sox you can vary the result to pretty much anything you like. The
different parameters don´t leave anything to be desired.
--
Wombat
Transporter
. The thread is on Hydrogenaudio
somewhere. I didn´t have the originals to do my own tests and used the
given samples so this may not be exatly valid.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
of the dithershapes sound. This
doesn´t change the sound above, only shifts the perceived loudness of
noise further down depending on the taste and audibility.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
as
good as the HD release while they are from the same version as BROKEN
and a valid reason to send them back.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
until you can hear the noise of that fiole. Now
play back an average loud sond, then go shopping for new speakers ;)
This or alike even Daniel Weiss argues agtainmst the need of more bits.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self
.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http
back any content at that
frequency may indeed trigger the tweeters break-up and distort sounds
below.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
is again that if you really playback higher
frequency contenet it is very likely that the audible frequencies
indeed get altered but in a negatiuve way. Thats what some people may
hear but it can´t be for the better.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
that bullshit became a waste of time.
I think i am done with this section of the forum. Several other members
that had to say really interesting stuff don´t post since long already
:(
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made
I stated to read around here is not worth but on the other hand you guys
are really a funny crowd sometimes :)
Excuse me if i came across arrogant. You deserve a gold medal for
consistency and nerves of steel!!
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
, samples that were hard to
identify but verified by some people i respect to have really above
average hearing.
So when some self-proclaimed golden ear throws out such bullshit in
forums without any serious backup i feel a bit *@!X#+, sorry.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde
. In these 2 seconds there may
these differences occure, and even then it is very unlikely. If so it
should be questioned if direct PC playback should be used at all.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
generation caps. I even think that replacing a new
generation lytic with a film cap with much lower capacity leads to
weaker sound.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
them for a pair of FM.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View
this wire alone influence the
clock quality? Never found some clear measurements for this on the
modding sides.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
space it seems.
To complicated for my skills :)
You are sure you don´t collect HF garbage with the leads of the
additional caps?
I saw real world measurememnts that made decoupling caps worse as a
cheap smd cap only becuse of the leads and 1mm already can hurt.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded
Hi Mnyb i just realized today that your signature must have changed
lately. Isn´t it?
Using new Meridian DSP is like cheating! No wonder you don´t hear a
difference with transports. These babies simply seem to work :)
Congrats for the purchase!
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142
This tone normaly is masked by the music because of its lower level.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http
you soon will
be able to purchase the same product once again, real DSD this time,
lol! The market just startet.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
25kHz on when doing DSD-PCM, and this with a
good reason. Of cause audiophiles will complain that they want more
noise for their money :)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
with your eyes even more as before, you are not
able to hear these things so you have to watch before you listen to
know what you have to hear. ROFL! :)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
maxes out at 24/96 btw.
Since business has to go on they sell it, people already buy it so the
market is there.
Well here we have a thread with numbers:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=91126hl=
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread: http
lately purchased an album in DSD files and decided that even
24/88.2 with an early lowpass is slightly overkill when trying to keep
all music signals i see spectral, not to confuse with the things i hear
please.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks
with this kind of HF noise why this is. It may be faulty hardware then.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http
. The music it spits
out without sinc filter is indeed horrible to measure and for sure will
benefit of higher sampling frequencies most. Now this is a case to
wonder, even when the output is technicaly speaking pretty less precise
it still may be sounding fantastic to some.
--
Wombat
Transporter
ripping
tools or drives this detection is still not working 100% all the time.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http
On diyaudio there lately just someone described how the sound gets
worse after every copy. Time to retype my old word documents before the
text becomes to blurry :)
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
. Thats why i don´t use one anymore. Two subs next to the
speakers may be best of all.
--
Wombat
Transporter (modded) - RG142 - Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks - Sommer SPK240 - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile
301 - 400 of 731 matches
Mail list logo
