Julf wrote:
> I am sorry, but I am not at liberty to discuss the nature of my client.
Socratic Trolls, Inc.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics
Julf wrote:
> Can you remind me, and explain what specific aspects of audio quality
> they affect, and how?
pleased to meet you, i think we've guessed your name; but what's
puzzling me is the nature of your game?
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse
funny, i came here wondering whether it was still for sale. if so, i'm
definitely interested. i have two "standard" transporters, and have
recently purchased a tube integrated (that has a lovely 274B
rectifier).
in any case, if you're still here, and it's still available, send me a
note.
--
the Mehta Planets is quite good too, assuming one likes The Planets of
course.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
a bit off topic, but does anyone know if the transporter's digital
OUTput is limited to 24/96? if one *could* theoretically send a 24/192
signal to the TP, would it pass it along intact via it's coax/bnc output
w/o downsampling?
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter-->
garym wrote:
> As toby10 notes, YES, it is limited to 24/96 without the possibility of
> a change (such as using EDO).
thanks, and i appreciate the lack of ad hominem statement wrt sq.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61-->
Julf wrote:
> Sounds like it was a sighted comparison - you knew which file was which,
> right?
yes, but see my earlier posts where i stated AIF sounded superior to
APL, so if anything the result is contrary to my previously stated bias.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
so today, i was listening to an album, and realized i kept hearing each
track repeat. i checked, and i do do indeed have two copies of the
album, one in AIF, and the other FLAC. so i did a little comparison on
one track, and felt there was a small, but subtle difference...very
subtle, but
Julf wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Indeed. But then we have to look at what we really are testing for.
i'm not testing. i'm listening, and enjoying the music.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Julf wrote:
> Good point. It also leads me to ask if the subjectivist view of "if I
> hear it, it must be The Truth" is either the ultimate in solipsism, or
> just extremely arrogant.
you misstate what I, and likely most other subjectivists believe: "If I
hear it, I hear it." i can then
Julf wrote:
> I suspect those who live in the wonderful make-believe world of unicorns
> and fairies enjoy their music more than I do, but then again, there is
> more to life than just audio...
but not more than music.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld
philippe_44 wrote:
> Just for curiosity, for you, if I stream a file from Paris to New York,
> once in flac and once in wav and if that file is processed by LMS in New
> York before being sent in PCM (both cases) to a transporter on the New
> York kcal home network, will it sound different
i've
ralphpnj wrote:
> Then rip and tag to Apple Lossless
on my system, AIF sounds better.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
Archimago wrote:
> Hey man, today's your lucky day then!
>
> Go compress some to FLAC and enjoy the same sound at 1/2 the space! No
> need to upgrade storage capacity for awhile, faster and easier to
> backup, and excellent tagging features of course...
>
> Everything to gain, nothing to lose.
Julf wrote:
> If it makes you happy...
i'm indifferent, although i'd be marginally happier if it weren't the
case, since my library would take up ~1/2 the space.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red
Julf wrote:
> I guess not - another difference is that I acknowledge and account for
> mine.
do you enjoy the music more, constantly checking your audio privilege?
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red
Julf wrote:
> Unfortunately we all suffer from cognitive bias.
i don't suffer from yours.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
Julf wrote:
> Did you listen with your ears or your eyes?
i don't have synesthesia.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
ralphpnj wrote:
>
> this thread could just as well be titled "does aiff sound different than
> Apple lossless"
yes, it does.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna
Julf wrote:
> And open eyes, I assume?
>
> What did you do to maintain an open mind (as opposed to one affected by
> cognitive biases)?
drank scotch.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
ralphpnj wrote:
> Single malt or blended?
Balvenie Double Wood. one wood for flac, one wood for AIFF.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
ralphpnj wrote:
> Question: does it sound better or does it just perform better, i.e. less
> buffering, or both?
sound.
there's no performance difference on my network. most of my collection
is 16/44, with a bit of 24/88 or 24/96. no higher bitrates.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac
can't comment on WAV vs FLAC, but on my system AIFF sounds better than
APL, and ethernet better than wifi.
sue me.
--
4 TB Drobo-->FW 800-->mac mini-->Ethernet
Transporter--> Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax-->Meridian G61
G61--> Nordost Red Dawn-->Primare 30.3
Primare-->Ocos--Vienna Acoustics
made a small change to my 2nd system
(http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?41527-A-Photo-of-your-Transporter-setup-Please!p=822445viewfull=1#post822445)
which occasioned the new pics, and was surprised by the sonic
transformation, which was unexpected.
some years back I bought one of
rgro wrote:
I tend to agree with a good part of what you say, Ralph. For good or
bad, I happen to own a server that has only analog and usb output. So,
for me, USB out it is to the dac. Honestly, I think the sound of my
music system is extremely good--at least to my ears---and I've been
Daverz wrote:
I wonder how much the piano strings resonate when the music is played
loudly.
not sure, but I've had the piano for years, and the strings have
certainly burned in by now.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61--
probedb wrote:
explain how the physical characteristics of the cable change over time
please.
no.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
Archimago wrote:
Lots to consider with speaker placement in that room!
there's lots to ponder, and i've spent hours thinking about it, but
ultimately only two places they can go. where they are, or on the wall
opposite, which is where the couch/listening position are. for traffic
and other
yeomanspc wrote:
I figure the wine has more effect than the cable burn! Enjoy both.
i can hear the difference between red, white, and rosé.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Archimago wrote:
Nice system Netchord.
Yikes, looks like a challenging room with the right speaker nestled in
the corner between reflecting surfaces and your piano... I see what you
mean about needing longer speaker cables. Room treatments and speaker
repositioning would likely make
here's a room panorama:
17923
system is on the far right, on a wall perpendicular to the speakers,
which flank the piano.
+---+
|Filename: IMG_2833.jpg |
|Download:
RonM wrote:
He wasn't suggesting you did. What he WAS suggesting is that the mind
is a flexible thing, and that it's easy to convince ourselves of things
that have no objective reality.
It's why systematic observation using controlled methodologies is so
very important.
i'd rather just
interesting experience recently. i moved my system around, and needed
longer speaker cables (25'). I had been using Ocos, an 8' pair, and
liked it, but it's no longer available. i also needed something that
was relatively small in diameter so i could run it either under my rug,
or run it under
MichaelJ wrote:
It's been my experience that perception changes over timecables
remain constant.
perception burn in- interesting concept.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Archimago wrote:
Interesting anecdote and I'm glad for you that eventually things sound
as it should again.
My concern is that you switched the polarity of ONE speaker and center
image IMPROVED running out of phase like this!? And you were somehow
able to listen to music while running the
cliveb wrote:
That's ok, we're fine with that.
But what we're not fine with is you coming here and stating that your
(utterly unscientific) experience demonstrates that cables do change
character over time.
Theory predicts they won't, proper experiments show they don't, and well
Mnyb wrote:
Yes if you move speakers or move to another house, it sounds radically
different for while until you get used to it .
That said I've had bad and good rooms , the bad ones never sounded
really good regardless off time to settle for me or the equipment .
didn't move the speakers.
ja? oder nein?
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
netchord's Profile:
Mnyb wrote:
one should insert an extra switch and a short piece of this super
expensive cable .
is '$8.98 super expensive?'
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GK5UI06/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8psc=1)
i recently switched from transporter connected wirelessly, to wired w/
the
Wombat wrote:
According to your sig you use the Transporter as transport only but hear
better dynamics over ethernet against wireless?
old sig- can't figure out how to change it.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost
Mnyb wrote:
Wonder how the poor sod's using wimp/tidal are having it.
what's your issue w/ Tidal (or presumably lossless streaming in
general?)
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
may i offer a contrarian view: do not listen blind- we don't listen to
music with just our ears, but you should trust what you hear, or what
you think you hear, even if you know what you're listening to.
a case in point- I recently added a new phono pre to my system, to
replace the on built into
First thing -I'd- do is reboot your server.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
bought the amp used, but it's from 2009, so a relatively recent design.
Luxman is old school however, so this may just be a legacy of an even
older implementation. interestingly the amp also includes an indicator
at the power cable to show whether your home wiring inverts phase (mine
does not
interestingly, reading that thread, it seems either Luxman, or Sean,
have it backwards as to which pin = the original American standard.
Sean: Pin 3 hot was American practice, but in 70s we adopted the EU
standard of pin 2 hot. by implication, the Transporter, which was built
in the 2000s,
Hi All- got a new amp that has an option to invert phase on XLR inputs,
depending on whether the upstream component has Pin 2 or 3 as hot.
wrt the transporter, i've poked around a bit and have not found anything
definitive on the subject, save for this old thread from Sean, which is
Archimago wrote:
Not clear about the diagram myself.
However, these days all my XLR gear including ASUS DAC, E-MU DAC are pin
2 hot. Other than pre-1990 gear, I believe the vast majority of gear
is like this and adjustable devices like my TEAC UD-501 DAC also
defaults to pin 2 +.
My
ralphpnj wrote:
There is no magic or voodoo involved in getting good sound from a piece
of audio equipment, there is just a thorough understanding and proper
application of good engineering practices. All the magic and voodoo is
added after the fact by the clowns who write for the various
ralphpnj wrote:
What you state is very true but I can't help but notice that you make no
mention of the how milled billet fronts and the like actually improve
the sound of a given piece of audio equipment. In other words, what I'm
trying to say is that, for example, Bryston's use of
ralphpnj wrote:
Oh yes there is a case for arguing. While one cannot argue that
expensive cases and other cosmetic features do make a difference for
many audiophiles, one can argue that the difference has absolutely
nothing to do with sound quality. Similar to the paint color on a sports
Julf wrote:
A nice finish, well-made hardware and a 20 year warranty are all great
things, but don't make a streamer sound any better than another.
perhaps, but there might be other things in the case that do.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6
ralphpnj wrote:
The completely unwarranted high price. Most be that front panel milled
from a billet of solid aircraft grade aluminum.
i can't understand the constant need in this forum to validate one's own
prejudices by denigrating the choices of others.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac
aston45 wrote:
Hello,
no ideas anybody?
I cannot imagine that nobody has seen that there are two different
versions of the PCB.
16313
16314
Cheers
Kai
never seen this.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red
this is interesting, from Bryston:
-
Features include UPnP compatibility, *Squeezebox® emulation*
and DoP (DSD over PCM), while the firmware is easily accessible from
most web browsers. Control is via Apple or Android phones and tablets
with a Bryston interface or several third-party apps.-
RonM wrote:
Just curious, actually, as to what exactly is the advantage of a
Transporter (any model) over a Touch. I don't see anyone saying the
Touch's DAC is inferior, and it has outs usable for most purposes. It's
a newer design.
I use a TP every day, and have two Touches in reserve.
i saw them on that tour, and would gladly pay to download them in 24/96
or 24/192. Qobuz has them in 16/44, but the only other download option
that's available is 320k mp3.
so, if you're going to throw them away, uhmmm, sell them to me?
i'm not set up to rip blu-ray.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW
Julf wrote:
Why would 16/44 not be enough for material that is pretty much 10 or 11
bits?
you've made an assumption you have no way of verifying.
you might read some of the background on the project, which was several
years in the making/remastering.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac
Julf wrote:
What is there to verify? If it was originally recorded 40 years ago, it
would have been recorded on magnetic tape. Show me a magnetic tape
system with more than 70 dB (11.5 bits) of dynamic range. I am also
pretty familiar with the electronics used in mixers and amps of the
bigblackdog wrote:
With storage costing so little just keep the 24/192.
I have the 24/96 and sounds great. What a great version of 'on the
beach'.:o
where'd you get a 24/96 version of CSNY 1974?
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian
RonM wrote:
Technical note: I use the application DVD Audio Extractor
(http://www.dvdae.com/), which is a fine tool that allows pretty easy
access to the DVD Audio. To use a BluRay disc, of course, you'd need a
BluRay drive on your computer -- not expensive, and convenient to have.
R.
cliveb wrote:
It is overwhelmingly more likely that you initially heard a difference
due to some other factor (such as your physiological state at the time)
rather than any change to the stereo system. But because you have
internally correlated it with the change to iTunes integration, that
lrossouw wrote:
I and some others here have a bias for the evidence based approach...
Which, in all honesty, is not a bad bias to have.
You posted that removing itunes integration improved sound quality. I
am saying I don't think so.
something you cannot possibly say w/ any
Julf wrote:
True. We can not say that the subjectively perceived sound quality
hasn't improved. All we can say is that the music being sent to your DAC
hasn't changed.
you may be able to say the -files- have not changed.
the music definitely has.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Julf wrote:
I guess primarily the expectation that your sensory system is a
well-calibrated, precise and consistent measurement system.
it may not be well calibrated, but it is well-educated.
frankly, it seems your biases are much more thoroughly ingrained, ie,
the bias that no such change
Julf wrote:
Occam's razor. One explanation stipulates mechanisms beyond current
scientific and engineering knowledge, the other doesn't.
you're imagining it is your scientific, engineering based
explanation?
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6
lrossouw wrote:
Unless anything else has changed in the OP's system I believe the above
is relevant :)
sure, and perhaps i moved a bit in my chair, or was drinking a syrah
instead of pinot...all valid.
for the record, i was not home when the power company cut the power (my
wife was here), so
Julf wrote:
No, not really. While the server might work marginally less hard, it is
extremely unlikely that it would result in audible differences, while
the other explanations offered here are much more likely (rather than
just as likely).
what's the basis for this ranking of likelihood?
an accidental discovery-perhaps others have already commented on this,
but it was new, and a surprise, to me.
background; my primary system consists of a Transporter--MF A5
integrated. Transporter is connected via ethernet, as is a 4-5 y/o mac
mini. music is stored on an external FW800 drive,
darrenyeats wrote:
Sorry I actually misread the comment about the analog rig - thought that
it had improved also. If not, then replay gain etc is a good candidate.
i don't use replay gain.
i'm really hearing it; just don't have an explanation for it. to be
sure, i don't really need an
Transporter + Balvenie DoubleWood = Happy Thoughts.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
a used Transporter.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
netchord's Profile:
darrenyeats wrote:
My point stands, absolute statements should be toned down a bit.
indeed.
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
your title is very odd. how does one apply definitively objective
criteria to an inherently subjective phenomenon?
netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002
View this thread:
garym wrote:
Yes, I believe netchord has used essentially every typical audiophile
response (as is his right since this is a public forum). He's used:
1. I'm experienced in therefore I have knowledge you may not have.
2. I've listened to your equipment before and personally find
Chrobrego wrote:
Not to deviate from the original debate but just to mention the
complexity of the HiFi sound capture and reproduction, I would avoid the
expression bit-perfect but rather call it bit-unperfect. Bit is
digital - not real - world and already translates irremediable sound
then by your definition, i am not an audiophile, since i only believe
things that i can hear (or see, feel, smell, etc.)
netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002
View this thread:
garym wrote:
not quite, if you believe things you can hear (see, smell, etc.)
*without* proper testing procedures to exclude potential
biases/confounding variables then you're still an audiophile.
no, i'm a music lover. used the wine analogy earlier, but if two
different cabs taste
netchord wrote:
no, i'm a music lover. used the wine analogy earlier, but if two
different cabs taste differently, and have different noses, are you
suggesting i shouldn't believe what my senses tell me, without
subjecting the wine tasting to rigorous chemical analysis?
or, should i
Archimago wrote:
I don't think anyone disagrees with this Chrobrego; what you say is
logical and plausible. Firstly, of course the same CD doesn't sound the
same in all hardware - but that has to do with different analogue output
qualities more than the underlying digital section mostly - a
Archimago wrote:
1. Happy to look at any references like Darrell mentioned. Remember,
undocumented opinions don't really go far in these discussions so I tend
to shy away from them in these debates.
2. I'm interested in accuracy, not good sound since that implies a
judgment of experience
Julf wrote:
I don't think a real audiophile would get it at all.
what is your definition of an audiophile?
netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002
View this thread:
darrell wrote:
1. Psychological factors
2. There is something broken in your replay chain
3. You are not comparing like with like (different masters, for example)
these are only the most likely causes if you believe, as you seem to,
that there can be no differences unless something is
Archimago wrote:
I would still argue (ultra-kamikaze-like) that if one could tell a
difference between FLAC vs. WAV vs. AIFF vs. APE vs. WV vs. ALAC, then
there's *something wrong with their hardware*! To actually hear a
difference (not just bias of some sort) should not be like some badge
probedb wrote:
Yet you still offer no proof that you can actually tell the difference.
If you hear it that's all fine, it's in your head. But until you can
offer proof that the output of one format is better then that's where
the difference can happily stay.
i don't understand this demand
mlsstl wrote:
No one demanded you provide proof. However, you are treating your own
perception under sighted conditions (i.e., that you have knowledge of
which format is being played at any point) as having some underlying
technical cause. To refer to your post from 4/22, you said ...when
Julf wrote:
I would be curious to hear how you verified your observations to guard
against perceptual bias.
i listened to two file types, through the same system, with all other
variables constant. one consistently sounded better. i have no bias
either way; in fact, given mine is an apple
Julf wrote:
So what you are actually verifying is that non-blind, non-controlled
listening is actually totally useless for evaluating a system, because
two systems producing exactly the same sound wave will sound different
anyway?
no; that one system will sound different to two people.
Archimago wrote:
True...
But that's such a broad generalization that if taken to the extreme
conclusion, doesn't this also mean that there's no point doing any
objective or subjective reviews at all if at the end of the day, good
sound is essentially idiosyncratic?
of course not- I'm
Mnyb wrote:
In this actual case there is facts , no needs to use poor analogies.
Fact . There is no difference in sound between FLAC and WAV .
There is not even a plausible mechanism for it .
Other forum members likearchimago have even measure the the transporter
in this regard.
The
Wombat wrote:
You had the idea of artifacts from unpacking flac.
not artifacts in the FLAC file itself, but something in the unpacking
process- and i'm just speculating, as i don't have a lot of experience
with FLAC, but i do have a lot of experience with other compressed (not
data reduced)
ralphpnj wrote:
Standard audiophile defense: I hear what I hear and I know what I hear,
no double blind listening tests required.
My response: It's your money to waste as you see/hear fit.
how am i wasting my money? are you suggesting i shouldn't own a
transporter? that aif files are
darrenyeats wrote:
Point of clarification, people really do hear what they hear. E.g. with
the McGurk Effect, you really hear that sound. So I would never say are
you really hearing what you think you're hearing ... because the answer
is always yes by definition.
The only question might
garym wrote:
huh? Your example doesn't match up at all the the issue of whether two
lossless files sound different. If someone was saying, listen to mp3,
it is likely just as good (transparent) as lossless then your example
would work (mp3 is the cheap deli and lossless is the fancy
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. in my own system, using a transporter for playback, I hear a
difference between Apple Lossless and AIFF, with a distinct preference
for the latter.
Wombat wrote:
Wasn´t that even worse? Writing reviews about something without even
knowing how to decode it correctly?
i'm not following you. i didn't read the article, just commenting
generally on whether or not such differences are audible.
this url worked for me:
http://vpsx2.multiparadigm.com/rafstl
netchord's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=21002
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98453
jh901 wrote:
Ah, good points about the Transporter digital outputs. Thanks. Anyone
have more insight?
The Cary 306 is a fairly serious hi-end player and the other gear in my
chain is quite good. I'm looking to get as close to CD sound quality
(as played in the Cary transport) as
I recall a thread where Sean addressed this issue, saying the digital
XLR output on the Transporter was an afterthought, and not particularly
well implemented (paraphrasing from memory). IIRC, he said the BNC
output was the best sounding, a true 75 OHM connection; if the CAry
supports BNC i
department may be smaller than
yours. ;)
--
netchord
--
4 TB Drobo--FW 800--mac mini--Ethernet
Transporter-- Wireworld Eclipse 6 coax--Meridian G61
G61-- Nordost Red Dawn--Primare 30.3
Primare--Ocos--Vienna Acoustics Beethoven/Maestro
0.99
2) restart server process...
thanks Phil- i'll poke around. i'm assuming to put it back to where it
was, i delete the portion after
**?
and to *always* upsample to 96k, change r48000 to r96000?
--
netchord
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
