Julf wrote:
> So any reaction to snake oil merchants being caught lying is being
> "emotionally fraught". Yes, fits the program...
Are you saying uptone are lying snake oil merchants ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK wrote:
> Are you saying uptone are lying snake oil merchants ?
I was referring to this:
Julf wrote:
> "The person that I spoke to told me that the owner of the company
> confided in him that he simply lies about the sonic improvements and his
> ability to hear the difference. Really? He
Julf wrote:
> What I do have (and as myself, not as any -ist label you might want to
> try to stick on me) I have a problem with you suggesting added noise,
> albeit inaudible, is proof of the *improvement* these devices are
> supposed to make.
>
> Do you really consider adding a 8 KHz signal,
jkeny wrote:
> Well as a measureist/objectivist you should have no problem with the
> 8KHz & harmonics spikes
What I do have (and as myself, not as any -ist label you might want to
try to stick on me) I have a problem with you suggesting added noise,
albeit inaudible, is proof of the
SBGK wrote:
> Are you saying uptone are lying snake oil merchants ?
With regards to uptone, all I am saying is that I would love to see
actual evidence to support the claims.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the
SBGK wrote:
> Yes, it would be a bit of a game changer if they were to do that,
> interesting times.
Don't hold your breath for measurements in the analogue domain that
correlate to sonic improvement for devices that don't have gross audible
differences.
John Westlake has already shown measured
Julf wrote:
> With regards to uptone, all I am saying is that I would love to see
> actual evidence to support the claims.
Yes, it would be a bit of a game changer if they were to do that,
interesting times.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Julf wrote:
> So cleaning up the USB timing results in more 8 KHz noise?Sure, it can - if
> you understand how USB high-speed protocol works & you
understand LIM, you can understand this.
> I guess that by that logic, we should measure at the neurons in our
> brain.There you go, now you are
Julf wrote:
> I agree. A fact-based discussion is good, and it does seem like your
> numbers provide pretty strong evidence that the CPU load is greater when
> decoding a compressed file format compared to the extra I/O load caused
> by the uncompressed data.
>
> Any possible audible effects
jkeny wrote:
> Amir, BE718 insist that DAC analogue output is the only place to do
> measurements & have shown higher amplitude 8KHz spikes (& their
> harmonics). This is exactly what is to be expected when the jitter of
> the USB frames & microframes is reduced. Microframe timing of 125uS
>
jkeny wrote:
> Well as a measureist/objectivist you should have no problem with the
> 8KHz & harmonics spikes as only 8Khz & 16KHz are within the audible band
> & they are considered to be far, far below audibility by those who claim
> to want to see evidence of audible differences on the DAC
jkeny wrote:
> Already answered, no need to flog it to death.
Indeed. Considering it was dead in the water from the start, any
flogging would be over the top.
"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
Wombat wrote:
> All of this is has a lower chance to alter the sound as some minimum
> phase upsampling.
Good point.
"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
edge that will fool many people"
jkeny wrote:
> Sure, but your characterising it as noise is disingenuous - it's a
> hint/trace of what's happening at the USB receiver - if you understand
> how USB high-speed protocol works & you understand LIM, you can
> understand this.
I guess using the proper technical term is disingenuous
jkeny wrote:
> Sure, but your characterising it as noise is disingenuous - it's a
> hint/trace of what's happening at the USB receiver - if you understand
> how USB high-speed protocol works & you understand LIM, you can
> understand this.
>
> There you go, now you are using logic - it's
Julf wrote:
> I guess using the proper technical term is disingenuous in your book. So
> what would you call an unwanted added signal that is not related to the
> original signal?
Well as a measureist/objectivist you should have no problem with the
8KHz & harmonics spikes as only 8Khz & 16KHz
16 matches
Mail list logo
