d6jg wrote:
> As well as posting here- well mostly upstairs in the adults area - I am
> a member of a Facebook page about rare Vinyl records and CDs.
> I have a 450ish collection of Vinyl records that I have been digitising
> since about 2009. Firstly to 320 MP3 and then when I realised the
edwardthern wrote:
> So I've been going back and forth with MPD and Squeezelite for over a
> yearprobably longer, but lets just say 'actively comparing' the two
> for at least a year.
>
> Initial listening both sound great. But over time MPD seems to sound
> thick with more bass than
bonze wrote:
> Whatever floats your boat - but you don't really need to share all the
> same.
definitely a dead sheep.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
bonze wrote:
> Here it's known as the "SBGK defence" ;)
I feel like I've been savaged by a dead sheep or is it nuzzled by an old
boar, both apply.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
S
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSiVWkk5zaQ
the sound of the sex pistols is barely audible above the steam sounds,
I'm sure Sid would have approved.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's
sdiesel77 wrote:
> Hi All,
> I made these notes when I was messing around with the Touch and EDO/TT3,
> don't know if you can make anything of them.
>
> If you want to use these settings then it is best to copy the whole text
> into a text file as sometimes the lines get truncated if copying
Fizbin wrote:
> You guys have WAY too much time on your hands.
Shhh, don't tell them that.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003
garym wrote:
> yes, that did give me pausebut even a broken clock is correct twice
> a day!
you're too hard on yourself, I'm sure you've sometimes been correct 3
times a day.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
rgro wrote:
> You do realize you're agreeing with SBGK??? Next we'll have Arnyk and
> Jkeny giving each other bro-hugs.
Lot's of people agree with me. It's to be encouraged.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot
rgro wrote:
> 1906319064
>
> Ralph, it's pretty simple. The John Swenson of Uptone Audio fame (or
> infame as it were) IS the chap who designed and engineered the Regen for
> Upton Audio and, as I understand it, Alex Crespi is the owner of Uptone
> Audio. There is every reason for that John
Greg Erskine wrote:
> Hi SBGK,
>
> I think it is a little unfair to call him a villain.
>
> He abandoned one project for a more financially rewarding project =
> businessman.
>
> regards
> Greg
I mean't pantomime type villain.
At least the regen has some re
J Swenson develops reolacement squeezebox = Hero
J Swenson develops regen to critical acclaim = Villain
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
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/
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/
Still, I'm reminded of Kevin Keegan's rant at Alex Ferguson when I read
the comments about regen in this thread, it's definitely the
objectivists who are getting emotionally fraught.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
So sad. Where did it all go wrong for the regen folks, 2500 sales and
now they'll probably have to return all the money as people realise the
measurements prove they are hearing imaginary improvements.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
arnyk wrote:
> Because they are bullied into such wasteful purchases by unscrupulous
> audio manufacturers, dealers and other audiophiles.
>
> The audiophile culture has created a population of people who crave
> influence and make up imaginary and often technically impossible
> so-called
Julf wrote:
> Well, except... My point was that true audiophiles tend to declare
> asynchronous sample rate converters Truly Evil - probably because they
> make the whole jitter discussion a non-issue, and in a simple way, so
> that can't be good.
>
> The answer to by SBGK's question (that no
so what will you say when manufacturers start making their dacs with
regen type devices already included and people prefer the sq of those to
previous versions ? will that also be some form of mass delusion ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
arnyk wrote:
> It appears that you made a personal attack in this post:
>
> http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?104227-Once-again-does-wav-sound-different-than-flac=829644=1#post829644
>
> "Again, Who decide when evidence are enougth do become "accepted fact"?
> Oh, yes...Always You."
marcoc1712 wrote:
> Again, Who decide when evidence are enougth do become "accepted fact"?
> Oh, yes...Always You.
>
>
>
>
> Sure, but here is not the same, I say I heard it and I'm not the only
> one, Again what more evidence you need to accept we feel it (not on why
> and how), please be
pippin wrote:
> And I am missing a proof that Nessie doesn't exist.
>
that's easy, just empty Loch Ness of water and if there's not a monster
at the bottom then it doesn't exist. Though it could have gone to the
pub that evening, I suppose.
Touch optimisations
SBGK wrote:
> what's the chain ?
>
> flac -> sox -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> wav -> aplay -> pcm -> kernel -> drivers -> device
>
> so kernel and drivers see the same amount of data unless the sample
> rates
Julf wrote:
> User marcoc1712 started 'this thread'
> (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?104198-Disk-and-folder-browsing=828137=1#post828137)
> in the developer forum. The tread is primarily about possible bugs
> associated with trying to stream pure pcm or wav format files. In order
arnyk wrote:
> It seems like wind turbines would have to be thick and dense to
> significantly slow down the wind. If they did so to any degree the
> effect would be bounded by some reasonable distances above and around
> them.
>
> Man made heat islands do seem to significantly affect weather
arnyk wrote:
> Of course turbulence creates drag - that's obvious. However the above
> statement shows a lack of understanding about the basics of
> thermodynamics.
>
> The above seems to ignore the fundamentals of energy extraction. I see a
> complete lack of appreciation of entropy and its
Julf wrote:
> Ah, nice to have you back! Now that you are here, how about the
> 'unfinished business'
> (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?104136-MEASUREMENTS-Audiophile-Sound-and-Operating-Systems-(Windows-8-1-Windows-10-)=827775=1#post827775)?
Or what ?
Touch optimisations
Julf wrote:
Don't know - I was banned from CA after pointing out that sgbk was in
violation of his own software license terms...
no, I think the tirnahifi ban was for trolling and the CA was for
promising not to troll after the first ban and then continuing to troll,
facts is facts, doncha
Archimago wrote:
SBGK, I don't think you ever answered the question of what methodology
you use to evaluate sound quality... Some details would be interesting
and useful. I've asked before and I believe a very fair question.
I mainly use my earholes and feedback from people nice enough
Julf wrote:
Would love to see the results of your measurements.
Well, the render loop takes 9 uops with no port pressure or register
stalls, that's the only measurement I've done recently, seems better
than the previous 13 and 11 uop versions.
The problem with digital is it's fairly easy to
Julf wrote:
And the investigation would follow the scientific method. First you
would verify that there really is a difference, by isolating possible
other causes (such as confirmation bias and the placebo effect), and by
independent verification / replication. Then you would formulate an
Wombat wrote:
I didn't really follow this since i know where it comes from :)
good decision, someone will be a long to tell you what to follow.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
Julf wrote:
Wasn't the 'mqnplayer' (http://mqnplayer.blogspot.nl/) the ultimate
incarnation of this silliness?
are you saying you've tried it julfy ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's
Julf wrote:
A good one!
what to call an anti audiophile ?
Arny's barmy army ?
Anyone who has such an absolute claim on science just doesn't know how
much he doesn't know. A common trait amongst eejits.
Just noticed the quality posters have abandoned this forum, wonder why.
Touch
artee wrote:
The questions that I would like to ask each of you are:
1.Do you think that those posts add value to the forum?
2.Are you proud of your posts?
Cheers,
Rick
It's just banter between two esteemed individuals arguing about
something that can never be proved on an
You guys have lost the plot, why are you attacking someone just because
they have a different viewpoint ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
arnyk wrote:
Jkeny's abject cowardice and utter denial of reality should be more
conspicuous. I guess he can hide behind the fact that nobody really
cares that much what he does.
Can't blame him for not wanting to be called up short for his
anti-scientific claims and self-serving
arnyk wrote:
This is one of the big golden ear lies - that all truth is relative and
nothing can be proven.
prove it
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
arnyk wrote:
You've done it for me many times, just lately with that post of yours
that I replied to.
That's the clear meaning of the following false claim:
It's just banter between two esteemed individuals arguing about
something that can never be proved on an online forum.
The
bonze wrote:
So you don't think anyone should have a Touch in their system?
Well done, you've just proved his point.
The empty vessel makes the most noise.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Julf wrote:
So you aren't using a squeezebox?
See, you've quoted it out of context, well done. Which no tactic is that
from the troll manual ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
ralphpnj wrote:
Pray tell - what would any self respecting audiophile be doing on the
Slimdevices forum?
So again I ask: what would any self respecting audiophile be doing on
the Slimdevices forum?
some misguided people have been duped into using the squeezebox as a
front end to multi
I changed the buffer sizes in my Touch and hear enhanced high
frequencies with smaller values and reduced high frequencies with larger
buffers, has anyone tried to measure this effect ? It should be possible
to measure frequency differences.
Touch optimisations
arnyk wrote:
Why don't you run your own tests?
You've said the following:
real science would be trying to come up with theories to match the
evidence rather than ridiculing the evidence.
can you back those brave words up with relevant action?
there is enough anecdotal evidence from
arnyk wrote:
It would appear that ridicule is all you've got.
If you actually had something useful to say, you'd have said it by now.
now now, play nicely. you don't want to be remembered as a bitter old
man.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
arnyk wrote:
Just one of very many such audio accessories:
Green CD pens
Various rocks and items made of rocks
cable elevators
$5,000 CAT-5E 6 network cables
etc.
etc
The comment about quality stuff often being transparent is something
that can be shown to be true by scientific
a pity the self proclaimed upholders of science can't put in some
original research to understand why their measurements don't match the
effects on sound that people report hearing. To say that anyone who
disagrees with them is anti science is the sign of cult driven group
think.
Touch
arnyk wrote:
The historical precedent for recognizing the egregious failings of
sighted evaluations goes back at least to 1977 and our first ABX tests.
I have to admit that at that time I didn't realize how biased the
sighted evaluations that I had done for more than the first third of
jh901 wrote:
Off topic request, but could I get the very, very short list of
specialty hi-end audio products which produce no audible change in sound
quality. Specifically, I'm only interested in those products which are
_widely_accepted_ amongst audiophiles, yet are understood by
1500 regen devices sold, not one properly conducted abx test. abx tests
obviously irrelevant to those audiophiles. I guess we'll hear any
negative comments after more prolonged exposure if it's not beneficial
to all setups.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
arnyk wrote:
So jkeny, in your universe, the Laws Of Physics are settled by means of
a popularity contest? Everybody votes that water flows uphill, and it
starts doing so? Sure would be handy if things worked out that way!
But in the universe that most of us live in, the Laws of Physics
Mnyb wrote:
The simplest measurements of them all would be at the analog output of a
DAC any DAC, even if a product do improve stuff farther up in the
chain, whats eventually matters is whats leaving the DAC .
If a professional magazine or site reviews they better test a whole
bunch of
could Clarke's help the objectivists take a step forward towards the
light ?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws
Clarke's Three Laws are three laws of prediction formulated by the
British science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke. They are:
When a distinguished but elderly
arnyk wrote:
Let's not conflate commercial realities with technical truths.
If you go to the drugstore, what percentage of whats on the shelves are
unique effective medical tools, what percentage are things that work or
kinda work but are reasonably safe and are repackaged 7,600 (more or
Archimago wrote:
Doesn't this depend on who and where you ask? Do you think the market
has actually spoken in favour of high-end snakeoil?
Like Arny says, the actual penetration of the high end brands of cables
and whatnot isn't all that significant. More pedestrian, moderately
expensive
arnyk wrote:
Is this a Royal We?
Don't you think it is presumptuous to purport to speak for people who in
fact disagree with you?
As far as I'm concerned I'm one person with one opinion, and so is
everybody else.
This is a marketplace of ideas, and we all bring what we have, and
Archimago wrote:
Bell wire? What is that 20AWG or thinner? I did say a decent length of
copper did I not as speaker cables?
As for golden ears, you, like some others seem to claim/insist you have
them (based on what you claim to hear on your blog with OS
optimizations)... Is this
Archimago wrote:
Good luck with the zip cords...
Bottom line is that physics predicts that the demands of accurate
transmission of audio from 20Hz-20kHz in -speaker cables- is a rather
low standard that can be fulfilled more than easily by a decent length
of copper!
THE CLAIM OF
arnyk wrote:
Yes.
One little problem. There is no such thing as ...a bunch of PhDs (in
electrical engineering) that actually design cables.
Getting a PhD in EE or a related area has a prerequisite - learning
enough about EE to understand why audiophile cables are a myth.
Prove me
arnyk wrote:
Seems to shed a lot of light. It hopefully will turn discussion back to
fact-based conversations.
See Uptone are endevoring to produce their own measurements to counter
some of the degenerate attacks from Archie Kruger
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Touchy wrote:
Bump and apologies - I have reread the OP and it was indeed an
invitation for you ladies to carry on as you have been.
Well done. 'Handbags at dawn' then.
Will start a more appropriate thread for the subjectively inclined in
due course.
Carry on
Hopefully I can sneak
ralphpnj wrote:
A nice aside to this whole discussion is the history of the audiophile
fixation with the USB interface for digital audio.
Several iterations ago of the Windows operating system it was discovered
that USB digital output on a Windows computer was not bit perfect due to
an
so getting back on topic
if you non circle jerking, placebophilephobic, fundamentalist
objectivists (who are not part of the mafia) ever get to hear the regen
and find it makes a difference will you be open minded enough to
reappraise your beliefs ?
Touch optimisations
arnyk wrote:
The article could convince a naive reader that JS has measured an
improvement due to his device, but
What I have been finding in looking at DACs etc with USB inputs is that
there is what I am calling packet noise. This is bursts of noise
caused by the USB receiver processing
ralphpnj wrote:
No but a $175 device used to solve a problem with a $5,000 USB DAC
is all part of the same ecosystem, an ecosystem where the price to
performance ratio has no meaning. Want to isolate a $5000 DAC from the
evils of USB? By a SB Touch, stream it digital audio via wi-fi and
arnyk wrote:
Part of clarity is realizing that it is possible to have an open mind
without having holes in your head! ;-)
Yup, we find lots of that in our populations of Placebophiles. Their
fixed world view excludes very many of the findings of modern science as
I have demonstrated
Julf wrote:
Computer Audiophile. A site that might have started off with good
intentions, but once the owner started trying to make a living out of
running it, being paid for by advertising from audiophile product
vendors, it become an on-line version of the audiophile press in terms
of the
arnyk wrote:
Absolutely.
Geddes Clark and I (Nousaine was there in spirit, he would have been
there in body but for that err.. life change that he experienced last
year) were sharing beverages, lots of conversation and a fine meal as
recently as last Saturday.
JJ calls me up when
arnyk wrote:
Wow, jkeny has empowered himself to speak for the 100's if not 1000's of
people who post on this forum!
Amazing!
What you jkeny and others around here don't get is that once one
obtains a certain critical mass of knowledge and experience and has the
mental power to
arnyk wrote:
Which monstrous insult to the audio community are you speaking?
AFAIK Uptone seems to be a very small operation. Can they even afford to
advertise outside their web site and some forum posts?
AFAIK they are taking money primarily from people who have to have one
of
arnyk wrote:
Well, if you say so, but I don't rock that way.
It is a commercial product and it is what it is. So the question is what
is it?
It is pretty clear to anybody with familiarity with the internals of
this kind of hardware what it is from the supplied documentation.
Saying
arnyk wrote:
Well you are way ahead of me, could you provide a link to that
statement?
Please describe the reliable means that you have used to observe SQ.
Well that's not me. You may have read that I feel that you are free to
determine SQ by any means and share it, but of
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:
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,
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:
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
ralphpnj wrote:
Wow all this pointless discussion and trash talking over $175 tweak.
What happen if the item being discussed cost $1750?
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
arnyk wrote:
There is no perhaps here. The remark has been forcibly and violently
misconstrued. The only question in my mind is whether it was
misconstrued as an honest error, or maliciously. It is very possible
that some people who read that remark have the same perceptual
difficulty that
Julf wrote:
Ah, yes, now we are on familiar ground - if you can't respond to
factual issues, you can at least try to belittle the people you disagree
with.
sense of humour failure, Julf ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
arnyk wrote:
Back at you, fellow. I ask simple questions, you deflect the discussion
into something else, usually personal attacks like the one above.
This must be a quote from a post by me to some radical subjectivist!
;-)
There is no cleverness here, just a search for reliable
http://uptoneaudio.com/products/usb-regen
What do my learned friends make of the claims made about this product ?
Should have you all choking on your cornflakes. lol
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Julf wrote:
Then we have our occasional friend with his 'MQn player'
(http://2channelaudio.blogspot.nl/2014/02/mqn-minimalist-pc-music-player-king-of.html)...
still bitter ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Mnyb wrote:
Thats OK with me thats a fairly resonable idea, except as i have come to
understand it the models we have acomodate for any possible pattern or
wave form ,but in princible .
And it would be quite a leap a modern dac can surpase our own abilities
with say 30dB or something
Julf wrote:
SBGK's 'MQN Player'
(http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/visual-studio-2012-c-and-wasapi-minimalist-player-15401/),
where minor differences in the player software make night and day
differences to the sound.
'Audiophile solder'
ralphpnj wrote:
Julf - you are banned from Computer Audiophile - good work and
congratulations!
There is one thing about Computer Audiophile that I admire - the site's
founder (whose name escapes me) started out as just another audiophile
but thanks to the unrelenting kowtowing to the
Archimago wrote:
As typical for that site.
For more details around that 44 vs. 88kHz paper, have a look at this
thread:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=82264
Remember, only 3/16 listeners in that paper got significant results
overall and all admitted to feeling
Quad wrote:
Maybe I should see a doctor. I always try to be loved by everyone. :-)
I think it is time to say thank you to some of the forum members who
constantly point out scientific arguments against audiophile myths. This
saved me money and energy. Here is what I stopped doing because
I respectfully disagree with your viewpoints, apart from Mr Swenson. I
can't see these magazines changing any time soon so look forward to
plenty more of these Ralph PNJ acolytes threads.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
Can you prove your measurements are relevant to how something sounds ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003
View this thread:
or maybe you guys are wrong and the rest of the world is right. Is that
a possibility ?
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003
View
Deaf Cat wrote:
Hi,
Seems to get rather good results reading about it on various forums, but
not come across anyone using it with a slimdevices set up, just
wondered?
http://www.highend-audiopc.com/optimizer.html
cheers
DC
of course it makes a difference, does win 7 sound the same as
Julf wrote:
I guess it is a result of the sum of intelligence on the planet being a
constant while the population is growing.
and I think Julf was called out and given a warning for trolling,
nothing new there. Those that can do, those that can't gossip.
Touch optimisations
SBGK wrote:
and I think Julf was called out and given a warning for trolling,
nothing new there. Those that can do, those that can't gossip.
It's nice to see Julf start his own thread for a change, even if it is
one that links to one of his trolling episodes.
has Julf been banned from CA
SBGK wrote:
has Julf been banned from CA ?
seems so
Julf - When your CA membership was reinstated you agreed not to engage
in unprofessional behavior. Based on a review of your posts since that
time I believe you've violated that agreement. A warning simply doesn't
go far enough. I've decided
andy_c wrote:
The level of bulls--- in high end audio is an always-increasing
function. So if you thought it couldn't get worse, remember that
tomorrow is another day! :D
the coding I've been doing could conceivably be used in any audio
player, so you might benefit from it in the future
garym wrote:
The problem is that unprofessional behavior at CA seems to be daring
to bring up facts, science, and engineering in a thread.
oh well, he's now free to troll in slim forums and PFM.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
garym wrote:
Yes. Thankfully now and then has become less and less over the last
few years.
have reported this personal attack
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
bzlrbi wrote:
After a couple months of aggravation, I've finally convinced my
insurance company and their designated electronics repair folks that my
Transporter is not repairable. It got zapped in an electrical storm.
The unrepairable part is in the pre-amp section: it buzzes if connected
Julf wrote:
Any specific reasons to prefer WAV? I think the general view is that
with lower-end processors (such as those in the squeezeboxes) that don't
have dedicated I/O processors the additional network load caused by the
wasted bits in WAV files causes more CPU load (and thus
Archimago wrote:
Where are you saying is the WM8805 SPDIF receiver in this post? That was
the SPDIF receiver in the old AUNE X1, not the ASUS Essence One... I
assume therefore you are the one mistaken.
Toslink can exhibit several 100ns of jitter - do you mean ps? I'm
pretty sure I show
1 - 100 of 502 matches
Mail list logo
