More 'Audiophile' bullsh*t

[Mr_Yogi]

Zod said:

Mr_Yogi said:

I what I have read on so called "audio grade" computer components, and the problems they attempt to address, specifically some written by people who actually work wioth and design HiFi DAC's, the issue is not that the data being transfered correctly but rather the RF that comes with it.

You don't actually believe this, do you?

I believe RF is still an issue for DAC's, if the people who design and make them say so, as opposed to the people peddling the solutions. How much that effect is audible I have no idea, and I have no intention of spending my money on these things to "find out". I would however be interested to listen to them if someone offered me the chance.

Many years ago I was sure all CD transports must sound the same, as even a £12 PC CD-ROM could read a disc at 52 times that of a CD player. Then I had the opportunity to listen to a high end Cyrus system, and compare their highly regarded CD transport with their Streamer playing lossless rips of the same CD's. Much to my amazement they did sound subtly different. Since then I've tried to keep an open mind if there is (what I believe) a realistic explanation

[krunchkin]

Mr_Yogi said:

Zod said:

Mr_Yogi said:

I what I have read on so called "audio grade" computer components, and the problems they attempt to address, specifically some written by people who actually work wioth and design HiFi DAC's, the issue is not that the data being transfered correctly but rather the RF that comes with it.

You don't actually believe this, do you?

I believe RF is still an issue for DAC's, if the people who design and make them say so, as opposed to the people peddling the solutions. How much that effect is audible I have no idea, and I have no intention of spending my money on these things to "find out". I would however be interested to listen to them if someone offered me the chance.

Many years ago I was sure all CD transports must sound the same, as even a £12 PC CD-ROM could read a disc at 52 times that of a CD player. Then I had the opportunity to listen to a high end Cyrus system, and compare their highly regarded CD transport with their Streamer playing lossless rips of the same CD's. Much to my amazement they did sound subtly different. Since then I've tried to keep an open mind if there is (what I believe) a realistic explanation

magic beans available. reasonable prices. PM for details

[TonyRPH]

Mr_Yogi said:

I believe RF is still an issue for DAC's,
<snip>

But once again this comes down to good vs. bad design. A properly designed DAC (the receiver to be exact) will reject RF interference (if it even exists in the bit stream) and be immune to it.

Mr_Yogi said:

Many years ago I was sure all CD transports must sound the same, as even a £12 PC CD-ROM could read a disc at 52 times that of a CD player. Then I had the opportunity to listen to a high end Cyrus system, and compare their highly regarded CD transport with their Streamer playing lossless rips of the same CD's. Much to my amazement they did sound subtly different. Since then I've tried to keep an open mind if there is (what I believe) a realistic explanation

Again - design. A well designed SPDIF interface will sound the same with any transport. Naturally, both ends (transmitter [cd-player] and receiver [dac]) need to be competently designed.

You can liken it to the interface between a radio transmitter and it's antenna. If there is an impedance mismatch, there will be signal losses and in some cases damage to the transmitter.

I once examined the SPDIF waveform coming out of various CD players, and in many cases the waveform was quite distorted when terminated with the correct load impedance.

Make of that what you will.

Edit: fixed spelling.

Edited by TonyRPH on Friday 12th June 10:15

[IforB]

Mr_Yogi said:

Zod said:

Mr_Yogi said:

I what I have read on so called "audio grade" computer components, and the problems they attempt to address, specifically some written by people who actually work wioth and design HiFi DAC's, the issue is not that the data being transfered correctly but rather the RF that comes with it.

You don't actually believe this, do you?

I believe RF is still an issue for DAC's, if the people who design and make them say so, as opposed to the people peddling the solutions. How much that effect is audible I have no idea, and I have no intention of spending my money on these things to "find out". I would however be interested to listen to them if someone offered me the chance.

Many years ago I was sure all CD transports must sound the same, as even a £12 PC CD-ROM could read a disc at 52 times that of a CD player. Then I had the opportunity to listen to a high end Cyrus system, and compare their highly regarded CD transport with their Streamer playing lossless rips of the same CD's. Much to my amazement they did sound subtly different. Since then I've tried to keep an open mind if there is (what I believe) a realistic explanation

What you have to remember is that having an "open mind" on some of the snake oil treatments is seen to be just as unacceptable as it is to be a complete covert to the way of Russ Andrews to some people.

From a bit of experimentation, I am very comfortable that you can make a perceptible difference with some of what is termed as snake oil by some, but the vast majority of stuff like this is absolute garbage and just a way of parting idiot from their money.

Always keep an open mind however and I was always taught to make my own opinion up rather than listen to some ranty people on the internet who often confuse their own opinion with fact, whatever side of an argument they sit on.

[Crackie]

IforB said:

What you have to remember is that having an "open mind" on some of the snake oil treatments is seen to be just as unacceptable as it is to be a complete covert to the way of Russ Andrews to some people.

From a bit of experimentation, I am very comfortable that you can make a perceptible difference with some of what is termed as snake oil by some, but the vast majority of stuff like this is absolute garbage and just a way of parting idiot from their money.

Always keep an open mind however and I was always taught to make my own opinion up rather than listen to some ranty people on the internet who often confuse their own opinion with fact, whatever side of an argument they sit on.

One of the best posts in the entire thread............... it is very easy to become ranty / preachy about what is in only anecdotal evidence.

[TonyRPH]

Crackie said:

One of the best posts in the entire thread............... it is very easy to become ranty / preachy about what is in only anecdotal evidence.

And subjective views.

[gizlaroc]

Some of it is st, but when someone says all transports sound the same they just sound like a complete fking idiot.

[Carl_Manchester]

This thread was pure comedy.

I resurrect it as I am looking to upgrade my system and we have the £600 1.5m audiophile usb cable available to order.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AudioQuest-Diamond-Digita...

I lost the link but one of these puppies one a hifi magazines product of the year award which goes to show how corrupt parts of the audio scene are.

It was amusing to read the transport banter. I think the whole cd transport thing had a time but a lot of higher end demos I have seen recently on YouTube simply run using flac from a MacBook Pro into a Bad ass dsp.

I did some of my own listening tests with SACD vs CD on flac and I think that in most cases where the SACD source wins is down to the improved quality of the master. If the masters are the same a 16bit flac rip from a cd sounds the same as 24bit rip to me.

[JonV8V]

Carl_Manchester said:

This thread was pure comedy.

I resurrect it as I am looking to upgrade my system and we have the £600 1.5m audiophile usb cable available to order.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AudioQuest-Diamond-Digita...

I lost the link but one of these puppies one a hifi magazines product of the year award which goes to show how corrupt parts of the audio scene are.

It was amusing to read the transport banter. I think the whole cd transport thing had a time but a lot of higher end demos I have seen recently on YouTube simply run using flac from a MacBook Pro into a Bad ass dsp.

I did some of my own listening tests with SACD vs CD on flac and I think that in most cases where the SACD source wins is down to the improved quality of the master. If the masters are the same a 16bit flac rip from a cd sounds the same as 24bit rip to me.

That's got me thinking of a brilliant business idea... a fancy air Ionisier come air freshener that improves the quality of the sound waves...

copyrighted right here and now!!!

[jmorgan]

JonV8V said:

That's got me thinking of a brilliant business idea... a fancy air Ionisier come air freshener that improves the quality of the sound waves...

copyrighted right here and now!!!

Better still, remove the air from the room and replace it with air from sports stadiums, this air will have been stressed the right way to remove the inverted chromatron emissions that often get in the way of the electrons running down exotic cables due to the nature of those particles moving through cheap heat shrink at a sub atomic level and interfering with the holes.

[bitchstewie]

I'm sure I remember stumbling upon a review of network switches somewhere.

As soon as audio moved into IT territory it was obvious that the audio vendors would see $$$ signs.

Never mind that a $1 ethernet cable will be used to move trillions of dollars around the world daily, it's just not good enough for reliable audio playback.

[ladderino]

Indeed, audioquest also make 'audiophile' quality ethernet cables. Very important that you plug this in the correct way round.

http://arstechnica.com/staff/2015/02/to-the-audiop...

It's weird that they stop at the cables though, and haven't also created an audiophile version of the TCP protocol.


Kef made a good April fools for a Wifi spray - https://www.kefdirect.com/kef-hydro-blaster-improv... - at least I hope that this is an April fools...

[IforB]

Carl_Manchester said:

This thread was pure comedy.

I resurrect it as I am looking to upgrade my system and we have the £600 1.5m audiophile usb cable available to order.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/AudioQuest-Diamond-Digita...

I lost the link but one of these puppies one a hifi magazines product of the year award which goes to show how corrupt parts of the audio scene are.

It was amusing to read the transport banter. I think the whole cd transport thing had a time but a lot of higher end demos I have seen recently on YouTube simply run using flac from a MacBook Pro into a Bad ass dsp.

I did some of my own listening tests with SACD vs CD on flac and I think that in most cases where the SACD source wins is down to the improved quality of the master. If the masters are the same a 16bit flac rip from a cd sounds the same as 24bit rip to me.

I've a hard drive full of 24bit and other "HD audio" of various bit rates and the biggest difference is not the rate or the encoding, but how the track or album was mastered originally. Supposed lower quality recording can sound great and better ones sound gash thanks to the way it was dealt with in the studio.

Once you get to a certain stage, then you start to hear the difference in how things were done originally. The encoding isn't the limiting factor.

[gizlaroc]

A digital file is simply container, move it around and you keep all the info. But you can alter that digital files sound with different FIFO Buffering and using different types of Apodising Filters.

Listen to a pair or Meridian DSP speakers playing a track from so a Sonos connect direct into the DSP speakers via coax and then listen again with a Meridian 818v3 applying its filters, the difference is not subtle.

Being able to clean up the filters used in early digital recordings is quite impressive, some of those early recordings can sound not just bright but pretty harsh, when you apply Meridians apodising filter to remove the pre-ringing it cleans them right up.

The thing is, most manufacturers will put this tech in the DAC, because Meridian use digital speakers they also put it in the transport which is unusual, but it shows how much you can alter the sound of a digital file and that not all transports are the same as many argue.

[Jobbo]

gizlaroc said:

The thing is, most manufacturers will put this tech in the DAC, because Meridian use digital speakers they also put it in the transport which is unusual, but it shows how much you can alter the sound of a digital file and that not all transports are the same as many argue.

That's the transport altering the data though, fairly obviously.

[Funk]

Jobbo said:

gizlaroc said:

The thing is, most manufacturers will put this tech in the DAC, because Meridian use digital speakers they also put it in the transport which is unusual, but it shows how much you can alter the sound of a digital file and that not all transports are the same as many argue.

That's the transport altering the data though, fairly obviously.

Indeed, and whether you like those changes will be personal taste. I guess being crude it's the equivalent of a posh digital bass boost button.

I've not heard many Meridian setups but what I did hear, I liked though.

[TonyRPH]

gizlaroc said:

<snip>
because Meridian use digital speakers they also put it in the transport which is unusual, but it shows how much you can alter the sound of a digital file and that not all transports are the same as many argue.

Measurements exist which prove that the digital stream (prior to any processing) as read from a CD is identical across transports.

You should have a read of this thread on DIYAudio.

ETA: I meant prior to any processing by a receiver / DAC - but post error correction.

There are rare cases where the data is not correctable, but that's usually because the CD is badly damaged (or a faulty transport).

Measurements show that errors occur in terms of several hours rather than seconds.

Edited by TonyRPH on Sunday 25th September 15:09

[gizlaroc]

TonyRPH said:

Measurements exist which prove that the digital stream (prior to any processing) as read from a CD is identical across transports.

But this is what you get when you buy an expensive transport, and I use transport to describe any digital source, the better ones can simply clean up the audio by using processing, in fact I would guess almost all are apodising now.

[TonyRPH]

I stand to correction on this (it's been some 30 years since I did my CD player training*), however IIRC, the filters do not play any part in the actual error correction / data extraction off the CD itself.

They are part of post processing to prior to processing by the receiver / DAC.

As has been said by others - I still believe that CD playback is excellent - IF - the source material is good - AND - it's been properly mastered. HD audio is simply not required IMHO.

In a similar vein, I find it somewhat irrational that people can rave about vinyl replay, however the source material for that vinyl has inevitably been digitized at some point nowadays (with the exception of the small specialist labels that manage to obtain the original master tapes). I remember back in the late 70's, Ry Cooder's Bop Till You Drop** album was digitally mastered, and it was head and shoulders after many other albums in terms of sound quality. Fleetwood Mac's Tusk album was also an early digital master and also sounded good.

Ultimately, there's no reason why 'red book' CDs shouldn't sound good - they are simply let down by poor mastering and the loudness wars (and no doubt mastered to a very tight budget).

• and I diversified into IT about 5 years after that!

• digitally recorded on 3-M multi-track digital equipment.

[gizlaroc]

TonyRPH said:

I stand to correction on this (it's been some 30 years since I did my CD player training*), however IIRC, the filters do not play any part in the actual error correction / data extraction off the CD itself.

They are part of post processing to prior to processing by the receiver / DAC.

Yeah, but that can be part of the transport, so people saying all transports sound the same are wrong.
You even have some transports that even let you select the filters you want to use, so this is the same transport with a choice of sonic signatures.

TonyRPH said:

As has been said by others - I still believe that CD playback is excellent - IF - the source material is good - AND - it's been properly mastered. HD audio is simply not required IMHO.

In a similar vein, I find it somewhat irrational that people can rave about vinyl replay, however the source material for that vinyl has inevitably been digitized at some point nowadays (with the exception of the small specialist labels that manage to obtain the original master tapes). I remember back in the late 70's, Ry Cooder's Bop Till You Drop** album was digitally mastered, and it was head and shoulders after many other albums in terms of sound quality. Fleetwood Mac's Tusk album was also an early digital master and also sounded good.

Ultimately, there's no reason why 'red book' CDs shouldn't sound good - they are simply let down by poor mastering and the loudness wars (and no doubt mastered to a very tight budget).

Totally agree.
Most of the stuff I listen to is redbook CD, 16/44 material.

But then I use Meridian with the apodising filters which makes it sound rather special. I can turn on/off the filters and the difference is pretty obvious, not always better, but 9 times out of 10 it is so I just leave it on.

My bedroom set up was an Arcam FMJ amp with a pair of Roksan ribbon tweeter speaker and a Rel sub, with that system there was more of a jump going from 16/24 to 16/44 vs 24/192, however, if you converted the 24/192 back to 16/44 flac there wasn't so much difference between the hi res and down converted cd quality rip, which, as you said, shows that much of the fact that the hires files sound better is that they are mastered and encoded better than the CD version.

Having said all that, some of the Diana Krall 24/96 recordings are truly stunning, the soundstage is the biggest gain, can't here it on my B&0 speakers, but on the Meridian DSP speakers it is fking scary how 'in the room' it is.
But I never find the CD version bad either and could happily live with either.

But I don't spend money on hires music, I have bought a few albums, but mainly stuff I already have that I love, 95% of my listening is streamed through Tidal at 16/44 and it is great.