More 'Audiophile' bullsh*t

[otolith]

Countdown said:

otolith said:

TonyRPH said:

And yet at the same time, some people genuinely say they can't tell the difference.

Relatively easy to obtain quantitative data to show the difference, though.

AIUI some people were suggesting earlier that you CAN'T get useful quantitative data.....

I mean in the case of Kia versus Bentley, not in the case of one power lead versus another.

[TonyRPH]

I was just browsing theartofsound.net and...

theartofsound.net said:

I don't think there is any difference between USB cables with regard to data transfer, the data is either successfully transmitted or not. But I do believe there can be differences with regard to secondary effects introduced by the USB cable, galvanic isolation, RF interference etc...

I have an M-DAC which has the rather handy capability of a 'bit perfect' test, using pre defined sample files, both 16/44.1 and 24/96 are provided. I can achieve a bit perfect feed from my SBTouch into the M-DAC using a cheapo USB cable, and also with my £35 Kimber 1/2M USB cable.

However the Kimber sounds better, so I have to put this down to secondary effects, I've even bought a USB isolator, but I'd be hard pushed to say if that's given me any improvements...but as it's there, and it doesn't degrade the sound, I'll leave it in place for now

If the transfer has been proven to be bit perfect, how can it sound different?

I know this is the old circular debate going on here - but this mystifies me.

It's almost as if there's a belief that USB / digital cables respond to audio transfer in the same way as analogue cables do - e.g. excessive capacitance yields HF rolloff etc.

[Mr Whippy]

TonyRPH said:

I was just browsing theartofsound.net and...

theartofsound.net said:

I don't think there is any difference between USB cables with regard to data transfer, the data is either successfully transmitted or not. But I do believe there can be differences with regard to secondary effects introduced by the USB cable, galvanic isolation, RF interference etc...

I have an M-DAC which has the rather handy capability of a 'bit perfect' test, using pre defined sample files, both 16/44.1 and 24/96 are provided. I can achieve a bit perfect feed from my SBTouch into the M-DAC using a cheapo USB cable, and also with my £35 Kimber 1/2M USB cable.

However the Kimber sounds better, so I have to put this down to secondary effects, I've even bought a USB isolator, but I'd be hard pushed to say if that's given me any improvements...but as it's there, and it doesn't degrade the sound, I'll leave it in place for now

If the transfer has been proven to be bit perfect, how can it sound different?

I know this is the old circular debate going on here - but this mystifies me.

It's almost as if there's a belief that USB / digital cables respond to audio transfer in the same way as analogue cables do - e.g. excessive capacitance yields HF rolloff etc.

They just don't get it, which then makes their opinion a bit iffy.

This is why blind testing is the only reliable method. No idea about anything, get the most audiophile person you can, but tell them nothing of the configs or anything.

Test a bunch of systems side by side, different wires, etc...

I'd be surprised if beyond £5,000 kit at 'normal' listening volumes they could tell much difference at all, and I bet none would spot differences in digital transmission cables (more so ones with checksum transmission protocols )

Dave

[StuH]

Mr Whippy said:

custodian said:

Mr Whippy said:

Imo the best sound I've heard was my Apple iPhone headphones, and they came free with my telephone.

Usually everything else is just much of a muchness, a matter of perception and taste or effects... all which can be done with a signal processor (ie, a computer) these days.

Dave

What a sheltered life you have lead

I've sampled a selection of fancier stuff over the years. £250 headphones recently that had a friend jizzing in his pants (my iPhone ones felt the same after I did a few tweaks in the equaliser in Windows hehe), and over £1000 B&W speakers in the past.

I used to buy T3 magazine and get excited about buying fancy wires and speakers once upon a time in the late 90's... unfortunately I then got into building my own speaker enclosures (ASW in my case) to complement my existing speakers, making a cross-over to send the low frequency around etc... the B&W ASW's were just too much cash to justify I think, and I liked the idea of a DIY build.
I quickly learnt that half of the stuff you buy is just paying for well balanced stuff and beyond a few hundred quid you are probably in the 90% zone, where every extra doubling of cost adds an ever smaller benefit. You can't change the laws of physics after all.


In the end I realised that I just didn't care that much.

I went from £1000 speakers to £50 ones and I honestly don't care.

Yes I know they are not great, but where do you stop?


I think if you do care that much fine, but you have to be honest with yourself. If you tell yourself something is better to avoid feeling like an idiot for spending £1000 on a needle to rub against a record vs a £50 one, then that is something entirely different. What is wrong with being honest and saying you can't tell the difference?

Dave

I think some people can't tell the difference though, some people just aren't discerning and good enough is good enough - I have no problem with this as long as they don't then infer because there is no difference for them that there is no difference for anyone else. Although already Mr Whippy appears to be falling into the trap of insinuating that anyone who buys expensive gear is a mug, yada yada, a tired cliche that we've been through ad nauseum on this thread already. For instance my wife can't tell the difference between HD and SD TV and doesn't care. Where for me watching "fuzzy" SD drives me to distraction.

As it happens the new Apple earbuds aren't too bad at all (unlike the previous very poor ones Apple supplied with its iDevices) and for most people will be "good enough". However I still have about a dozen pairs of headphones that I use in place of these, my current favorites are Phonak Audeo PFE 232, and I also drive these with an external Fiio E7 amp/DAC from my iPhone, but them I'm part of the 0.1% of the population at the far extremity of the bell curve who chases diminishing returns because to me they're worth it

[robbyd]

StuH said:

I think some people can't tell the difference though, some people just aren't discerning and good enough is good enough - I have no problem with this as long as they don't then infer because there is no difference for them that there is no difference for anyone else. Although already Mr Whippy appears to be falling into the trap of insinuating that anyone who buys expensive gear is a mug, yada yada, a tired cliche that we've been through ad nauseum on this thread already. For instance my wife can't tell the difference between HD and SD TV and doesn't care. Where for me watching "fuzzy" SD drives me to distraction.

We see with our brains, not our eyes. Our eyes are just the receptors for light. The same with ears. The more you deal with minute differences in anything on a daily basis the more exaggerated they become, even though the next person might not even spot them at all. My line of work relies on my eyes - I spot differences on lines or whatever to tenths of a mm, same with colour, tone etc. Because that's what I am used to doing. Yet if I were watching, say, a cricket match, I wouldn't pick up on a fraction of what a cricket fan would be seeing, because I have no interest in it. He on the other hand would be reading what sort of spin the bowler had put on the ball, why the fielders were standing where they were etc etc. Even though we're staring at exactly the same game. Same with anything else. You don't have to hear to 20kHZ to pick up on differences in equipment. You just have to have experience and a lot of time listening to both live and recorded music. It's not necessarily even 'listening' - just 'hearing'. Having said that, many systems are incapable of revealing the differences of a cable swap because they are not transparent enough - maybe the amp or speakers simply cannot resolve the amount of detail. Doesn't mean the differences aren't obvious in another system.

[Mr Whippy]

StuH said:

Mr Whippy said:

custodian said:

Mr Whippy said:

Imo the best sound I've heard was my Apple iPhone headphones, and they came free with my telephone.

Usually everything else is just much of a muchness, a matter of perception and taste or effects... all which can be done with a signal processor (ie, a computer) these days.

Dave

What a sheltered life you have lead

I've sampled a selection of fancier stuff over the years. £250 headphones recently that had a friend jizzing in his pants (my iPhone ones felt the same after I did a few tweaks in the equaliser in Windows hehe), and over £1000 B&W speakers in the past.

I used to buy T3 magazine and get excited about buying fancy wires and speakers once upon a time in the late 90's... unfortunately I then got into building my own speaker enclosures (ASW in my case) to complement my existing speakers, making a cross-over to send the low frequency around etc... the B&W ASW's were just too much cash to justify I think, and I liked the idea of a DIY build.
I quickly learnt that half of the stuff you buy is just paying for well balanced stuff and beyond a few hundred quid you are probably in the 90% zone, where every extra doubling of cost adds an ever smaller benefit. You can't change the laws of physics after all.


In the end I realised that I just didn't care that much.

I went from £1000 speakers to £50 ones and I honestly don't care.

Yes I know they are not great, but where do you stop?


I think if you do care that much fine, but you have to be honest with yourself. If you tell yourself something is better to avoid feeling like an idiot for spending £1000 on a needle to rub against a record vs a £50 one, then that is something entirely different. What is wrong with being honest and saying you can't tell the difference?

Dave

I think some people can't tell the difference though, some people just aren't discerning and good enough is good enough - I have no problem with this as long as they don't then infer because there is no difference for them that there is no difference for anyone else. Although already Mr Whippy appears to be falling into the trap of insinuating that anyone who buys expensive gear is a mug, yada yada, a tired cliche that we've been through ad nauseum on this thread already. For instance my wife can't tell the difference between HD and SD TV and doesn't care. Where for me watching "fuzzy" SD drives me to distraction.

As it happens the new Apple earbuds aren't too bad at all (unlike the previous very poor ones Apple supplied with its iDevices) and for most people will be "good enough". However I still have about a dozen pairs of headphones that I use in place of these, my current favorites are Phonak Audeo PFE 232, and I also drive these with an external Fiio E7 amp/DAC from my iPhone, but them I'm part of the 0.1% of the population at the far extremity of the bell curve who chases diminishing returns because to me they're worth it

If there is a difference and you CAN spot it, then great. I believe many people can't but they feel they should because everyone else can, and so spend cash for no benefit... and in a market place rife with snake oil retailers that isn't ideal for the consumer (their own fault though)

As per HD/SD TV. I'm a big fan of HD purely because the bitrate per pixel ratio is superior, which means better image quality.

It's interesting that in the world of video we are still at a point where getting a good enough quality product to start with is pretty damn hard to appreciate even average display devices to their best!
It's almost the flip around with the audio world it seems, where you can get good source material for peanuts but getting a device to do it justice seems to cost a fortune.

Ie, people editing content for Blu Ray will shoot on RED cameras, but usually they will edit on displays that probably cost £2000 tops, along boggo DVI wires and the like.

Dave

[torres del paine]

There's terrible snobbery in Hifi.

Trawl the hifi forums and it often goes something like this:

OP: I've got a Marantz xxxx and Rotel xxxx with Tannoy xxxx floorstanders and it sounds wonderful, can't fault it: fabulous, tight bass that's not boomy, midrange that is clear, detailed and faithful, and sweet treble but I'm looking to upgrade! I'm looking at the following for £xxxx (a number of ugly boxes from cottage industry charlatans)

Reply: I've tried the Audiodrab xxxx and the Cyrus xxxx from the list both are very detailed with terrific seperation but they're harsh, thin and rather unmusical compared to your set-up. You could go for the Marantz KI Pearl, which is superb and would give you hours of listening pleasure but that would be a sideways move. Have you tried the Densen xxxx? It's meant to be truly revealing, a real step-up...

[kayc]

torres del paine said:

There's terrible snobbery in Hifi.

Trawl the hifi forums and it often goes something like this:

OP: I've got a Marantz xxxx and Rotel xxxx with Tannoy xxxx floorstanders and it sounds wonderful, can't fault it: fabulous, tight bass that's not boomy, midrange that is clear, detailed and faithful, and sweet treble but I'm looking to upgrade! I'm looking at the following for £xxxx (a number of ugly boxes from cottage industry charlatans)

Reply: I've tried the Audiodrab xxxx and the Cyrus xxxx from the list both are very detailed with terrific seperation but they're harsh, thin and rather unmusical compared to your set-up. You could go for the Marantz KI Pearl, which is superb and would give you hours of listening pleasure but that would be a sideways move. Have you tried the Densen xxxx? It's meant to be truly revealing, a real step-up...

Bizzare post..Good lunch i presume.

[torres del paine]

Bizarre.

I'm a touch bored at work, and yes I'm clealy on a tangent but there's no denying the mediocre crap produced by some fabled British hifi companies.

Not all bad but fk me, some of it is plain sounding stuff and unreliable to boot.

As you were...

[TonyRPH]

This 'Ambient Field Conditioner' is a bit 'Zen' like.

Put it in the right place, and your sound will improve.

Yours for $1323.

[dudleybloke]

i have a stunning set of magic beans that when nano-bonded to the atomic matrix of the huygenphonic trans-inversion parametric flutes (sold seperatly) increase both sub-tweeter efficiancy and resofluxing of the boundry layer condensates whilst also reducing wand-tang spike flashing.

these beans will totaly transform the sound of any system and quite frankly not using them means you know nothing about hi-fi.

available for a limited time only,all with the dudleybloke 25 year no-refunds guarantee.

price - £4999.00 per bean.

SPECIAL OFFER!!!!!

hurry and take advantage of our special "2 for the price of 3" offer.

NOT AVAILABLE IN ANY SHOPS SO BUY TODAY!!!!!!!

[tank slapper]

No. Their website is full of plausible (to someone with minimal knowledge of physics) sounding bullst. Wow, they have made a box that looks dark when you photograph it, and somehow they think that it can radiate some absorbing effect from it. Utter rubbish.

If you really want to block EM interference from something, stick it in a Faraday cage. You could build one for a hell of a lot less than what they are asking for that fancy looking box.

[Globs]

tank slapper said:

No. Their website is full of plausible (to someone with minimal knowledge of physics) sounding bullst. Wow, they have made a box that looks dark when you photograph it, and somehow they think that it can radiate some absorbing effect from it. Utter rubbish.

If you really want to block EM interference from something, stick it in a Faraday cage. You could build one for a hell of a lot less than what they are asking for that fancy looking box.

It probably does the same job as a feather cushion, but worse. Cushions are so yesterday though.
As, apparently 'Stereo Times' will be soon pushing pure grade bullst like that, it's almost as daft as mains leads...

[Mr Whippy]

dudleybloke said:

i have a stunning set of magic beans that when nano-bonded to the atomic matrix of the huygenphonic trans-inversion parametric flutes (sold seperatly) increase both sub-tweeter efficiancy and resofluxing of the boundry layer condensates whilst also reducing wand-tang spike flashing.

You write for Star Trek don't you

[dudleybloke]

Mr Whippy said:

dudleybloke said:

i have a stunning set of magic beans that when nano-bonded to the atomic matrix of the huygenphonic trans-inversion parametric flutes (sold seperatly) increase both sub-tweeter efficiancy and resofluxing of the boundry layer condensates whilst also reducing wand-tang spike flashing.

You write for Star Trek don't you

i used to write for what hi-fi but changed to star trek as i was fed up with writing fiction.

[TonyRPH]

dudleybloke said:

i used to write for what hi-fi but changed to star trek as i was fed up with writing fiction.

Huh. Don't get me started about What Hi Fi.

"Which manufacturer are we plugging this month then?"

I guess the one that's paying the biggest advertising bill.

There was a time when every Cyrus product was the best, despite their CD player(s) munching CDs (literally) at an alarming rate.

Not forgetting that Cyrus themselves wouldn't even accept there was a problem...

[Globs]

TonyRPH said:

Huh. Don't get me started about What Hi Fi.

"Which manufacturer are we plugging this month then?"

I guess the one that's paying the biggest advertising bill.

They have a forum too.
Mention one bad word about Naim and you're banned.
Mention stuff about digital active speakers and PCs and your banned.
Mention something about someone who was banned and you get banned.
Mention, oh - never mind. It's censorship city there, no opinions required...

A truly pathetic magazine that makes the Guardian 'CiF' look like tolerance city

[TonyRPH]

Globs said:

They have a forum too.
Mention one bad word about Naim and you're banned.
Mention stuff about digital active speakers and PCs and your banned.
Mention something about someone who was banned and you get banned.
Mention, oh - never mind. It's censorship city there, no opinions required...

A truly pathetic magazine that makes the Guardian 'CiF' look like tolerance city

Yes! I am a member there, although I haven't used it for about 2 years now.

I noticed it was the same old people babbling on about upgrades all the time too.

There were one or two helpful guys, one in particular who did a really nice write up about Windows audio stuff - PJ somebody IIRC.

[Crackie]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Certainly not.

[TonyRPH]

Crackie said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Certainly not.

No, certainly not.

Just overhyped and overrated IMHO.