I wondered what the opinion is in this forum on the below mentioned DAC's,
and wheather anyboy knows DAC's with better price/value?
Merk/Type Chip(s) Prijs
Gustard X20u ES9018 Sabre € 772,00
JemmyAudio DAD1pro ES9018 Sabre € 305,00
SMSL M8 ES9018 Sabre € 223,00
Schiit Modi 2 Uber AKM AK4490 € 175,00
Behringer UCA-202 with NWAVGUY's mods, maybe? Around 40 USD.
http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011_02_01_archive.html (http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011_02_01_archive.html)
For line-level use, probably no need to modify at all: The mods do greatly lower output impedance through the headphone jack though.
Fiio D3 for ~20 USD?
Or, any soundcard that doesn't have audible noise is very-likely better than human hearing, and you can't do much better than that!
P.S.
Or, HDMI into a home theater receiver if you want surround sound and support for all of the major formats, and EQ, and remote control, etc.
I wondered what the opinion is in this forum on the below mentioned DAC's
Well the ES9018 costs about 10-15 dollars in bulk, so I would say anyone charging you hundreds of euros for one is probably not giving you a very good deal unless they are including a lot more than a DAC...
What exactly are you hoping get?
Well, you can guess my opinion by ABXing these two files:
One is the original track, the other one is the original after being played on a Samsung GT-S5830L and recorded with the line in of a A58M-E motherboard. I even had to convert the original file to AAC because the phone can't play Flac files. xd (though it was an overkill bitrate).
Note: The beginning silence of the recorded file was edited to be free of hiss (the rest is untouched).
Behringer UCA-202 with NWAVGUY's mods, maybe? Around 40 USD.
http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011_02_01_archive.html (http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011_02_01_archive.html)
For line-level use, probably no need to modify at all: The mods do greatly lower output impedance through the headphone jack though.
Great price/value headphone DAC. And easy to MOD (http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/03/behringer-uca202-frankendac.html).
However, I am not into modding and, as you can see on my list, not searching for headphone DAC's
Fiio D3 for ~20 USD?
Would not know where to get it for only 20USD or equivalent in €. And I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value. However, certainly great price/value. (More info: https://hifiduino.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/inside-fiio-d3/)
I wondered what the opinion is in this forum on the below mentioned DAC's
Well the ES9018 costs about 10-15 dollars in bulk, so I would say anyone charging you hundreds of euros for one is probably not giving you a very good deal unless they are including a lot more than a DAC...
What exactly are you hoping get?
A ES9018 alone doesn't make a decent audio-DAC with commonly wished functionality (And certainly with all the technical possibilities nowadays those wishes are increasing).
Fiio D3 for ~20 USD?
Would not know where to get it for only 20USD or equivalent in €. And I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value. However, certainly great price/value. (More info: https://hifiduino.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/inside-fiio-d3/)
You're right, it's about 34 euros on Amazon.fr. I'm not real familiar with European retailers so maybe there's a better deal out there. It certainly worked for my purposes.
What exactly are you hoping get?
A ES9018 alone doesn't make a decent audio-DAC with commonly wished functionality (And certainly with all the technical possibilities nowadays those wishes are increasing).
Once again, what are those wishes? Do you need more than just a DAC? It is impossible to answer your question if you don't specify what you are looking for.
Well, you can guess my opinion by ABXing these two files:
One is the original track, the other one is the original after being played on a Samsung GT-S5830L and recorded with the line in of a A58M-E motherboard. I even had to convert the original file to AAC because the phone can't play Flac files. xd (though it was an overkill bitrate).
Note: The beginning silence of the recorded file was edited to be free of hiss (the rest is untouched).
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
Sure are there bad chips and bad implementations, but on its face, this amounts to little more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link. When discussing differences in audible sound quality, the rule here is put up or shut up.
EDIT: Toned it down a bit; "put up or shut up" applies in general, rather than only to the original poster, though it seems pretty clear that the original poster doesn't know about TOS #8 and really really really should. My post before editing can be seen quoted below.
What exactly are you hoping get?
A ES9018 alone doesn't make a decent audio-DAC with commonly wished functionality (And certainly with all the technical possibilities nowadays those wishes are increasing).
Once again, what are those wishes? Do you need more than just a DAC? It is impossible to answer your question if you don't specify what you are looking for.
An ideal solution would solve the below mentioned situation.
Like many people I have a invested in the past in a decent analogue audioset (my Amp has RCA-jacks only). And I don't want to put that investment to waste.
However I do wish to digitize my Vinyl- and CD-collection into 24bit-192kHz flac files, and be able to play them lossless (thus without cable induced jitter) on my analogue set. I would like to listen to music from the internet (downloading or streaming) on my audioset, or to listen to audio from video's that I play on my TV (For instance with Blu-ray player).
And I would like to use my laptop, I-pad and TV as both monitor to control which music should be played on which device at a certain moment (for example with XMBC?) and as mediaplayer. Among those audiostreams could be DTS or Dolby 7.1 sources while my analogue audioset only takes in 2-channel Stereo.
In other words I would like be able to control on any monitor In my house which music I would like to play on which connected device(s). And all music sources (even DTS and Dolby 7.1 compressed into 24-bit 192kHz flac files) should be transported by cable or by air without loss of quality (so without compression-loss and without jitter). Which means that digital decoding and digital to analog conversion should take place as close as possible to the loudspeakers.
However, it would take a great effort, and money, to run UTP or HDMI cables everywhere through my house. So I try to avoid this if possible.
I have my digital files on a harddisk connected to my laptop (If necessary I'm willing to invest in a separate NAS). My laptop (with connected harddisk) is located 6 meters from my audioset.
I can run a cable between my laptop and my audioset fairly easy .
My TV is located 6 meters from my audioset and my laptop. However running a cable from my TV to my audioset or laptop would take great effort.
My internet router is located 7 meters from my TV, 10 meters from my laptop and 15 meters from my audioset. I can run a cable between my Internet router and my TV fairly easy . However running a cable from my Internet router to my audioset or laptop would take great effort.
What solution(s) would you advice?
(If no decent solution for the above situation, with good price/value, is available then I would settle with a simple DAC for now. As long as I helps me to play my flac files on my analogue audio-set.)
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response. On which toes did I step? I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
It sounds like you are actually asking for a fairly ordinary AV receiver and possibly a WiFi audio bridge for the devices that are too far to run RCA cables to.
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
However I do wish to digitize my [...] CD-collection into 24bit-192kHz flac files
???
cable induced jitter
Fuck me. I can't be bothered to read beyond this horseshit.
I think they mis-typed "coffee-induced jitters".
delusionally induced regurgitation
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
Then, show us the ABX log of the files that I've linked using your audio set.
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
Then, show us the ABX log of the files that I've linked using your audio set.
What is an ABX log? And is ABX not a listening test? How do I log my ears?
By the way I don't have DAC yet. That why I started this thread in the first place. To get informed on DAC's, by asking peoples opinions about the "supposed to be good DAC" that I found on the net. And maybe people on this forum allready did ABX-tests on those or other DAC's ? Is that so much to ask for? Is not that what forums are supposed to be all about? Help people instead of harassing them in GOD-like elitist way.
Learning how to liberate your ears from the rest of your senses is the best help you can possibly get; far better than weighing the anecdotal placebophile bullshit that you've undoubtedly read about subjects you say you don't understand.
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
Then, show us the ABX log of the files that I've linked using your audio set.
What is an ABX log? And is ABX not a listening test? How do I log my ears?
By the way I don't have DAC yet. That why I started this thread in the first place. To get informed on DAC's, by asking peoples opinions about the "supposed to be good DAC" that I found on the net. And maybe people on this forum allready did ABX-tests on those or other DAC's ? Is that so much to ask for? Is not that what forums are supposed to be all about? Help people instead of harassing them in GOD-like elitist way.
You need foobar2000. And this: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx
There are plenty of guides on internet of how to use it, but to resume it, select test A and test B on foobar2000, rightclick, utilities, ABXtracks. Choose the trail count (preferably >10) and start. You have to tell whether not "Play X" is "Play B" or "Play A". (Obviously if for example "Play X" is "Play B", then "Play A" is "Play Y").
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
Then, show us the ABX log of the files that I've linked using your audio set.
What is an ABX log? And is ABX not a listening test? How do I log my ears?
By the way I don't have DAC yet. That why I started this thread in the first place. To get informed on DAC's, by asking peoples opinions about the "supposed to be good DAC" that I found on the net. And maybe people on this forum allready did ABX-tests on those or other DAC's ? Is that so much to ask for? Is not that what forums are supposed to be all about? Help people instead of harassing them in GOD-like elitist way.
You need foobar2000. And this: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx
There are plenty of guides on internet of how to use it, but to resume it, select test A and test B on foobar2000, rightclick, utilities, ABXtracks. Choose the trail count (preferably >10) and start. You have to tell whether not "Play X" is "Play B" or "Play A". (Obviously if for example "Play X" is "Play B", then "Play A" is "Play Y").
And then? I don't have a DAC.
Why is there nobody here that is even willing to give his personal opion on mentioned DAC's? or others?
May than I can start to select some DAC's which I can try out with my "liberated ears".
Probably because:
"All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims. Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings. Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support."
...gets in the way of reporting differences between devices which are purely imagined. Cases where some boutique DAC is intentionally designed to have its own signature "sound" (read: degraded through coloration, IOW: broken) don't find their way here likely because those interested in such garbage find this community anathematic.
Probably because:
"All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims. Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings. Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support."
...gets in the way of reporting differences between devices which are purely imagined. Cases where some boutique DAC is intentionally designed to have its own signature "sound" (read: degraded through coloration) don't find there way here likely because those interested in such garbage find this community anathematic.
And do you guys maybe have a list of ABX tested DAC's that states with which DAC you can and with wich DAC you cannot hear a difference on your audio-set between files with a quality difference that should be just hearable by people with good hearing?
It sounds like you are actually asking for a fairly ordinary AV receiver and possibly a WiFi audio bridge for the devices that are too far to run RCA cables to.
Thanks. Could you maybe elaborate a bit on this. So as I understand why this is what I am looking for (instead of a DAC or so)?
I am not sure weather it meets most of this forums members threshold of value.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.msg149481.html#msg149481
Well you obviously would not hear a difference playing them on a Samsung GT-S5830L or a common PC. However, I would love to know weather anybody hears a difference using a decent audio-setup and the DAC's mentioned by me.
This amounts to no more than elitist bullshit.
Read the above link: put up or shut up.
Strange response.
Not really. You're telling a moderator that you don't feel like following the forum guidelines you agreed to when you signed up. Expect a negative response.
I was only saying "I am not sure" and "I would like to know". What is so elitist about that?
The presumption that normal people don't have a good enough PC to evaluate the difference between lossless and AAC audio player on a cell phone is extremely elitist. And almost certainly wrong.
No, Phoenix1 was insinuating he could not hear the difference. I will gladly believe that you cannot hear the difference on a common PC (maybe there are good ones with great speakers on which you can. I don't no). What I do know is that the quality and detail that comes from my phone and my computerspeakers do not even compare to the quality and detail that comes from my Audio set. And I was curious weather others can. But clearly this forum is not for me. To many people with a history of fight and chips on their shoulder. I just came here for some help since I don't know to much about the subject and the only thing I receipt was being harassed by moderators. Nice forum. Keep up the good work.
Then, show us the ABX log of the files that I've linked using your audio set.
What is an ABX log? And is ABX not a listening test? How do I log my ears?
By the way I don't have DAC yet. That why I started this thread in the first place. To get informed on DAC's, by asking peoples opinions about the "supposed to be good DAC" that I found on the net. And maybe people on this forum allready did ABX-tests on those or other DAC's ? Is that so much to ask for? Is not that what forums are supposed to be all about? Help people instead of harassing them in GOD-like elitist way.
You need foobar2000. And this: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx
There are plenty of guides on internet of how to use it, but to resume it, select test A and test B on foobar2000, rightclick, utilities, ABXtracks. Choose the trail count (preferably >10) and start. You have to tell whether not "Play X" is "Play B" or "Play A". (Obviously if for example "Play X" is "Play B", then "Play A" is "Play Y").
And then? I don't have a DAC.
Why is there nobody here that is even willing to give his personal opion on mentioned DAC's? or others?
May than I can start to select some DAC's which I can try out with my "liberated ears".
It gives you your results. You can use the DAC of your computer.
It just makes no sense, how could the integrated audio of my motherboard be so bad that its "bad sound" is not detected after being degraded once more?
And I have tested other phones, there's one where I've notice something, it is a Samsung galaxy Y (A even shitter phone). Will try to upload what I've recorded soon (I'm not on the computer where I uploaded the first two samples).
An ideal solution would solve the below mentioned situation.
Like many people I have a invested in the past in a decent analogue audioset (my Amp has RCA-jacks only). And I don't want to put that investment to waste.
However I do wish to digitize my Vinyl- and CD-collection into 24bit-192kHz flac files, and be able to play them lossless (thus without cable induced jitter) on my analogue set. I would like to listen to music from the internet (downloading or streaming) on my audioset, or to listen to audio from video's that I play on my TV (For instance with Blu-ray player).
And I would like to use my laptop, I-pad and TV as both monitor to control which music should be played on which device at a certain moment (for example with XMBC?) and as mediaplayer. Among those audiostreams could be DTS or Dolby 7.1 sources while my analogue audioset only takes in 2-channel Stereo.
In other words I would like be able to control on any monitor In my house which music I would like to play on which connected device(s). And all music sources (even DTS and Dolby 7.1 compressed into 24-bit 192kHz flac files) should be transported by cable or by air without loss of quality (so without compression-loss and without jitter). Which means that digital decoding and digital to analog conversion should take place as close as possible to the loudspeakers.
However, it would take a great effort, and money, to run UTP or HDMI cables everywhere through my house. So I try to avoid this if possible.
I have my digital files on a harddisk connected to my laptop (If necessary I'm willing to invest in a separate NAS). My laptop (with connected harddisk) is located 6 meters from my audioset.
I can run a cable between my laptop and my audioset fairly easy .
My TV is located 6 meters from my audioset and my laptop. However running a cable from my TV to my audioset or laptop would take great effort.
My internet router is located 7 meters from my TV, 10 meters from my laptop and 15 meters from my audioset. I can run a cable between my Internet router and my TV fairly easy . However running a cable from my Internet router to my audioset or laptop would take great effort.
What solution(s) would you advice?
(If no decent solution for the above situation, with good price/value, is available then I would settle with a simple DAC for now. As long as I helps me to play my flac files on my analogue audio-set.)
Move everything closer together. Find a way.
I agree with saratoga, an AV receiver would be good.
With an AV receiver, you have all your sources plugged into the receiver (computer, blu-ray player, game console, etc). The receiver is plugged into your tv, and has a built-in dac/amp for your speakers as well. Then you can switch between multiple audio/video sources with the push of a button.
My setup has a desktop permanently plugged into the receiver. It's on and running Foobar2000 pretty much at all times. Foobar has plugins that will let it play just about any format and also control it over the network.
I do the same thing but stream audio and video to an Apple TV using iTunes and which I can control with my iPhone/iPod/iPad or stream directly from the device. I also plug a 64GB USB stick into a Roku 3.
We plan on moving the office to the back of the house at which time I'll likely run CAT5 to where it is needed. The wireless access point will probably stay put, though a repeater is still up for consideration.
To me, long HDMI runs make sense if you want the TV on its own wall. YMMV.
The OP should seriously question the necessity of silly overkill samplerates which can really only serve to hinder audio quality with otherwise competently designed devices. 48kHz is more than adequate for human consumption of content. Severe contortions are also necessary in order to attempt to justify the need for more than 16 bits. The forum has seen more than its share of hand waving on the matter with little to no real meaningful or compelling evidence. I see no need to carry that on in this topic as well.
It gives you your results. You can use the DAC of your computer.
It just makes no sense, how could the integrated audio of my motherboard be so bad that its "bad sound" is not detected after being degraded once more?
And I have tested other phones, there's one where I've notice something, it is a Samsung galaxy Y (A even shitter phone). Will try to upload what I've recorded soon (I'm not on the computer where I uploaded the first two samples).
OK. So you are telling me a DAC is useless because the DAC in my PC probably allready is good enough, right? Why didn't you say that from the start. Would have made it all a lot simpler. But at least that is info that helps. Thanks for that. What would be the best way to connect to my audioset? My audioset is located 5 mtr away from my PC. I cannot place them closer together.
Move everything closer together. Find a way.
I agree with saratoga, an AV receiver would be good.
With an AV receiver, you have all your sources plugged into the receiver (computer, blu-ray player, game console, etc). The receiver is plugged into your tv, and has a built-in dac/amp for your speakers as well. Then you can switch between multiple audio/video sources with the push of a button.
My setup has a desktop permanently plugged into the receiver. It's on and running Foobar2000 pretty much at all times. Foobar has plugins that will let it play just about any format and also control it over the network.
OK That clears it up a bit for me. Thanks for that. However I really do not have any way to move things closer together. The layout of my living room together with a big bookcase and another hobby (aquarium) make it impossible to move things. As it is right now my PC, TV and audioset stand is a sort of triangle appart from each other. Distance between PC and audio is 5 mtr but easy for connection with cable. Shortest distance between PC and TV and between TV and audio is both about 6 mtr direct line through air (9 mtr for direct cable). But both almost impossible for connection with direct cable. Between TV and audio there might be a still difficult way to cable but then over a distance of 15 mtr. And of course I have a router, located 7 meters from my TV, 10 meters from my laptop and 15 meters from my audioset. Which I can easily connect with cable to my TV but not to my PC or Audio. That's the situation in which I hope to be able to create good connections between all of them.
I do the same thing but stream audio and video to an Apple TV using iTunes and which I can control with my iPhone/iPod/iPad or stream directly from the device. I also plug a 64GB USB stick into a Roku 3.
We plan on moving the office to the back of the house at which time I'll likely run CAT5 to where it is needed. The wireless access point will probably stay put, though a repeater is still up for consideration.
To me, long HDMI runs make sense if you want the TV on its own wall. YMMV.
The OP should seriously question the necessity of silly overkill samplerates which can really only serve to hinder audio quality with otherwise competently designed devices. 48kHz is more than adequate for human consumption of content. Severe contortions are also necessary in order to attempt to justify the need for more than 16 bits. The forum has seen more than its share of hand waving on the matter with little to no real meaningful or compelling evidence. I see no need to carry that on in this topic as well.
Thanks for that info. So you suggest that I convert my 24-192 and 24-96 files files to 48-16 because ABX tests have proven it does not make a difference even on really good audio-sets, right? After I read your post I took the liberty of searching for some decent convertors. I found Final-CD and SSRC. I think that together with a DOS-batch file I can get them to do the job for me fast. What's your verdict on those?
...gets in the way of reporting differences between devices which are purely imagined. Cases where some boutique DAC is intentionally designed to have its own signature "sound" (read: degraded through coloration, IOW: broken) don't find their way here likely because those interested in such garbage find this community anathematic.
Do I understand that PC DAC's do not have this problem or do you still advice a separate DAC? How do I find out whether my PC DAC colors the sound of my flac files?
You play a reference signal an record the output. Right Mark (RMAA) is one way (for measurable differences). Another is to record content of your choice and ABX for audible differences. What did Phoenix1 do?
I wouldn't resample content unless my hardware required that I do it, but I also wouldn't go out of my way to get specifi hardware just to support content, at say 192kHz, for example. Resampling is fine; foobar2000 can do it on the fly so you don't have to do it to your files. Purchasing or creating content at higher than necessary bitrates simply for the sake of having them at those bitrates is dumb. Vinyl at >48/16 as a final delivery format is especially dumb. There is too much noise and distortion intrinsic to the medium to warrant it.
Regarding the component separation conundrum, I mentioned AppleTV and Roku, both support Ethernet and WiFi. Some AVRs support these as well, as do other devices. It still might make the most sense to get an inexpensive DAC to feed your analog receiver than replacing it with an AVR, provided it works with your content. I've gotten along with the TV doing that job before, though maybe not the most ideal considering it also has to be turned on for audio-only content. They're also a nonstarter for >2-channel content, though this may also be the case with a receiver that has no digital inputs.
You play a reference signal an record the output. Right Mark (RMAA) is one way (for measurable differences). Another is to record content of your choice and ABX for audible differences. What did Phoenix1 do?
let's assume my installation slightly colors the reference signal. Than I would hear the colored signal (if that coloration is hearable at all). However, I would not know how the undistorted signal sounds. To measure the full distortion (if I had the proper equipment for that) I would have to record the sound with a microphone near my speaker. This recordingproces in itself would create some distortion of which I don't know wether it is hearable or not. Than I would have to replay that recording and I don't know how much impact the extra distortion has on an allready distorded signal. If I hear a difference than where does that come from, my installation or the recording. If I don't hear a difference does that mean there is no distortion or just that the difference between single or double distortion is not hearable? You see the methodological problem?
I wouldn't resample content unless my hardware required that I do it, but I also wouldn't go out of my way to get specifi hardware just to support content, at say 192kHz, for example. Resampling is fine; foobar2000 can do it on the fly so you don't have to do it to your files. Purchasing or creating content at higher than necessary bitrates simply for the sake of having them at those bitrates is dumb. Vinyl at >48/16 as a final delivery format is especially dumb. There is too much noise and distortion intrinsic to the medium to warrant it.
That's clear thanks.
Regarding the component separation conundrum, I mentioned AppleTV and Roku, both support Ethernet and WiFi. Some AVRs support these as well, as do other devices. It still might make the most sense to get an inexpensive DAC to feed your analog receiver than replacing it with an AVR, provided it works with your content. I've gotten along with the TV doing that job before, though maybe not the most ideal considering it also has to be turned on for audio-only content. They're also a nonstarter for >2-channel content, though this may also be the case with a receiver that has no digital inputs.
Hmm, I already have a Minix NEO-X8-Plus connected to my TV. It also has wifi. Could that be part of the solution? If so, maybe somebody knows how to configure this? Or knows of a guide for this (I'll also start searching myself on the internet)?
Maybe working together with a wifi-DAC connected between my PC and audioset (Just brainstorming without knowing what's really possible)?
Rip your cd s on your laptop and move the files to a USB hard drive. Connect that drive to your Minix and run a media server on that. Output audio direct from the Minix to your sound system?
Rip your cd s on your laptop and move the files to a USB hard drive. Connect that drive to your Minix and run a media server on that. Output audio direct from the Minix to your sound system?
I allready have Kodi on the Minix. So that could work. Kodi at the moment is not very user friendly for music but the new version is supposed to be improved on that. Thanks for the suggestion. The only problem that rest than is how to get sound from the Minix to my audio system, since I cannot connect them together with cable. Once that is solved maybe I can also play sound from TV or streamed video's to my audioset? or is that impossible this way?
^ Kodi is a UPnP server. Use it to wirelessly send signal to a Chromecast Audio plugged into your system via analog or optical digital. Control via smartphone/tablet.
^ Kodi is a UPnP server. Use it to wirelessly send signal to a Chromecast Audio plugged into your system via analog or optical digital. Control via smartphone/tablet.
Sounds very interesting. Does anybody have experience with this configuration? How does it work quality and stability wise? Where can I find a good guide to get this working together with Kodi on my Minix? Of course I will search myself also but if any body allready knows of a good guide it would help me speed up the process. Can I also use my computer to send music wireless to this googlecast audio device?
No direct experience of kodi for music but generally all the upnp server software I have tried has worked more or less perfectly. What OS do you have on the Minix? If android try bubbleupnp on the Minix. I use it on my android phone and it is excellent as a control point for kodi and other upnp devices.
One issue with the Chromecast is that apparently it cannot do gapless playback, in case that matters to you.
No direct experience of kodi for music but generally all the upnp server software I have tried has worked more or less perfectly. What OS do you have on the Minix? If android try bubbleupnp on the Minix. I use it on my android phone and it is excellent as a control point for kodi and other upnp devices.
One issue with the Chromecast is that apparently it cannot do gapless playback, in case that matters to you.
My Minix NEO-X8 plus runs on android. Gapless playback would be nice. However on the other hand it's not clever tot split gapless music (live, classic or pink floyd and the likes) into separate files either.
However on the other hand it's not clever tot split gapless music (live, classic or pink floyd and the likes) into separate files either.
I disagree. I have lots of gapless albums and all my players handle them perfectly, even though ripped as separate FLAC tracks. Squeezeboxes, SONOS, Roon Endpoints, foobar2000, among others.
However on the other hand it's not clever tot split gapless music (live, classic or pink floyd and the likes) into separate files either.
I disagree. I have lots of gapless albums and all my players handle them perfectly, even though ripped as separate FLAC tracks. Squeezeboxes, SONOS, Roon Endpoints, foobar2000, among others.
Yes because they can but what is the need? Unless you wish to listen to parts of music that has no pauzes and don't mind they stop abruptly. I'll be honest I also tended to rip into seperate files, but then again I never had to worry about that because I could replay them gapless on my PC. But thinking about it in hind side I think I would not do it like that again.
I apologise. I fell into the habit of recommending a particular solution based on my subjective experience. And the thing I love about this place is that it requires you to research and decide things for yourself, but gives great ideas on ways you can do this. The posts above on abx are great examples of this.
Consider you have two separate issues: one is transport, or how to make your music files available to devices in your home, and the other is digital to analogue conversion. The latter is covered by the abx discussion above. For the former look at eg UPNP server software, apple equivalents etc. It seems you already have most of what you need but I apologise if I have unintentionally sent you in a wrong direction.
However on the other hand it's not clever tot split gapless music (live, classic or pink floyd and the likes) into separate files either.
I disagree. I have lots of gapless albums and all my players handle them perfectly, even though ripped as separate FLAC tracks. Squeezeboxes, SONOS, Roon Endpoints, foobar2000, among others.
Yes because they can but what is the need? Unless you wish to listen to parts of music that has no pauzes and don't mind they stop abruptly. I'll be honest I also tended to rip into seperate files, but then again I never had to worry about that because I could replay them gapless on my PC. But thinking about it in hind side I think I would not do it like that again.
The main reason is compatibility. Gapless is pretty widely supported these days even on portable devices. Conversely, very few things support cue + FLAC, so outside of your PC, you'd be giving up any sort of track indexing without transcoding/splitting. Of course if you were willing to transcode to MP3/AAC for portable use anyway, then it won't matter.
let's assume my installation slightly colors the reference signal. Than I would hear the colored signal (if that coloration is hearable at all). However, I would not know how the undistorted signal sounds. To measure the full distortion (if I had the proper equipment for that) I would have to record the sound with a microphone near my speaker. This recordingproces in itself would create some distortion of which I don't know wether it is hearable or not. Than I would have to replay that recording and I don't know how much impact the extra distortion has on an allready distorded signal. If I hear a difference than where does that come from, my installation or the recording. If I don't hear a difference does that mean there is no distortion or just that the difference between single or double distortion is not hearable? You see the methodological problem?
A microphone is used when you want to check the distortion of the speakers themselves.
If you want to record the distortion from your amp, you have to do the loopback test from the speaker output of your amp while you have a load (resistor) connected to the amp (close to the impedance of your speakers). However there's a detail, It is usually performed with a 1W load, that's 2.82 Vrms for a 8 Ohm resistor, 2.82 Vrms is certainly going to saturate the line in of your computer, so you will need to create a voltage divider to attenuate the signal at the line in.
Here's how you connect everything: Diagram (http://image.prntscr.com/image/861e8b1257c54f8b84fcf6acb22fe651.png)
I don't know the input impedance of the line in of your PC, The attenuation might be more than needed if it turns out to have a <10K Zin, which is unlikely.
Notice that I did not connect the ground of the output of the speaker amp to the ground of the line in, that's because there's already a ground connection established between the line in and line out of your PC, the amp's ground is already connected to the line out ground of the PC. However, always check, if the output of your amp is isolated, then you will need do that connection.
Why is there nobody here that is even willing to give his personal opion on mentioned DAC's? or others?
(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.
(2) Because audible differences between DACs is usually a well-known audiophile myth
And then? I don't have a DAC.
What? No phone, no music player, no tablet, no PC. no CD player?
I kind of doubt it. Which do you already have? They all have DACs inside.
I don't think the ODAC revB was mentioned yet (PCM5102A, about $150).
And then there are quite a few professional audio interfaces with respectable performance, such as the Focusrite Scarlett 2nd Gen line starting from about $100.
let's assume my installation slightly colors the reference signal. Than I would hear the colored signal (if that coloration is hearable at all). However, I would not know how the undistorted signal sounds. To measure the full distortion (if I had the proper equipment for that) I would have to record the sound with a microphone near my speaker. This recordingproces in itself would create some distortion of which I don't know wether it is hearable or not. Than I would have to replay that recording and I don't know how much impact the extra distortion has on an allready distorded signal. If I hear a difference than where does that come from, my installation or the recording. If I don't hear a difference does that mean there is no distortion or just that the difference between single or double distortion is not hearable? You see the methodological problem?
A microphone is used when you want to check the distortion of the speakers themselves.
If you want to record the distortion from your amp, you have to do the loopback test from the speaker output of your amp while you have a load (resistor) connected to the amp (close to the impedance of your speakers). However there's a detail, It is usually performed with a 1W load, that's 2.82 Vrms for a 8 Ohm resistor, 2.82 Vrms is certainly going to saturate the line in of your computer, so you will need to create a voltage divider to attenuate the signal at the line in.
Here's how you connect everything: Diagram (http://image.prntscr.com/image/861e8b1257c54f8b84fcf6acb22fe651.png)
I don't know the input impedance of the line in of your PC, The attenuation might be more than needed if it turns out to have a <10K Zin, which is unlikely.
Notice that I did not connect the ground of the output of the speaker amp to the ground of the line in, that's because there's already a ground connection established between the line in and line out of your PC, the amp's ground is already connected to the line out ground of the PC. However, always check, if the output of your amp is isolated, then you will need do that connection.
I appreciate this explanation, however this is all getting much to complicated for me. Sorry.
And then? I don't have a DAC.
What? No phone, no music player, no tablet, no PC. no CD player?
I kind of doubt it. Which do you already have? They all have DACs inside.
Please read the entire thread, before giving a comment like this. At that point in time I thought we were talking about an external DAC, because that was the reason in the first place why I had started this thread.
I apologise. I fell into the habit of recommending a particular solution based on my subjective experience. And the thing I love about this place is that it requires you to research and decide things for yourself, but gives great ideas on ways you can do this. The posts above on abx are great examples of this.
Consider you have two separate issues: one is transport, or how to make your music files available to devices in your home, and the other is digital to analogue conversion. The latter is covered by the abx discussion above. For the former look at eg UPNP server software, apple equivalents etc. It seems you already have most of what you need but I apologise if I have unintentionally sent you in a wrong direction.
I still think you came closest and with the cheapest solution. But hey, if anybody has a better idea I will listen to it with an open mind (and ears).
(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.
That's an assumption. And assumptions are the mother of all ......... And also recently people have informed me that assumptions is not what this forum is all about.
(2) Because audible differences between DACs is usually a well-known audiophile myth
Clearly that is not well known in most forums I have read on DAC's. And strangely enough that was certainly not the first clear answer I got after I opened this thread.
If possible I would like to get on topic again. That is find the best solution for my home situation (which possibly is also recognizable for others). I allready got some helpfull input from Saragota, Phoenix1, Greynol, finphil and apesbrain. Hope to get more. I will weight all the info I get especially when underpinned with decent prove (like ABX tests, or personal experience of workability and stability of certain setups) .
Clearly that is not well known in most forums I have read on DAC's.
Right... That's the unique thing about HydrogenAudio! All the Audiophile nonsense is filtered out... Before you can claim that one DAC (or anything else) sounds better than another you have to perform a proper scientific, blind, level matched, listening test to demonstrate that you can
really hear a difference.
And strangely enough that was certainly not the first clear answer I got after I opened this thread.
Read between the lines. ;) He's saying that a $40 interface is probably fine, although it's headphone amplifier can use some improvement. (And, if you dig in and follow the links you'll find a scientific/engineering explanation of what's going on with the headphone amp without any meaningless audiophile terminology... He talks about voltage, power, frequency response, etc., and avoids terms like "detail" or "openness" that seem to have some meaning, but they are not clearly defined and cannot be measured.)
(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.
That's an assumption. And assumptions are the mother of all ......... And also recently people have informed me that assumptions is not what this forum is all about.
Don't be condescending just because you dislike the answer. Arnold is right. There is almost zero chance of anyone being able to answer that question.
(2) Because audible differences between DACs is usually a well-known audiophile myth
Clearly that is not well known in most forums I have read on DAC's. And strangely enough that was certainly not the first clear answer I got after I opened this thread.
Really? You were told this immediately:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112803.msg928863.html#msg928863
Just to add a couple of cents to the pot so that we can hopefully get on with assisting the OP on the main thrust of his topic...
It has been insinuated that double blind testing isn't workable because interconnects have their own sound. In other discussions it has been posited that all components impart a signature sound. While I don't know that the OP has fallen into this rabbit hole, I'd like to briefly address it, and while it might appear to some that I'm setting up a straw man, I am definitely not.
The mantra here is that all things controversial in nature are assumed to sound the same until demonstrated otherwise.
Unless you have incompetently designed or otherwise broken equipment or are operating it beyond rated specifications, transducers and your listening environment are going to be your source of coloration. Cables are not, though these can be tested a well. There are plenty of discussions on how you test various pieces of hardware available if you look for them.
If someone tells you a cable or some other unlikely component has a sound, ask for evidence. The burden of proof lies on the individual claiming a difference, not the person skeptical of the claim. ABX tests are designed to reveal differences. Failed tests are not intended to be held as proof that there are no differences. An absence of objective evidence in the wake of unsubstantiated claims speaks volumes, however. It is a shame that some online communities forbid requests for objective evidence, though this is understandable when they (or their owners) either sell products or receive funding from companies or individuals who sell products that are snake oil.
Really? You were told this immediately:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112803.msg928863.html#msg928863
I have to agree with you on that at that point one person was clear about it. However one person doesn't count as common opinion. So at that point the common opinion on this was certainly not clear to me. And still isn't fully because on other forums there are many who would disagree. It is very hard for me to verify who is right (You will probably respond ABX, and on that point we both agree). However, by now I am getting the feel of the common opinion on this forum. ;)
Some individuals/communities do not adhere to the principles of scientific discovery.
Equating the position of a community that adheres to these principles as simply an opinion is quite wrong of you.
Just to add a couple of cents to the pot so that we can hopefully get on with assisting the OP on the main thrust of his topic...
It has been insinuated that double blind testing isn't workable because interconnects have their own sound. In other discussions it has been posited that all components impart a signature sound. While I don't know that the OP has fallen into this rabbit hole, I'd like to briefly address it, and while it might appear to some that I'm setting up a straw man, I am definitely not.
The mantra here is that all things controversial in nature are assumed to sound the same until demonstrated otherwise.
Unless you have incompetently designed or otherwise broken equipment or are operating it beyond rated specifications, transducers and your listening environment are going to be your source of coloration. Cables are not, though these can be tested a well. There are plenty of discussions on how you test various pieces of hardware available if you look for them.
If someone tells you a cable or some other unlikely component has a sound, ask for evidence. The burden of proof lies on the individual claiming a difference, not the person skeptical of the claim. ABX tests are designed to reveal differences. Failed tests are not intended to be held as proof that there are no differences. An absence of objective evidence in the wake of unsubstantiated claims speaks volumes, however. It is a shame that some online communities forbid requests for objective evidence, though this is understandable when they (or their owners) either sell products or receive funding from companies or individuals who sell products that are snake oil.
I totally agree with this forums demand for prove. And as an academic I strongly believe in double-blind testing. I also have my doubt on various claims in the audio-branch. That's why I don't just read ad's but visit forums in the hope that people with live listening experience with certain components can advise me on that. I just just don't have the time nor the money to investigate everything. I do know that I could hear a clear difference between my earlier audio-sets and my current, already 17 years old Rotel, set. And I believe it is a legitimate question weather other component like DAC have comparable differences in quality. However, if technology all-ready has evolved so much that everything on the market is good enough than I will be the first to embrace that. But if not than I hope you will help me to prevent buying a pig in a poke
I do know that I could hear a clear difference between my earlier audio-sets and my current, already 17 years old Rotel, set.
On its face this falls under a breach of TOS #8, but since it is vague and may have involved something noncontroversial to this community, I'll extend to you the benefit of the doubt.
In general you should not be offering the above quoted to this community unless you are also prepared to provide objective evidence in accordance with TOS #8.
... However, by now I am getting the feel of the common opinion on this forum. ;)
I suppose that is one way of saying
finding out how things work here. That is necessary when entering any group, online or off. Entering this one for the first time, it may be a little tough to get to grips with the differences. This is just not one of those other audio forums where people express opinions or feelings about Box A and Box B. It just isn't. That is enshrined in the rules (TOS) as has been pointed out to you. This community just does not have long, heated arguments about Box A being warmer, or Box B being more resolving. It just doesn't. The closest it gets to that is sometimes discussing other people doing it, or pointing out to a newcomer, occasionally at length, that it doesn't.
My personal (subjective ;) ) view is that I use this place as a technical resource (real technology) and a sanity check. If the not-so-sane part of me wants to wallow in all that subjective stuff or, even, just listen to other people's
opinions, there are, as you say, many other internet places where we can do that.
(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.
That's an assumption.
Wrong. There were two claims there, and your answer is in the singular.
Wrong a second time, because the statement that are are over 500 DACs on the market is based on a published market study that I happened to stumble over about a month ago.
Just saying that something isnt't so doesn't make it false without reliable proof. Got any? I didn't think so.
Wrong a third time based on simple statistics. If there are 100's of DACs (For another example, a well known pro audio dealer B&H has about 150 different DACs listed in his online store) on the market place then the odds are very tiny that the same random collection of just a few products would be owned by two or more individuals posting on the same tiny forum.
And assumptions are the mother of all ........
In fact you have already shown that you have nothing but assumptions to back your claims up., and ditto for the earlier post of mine that you tried to trash on similarly specious grounds. You are making me bad about telling you the truth about most DACs sounding pretty much the same.
(1) Because there are over 500 different DACs on the market, and the odds that I'd have a DAC that you are interested in is extremely low unless it is a very common one.
That's an assumption.
Wrong. There were two claims there, and your answer is in the singular.
Wrong a second time, because the statement that are are over 500 DACs on the market is based on a published market study that I happened to stumble over about a month ago.
Just saying that something isnt't so doesn't make it false without reliable proof. Got any? I didn't think so.
Wrong a third time based on simple statistics. If there are 100's of DACs (For another example, a well known pro audio dealer B&H has about 150 different DACs listed in his online store) on the market place then the odds are very tiny that the same random collection of just a few products would be owned by two or more individuals posting on the same tiny forum.
And assumptions are the mother of all ........
In fact you have already shown that you have nothing but assumptions to back your claims up., and ditto for the earlier post of mine that you tried to trash on similarly specious grounds. You are making me bad about telling you the truth about most DACs sounding pretty much the same.
Seldom have I had to put so much energy on a forum as a response to this kind of aggressiveness. Doesn't give me a very good feeling nor about this forum. Help people instead of harassing them. If you do you will find in me someone with an open academic mind. I am not going to respond to this sort of non constructive response anymore. Get on topic please.
I do know that I could hear a clear difference between my earlier audio-sets and my current, already 17 years old Rotel, set.
On its face this falls under a breach of TOS #8, but since it is vague and may have involved something noncontroversial to this community, I'll extend to you the benefit of the doubt.
In general you should not be offering the above quoted to this community unless you are also prepared to provide objective evidence in accordance with TOS #8.
Sorry I am not able to objectively prove what I clearly heared. I also clearly hear a difference between my audioset and music coming from my iphone speaker. Nobody has to believe me for that and I can't prove it to you since we probably live miles apart and your ears aren't mine. What I don't understand is that under these conditions it becomes almost impossible to share each others opinions. How would it be if I would ask you guys to back up every claim you made with scientific valid prove? The dialogue would soon end. Instead I prefer to show interest in your claims and see whether others agree. Of course I am interested in prove but I am against religious zeal in demanding it. I'm a scientist that likes to keep an open mind. That's why I am interested even in subjective opinions. Afterwards we can always talk about the scientific soundness of those claims, but I tend to refrain from harrassing people upfront just because these claims are subjective. Because as a scientist I know better then most that real objectivity does not exist. It just depends on how accurate you want the numbers to be before you accept them as truth. Nowadays most proof is accepted on the basis of statistic correlation. That does not always means that what is accepted that way always ends up being the truth.
Sure, but the more outlandish the claim the stronger evidence you should provide. That a smartphone speaker sounds different than a headset is a trivial claim. In Bayesian terms, the prior probability of this claim being true is very high, so it should come at no surprise that you wouldn't even get a comment on that.
Hearing fine differences™ between DACs that perform much better than any speaker to the point of exceeding established limits of hearing is guaranteed to get challenged, as it should. Prior probability is going to be low, so you need some good evidence. If you then added expressions like "day/night difference" you'd just further raise the bar.
It is really rather simple: either put effort into testing whether your beliefs are true and provide that evidence with your claims, or simply refrain from making such claims in the first place.
Sorry I am not able to objectively prove what I clearly heared.
People "clearly" hear all sorts of things that are completely imagined when performing uncontrolled listening tests. It doesn't matter how acute your listening or objective you think you are, it is the way the human brain works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0
I also clearly hear a difference between my audioset and music coming from my iphone speaker.
This isn't controversial.
Nobody has to believe me for that and I can't prove it to you since we probably live miles apart and your ears aren't mine.
Irrelevant. TOS8 says you then need to shut the fuck up.
What I don't understand is that under these conditions it becomes almost impossible to share each others opinions.
For people who are incapable of creating objective tests, yes. And if you can't then your opinion isn't worth the electricity used to generate and preserve it.
How would it be if I would ask you guys to back up every claim you made with scientific valid prove?
You are welcome to, though you need to understand where the burden of proof lies. It is not up to us to disprove posited claims that microscopic pink elephants are in orbit around the planet Uranus sipping tea.
The dialogue would soon end.
Because they do not generate meaningful discussion about reality they ought to be stopped dead in their tracks.
Instead I prefer to show interest in your claims and see whether others agree.
Science isn't based on majority opinion.
Of course I am interested in prove but I am against religious zeal in demanding it. I'm a scientist that likes to keep an open mind.
It doesn't sound like you're a scientist, or at least not one who is actually interested in separating opinion from fact. Anyway, TOS8 is the law around here and you are expected to follow it.
Sure, but the more outlandish the claim the stronger evidence you should provide. That a smartphone speaker sounds different than a headset is a trivial claim. In Bayesian terms, the prior probability of this claim being true is very high, so it should come at no surprise that you wouldn't even get a comment on that.
Hearing fine differences™ between DACs that perform much better than any speaker to the point of exceeding established limits of hearing is guaranteed to get challenged, as it should. Prior probability is going to be low, so you need some good evidence. If you then added expressions like "day/night difference" you'd just further raise the bar.
This I can understand. Although I am of the opinion that there is a clear difference in stating that "I hear a difference" and stating that "there is a difference". From the first statement I would never ever ask prove. From the latter you should alsways ask prove. And it's the inability to make that difference which to my humble opinion is going wrong on this forum. As soon as you say "I hear" or "I believe" on this forum they start demanding for prove. Of course there is nothing wrong with asking for it, but demanding it and forbidding people to make commands like that is an entirely different thing.
It is really rather simple: either put effort into testing whether your beliefs are true and provide that evidence with your claims, or simply refrain from making such claims in the first place.
I rest my case!!!
... I am of the opinion that there is a clear difference in stating that "I hear a difference" and stating that "there is a difference". From the first statement I would never ever ask prove. From the latter you should alsways ask prove. And it's the inability to make that difference which to my humble opinion is going wrong on this forum. As soon as you say "I hear" or "I believe" on this forum they start demanding for prove. Of course there is nothing wrong with asking for it, but demanding it and forbidding people to make commands like that is an entirely different thing.
It's those sorts of seemingly harmless opinions which have turned high-end audio into what it is today.
If you simply want to purchase a fancy DAC, by all means do that: Aesthetics, features and form factors might make things more convenient and enjoyable to use. I myself own a Stereophile Class A-rated DAC which boasts amazing measured performance and have purchased or assembled a number of others. But aside from test bench results, it turns out that reasonably well-designed DACs really do sound pretty much the same. Wolfson, ESS, Tenor, Burr-Brown: As long as you build a pretty good product around them, they have no signature sound.
The problem with your opinion: You assume that you actually hear what you think you hear. When in fact your perceptions are colored by all manner of factors such as your mood at the time. If I were to repackage and present my $40 Behringer really really well, I have no doubt I could convince someone they were hearing a $10K++ product.
Wolfson, ESS, Tenor, Burr-Brown: As long as you build a pretty good product around them, they have no signature sound.
I would not know but I would love to believe you. But since this is a clear statement according to TOS8# I am now forced to ask you (whether I like it or not) for prove of this claim. As they call it over here: Put up or shut up.
And now you made a statement that forces you by act of TOS8# to prove to me that I don't hear what I hear!!!
You were also told that the burden of proof falls on those who claim audible
differences. Seeing that 4season has done no such thing, you are clearly in the wrong on this. There have already been several attempts to clue you into this concept and they have either been brushed aside or have all flown over your head. If you are indeed a scientist then I see adequate justification for classifying this behavior as trolling.
I still hear what I hear and I believe you won't be able to prove the contrary.
Since we have no way of knowing whether what you heard wasn't also influenced by non-audible factors we aren't interested in reading about it.
please don't tell me I have to prove what I hear
Please don't post in violation of TOS8 so that our members don't have to.
Oh, and another thing, since you people don't believe what you hear you might as well throw your ABX-test into the dustbin.
I'm saving this one from the dustbin for the irony.
Oh, and another thing, since you people don't believe what you hear you might as well throw your ABX-test into the dustbin.
I'm saving this one from the dustbin for the irony.
Makes me feel so much better because it is proof that he did not benefit in the slightest from the fine efforts that were made in good faith to educate him. Sine he did so many of the usual things that hogs do when presented with pearls, he did not benefit from our efforts on his behalf.
Being that stupid and arrogant takes some work, but he was clearly up to it!
I suspect he was trolling the web and thought that he would impress us with his abilities to drop the names of the high end audiophile/placebophile latest/greatest toys.
This I can understand. Although I am of the opinion that there is a clear difference in stating that "I hear a difference" and stating that "there is a difference".
Sure, but it's not always so easy to draw a clear distinction and in other places you can see widespread self-delusion because these people conclude that "I hear a difference" means "there must be a difference in sound" and this is further reinforced by the experiences of like-minded people. In these places confirmation bias and groupthink are not a negative thing, they are desirable or even demanded.
Here at HA we try to nip this problem in the bud.
From the first statement I would never ever ask prove.
Sure, if you just talk about some experience then it would be unfair to ask for proof, but it could still be challenged e.g. if there is reason to believe you're making stuff up. (I'm not saying that's the case here.)
For example, while tuning some EQ settings I was hearing differences but later I found out that the EQ was actually bypassed.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool," as Feynman said.
It also depends on how you say it. "I can hear differences between DAC A and B" will be interpreted as a claim that you can discern A and B by their sound .. and either you can or it's persistent self-delusion. A blind test can provide evidence either way.
I didn't follow the discussion but maybe the problem is lack of clear language. Also, most newcomers do not make such distinctions and as such the assumption will be made that the person is making claims about audible differences ... which is a very reasonable assumption.
Seldom have I had to put so much energy on a forum as a response to this kind of aggressiveness. Doesn't give me a very good feeling nor about this forum.
No doubt this guy worked his way into deserving all the animus that was laid on him, but I wonder if his original question couldn't have been handled differently. Totally understandable given all the bullshit/hype surrounding this topic that a novice would think a "good" DAC requires the investment of hundreds/thousands of dollars/euros. For us to come back with the response that "this $20 DAC is as good as it gets" naturally strains credulity for these beginners. Of course then, since we've questioned his manhood, it quickly devolves into TOS#8 violations and name-calling.
I'm honestly not sure how we as a community can better deal with this situation. The true "answer" obviously is that questions of sound quality and "value" are totally within the eyes and ears of the individual beholder and maybe that's how it should be left and the topic closed. That is unless someone among us can offer measurements that show the component under question truly does not perform up to established norms.
@Webdrifter, I'm sorry your experience at Hydrogenaudio did not go as well as you would have liked. You brought most of it on yourself by thinking you know better than the experienced people whose opinion you sought out in the first place. Increasingly, it seems that new people coming to this forum are those who share the same misinformed "facts" as yourself for whom HA is a disappointment as it is not a place where egos are stroked.
For us to come back with the response that "this $20 DAC is as good as it gets" naturally strains credulity for these beginners.
I think it's always going to be a challenge to seem more welcoming to someone who arrives here steeped in subjective audiophile lore. How do you reconcile Astrology and Astronomy?
Over the decades, subjective audiophiledom has developed it's own view of How Things Work. Many of the columns written from this point of view are entertaining, thought-provoking and well-crafted overall. Pity that the bulk of them are worthless save as entertainment.
To really embrace scientific thinking in sound reproduction is to realize that one's Ongoing Voyage of Sonic Discovery may in fact be akin to a dog chasing it's own tail. Hardware-wise, there's little to strive for, and much of it can be had readily from the likes of Best Buy or Sweetwater Sound. So much for hanging out at the audio "salon"! And yet, it's the very same scientific thinking which can quickly lead a person to Accurate sound which transcends silliness such as "front-to-back depth" or "liquidity".
I think it's always going to be a challenge to seem more welcoming to someone who arrives here steeped in subjective audiophile lore.
...and a self-professed scientist, no less.
I think it's always going to be a challenge to seem more welcoming to someone who arrives here steeped in subjective audiophile lore.
To say the least.
I've reviewed this thread several times to try to better understand where things went wrong. I conclude that the two different audiophile cultures represented were so far apart that they could barely talk to each other because the meaning of the words and phrases that were being used were so different.
Our guest arrived here prepared to execute a execute a procedure for choosing DACs that would have worked out far more as he expected at dozens of other audio conference sites. Key to this procedure is the false idea that in general audio gear, particularly DACs generally sound different, and are (a) (the) strong determining factor in an audio system's sound quality.
His perception that the regulars here were exceptionally aggressive was no doubt based on the fact that the ideas that they presented to him were so much different from what he was familiar with.
... ... ...I've reviewed this thread several times to try to better understand where things went wrong.
The conversation went...
"Sorry, you've got the wrong number."
"No I haven't." ...Repeated every time he called back.
Nobody can be blamed for his dialling the same number over and over. It's nice to be human, warm, friendly. Maybe there are nicer ways of saying
This is not the place for you. I tried to say that explicitly, and I don't think my post was even answered.
In India, people say,
"What to do?"
I think it's always going to be a challenge to seem more welcoming to someone who arrives here steeped in subjective audiophile lore. How do you reconcile Astrology and Astronomy?
IMO, OP got 'the right kind' of reply in post #10 where he was asked for what purpose he needs a DAC.
What exactly are you hoping get?
That said, maybe what is worth debating could lie more on side of general influence, than discussing each case individually. Maybe answer could be found in better delivery of what is Hydrogenadio's purpose.
It will always remain a challenge to recognise how informed new members are, so maybe remembering to ask what is actual purpose of equipment or software is needed could help. Maybe remembering to inform that, like in this case, that chips designed to perform certain function does just that, unit itself can have number of features and decision which unit to get should be made based on features user needs from that unit.
To get back to influence, think of professor who educates people. Not every conversation needs to be a lecture and there is certain responsibility on both professors part and pupils side. Educators that are approachable and can set and use tone of conversation on their side typically get their point across better than type whom every conversation turns to lecture (which can turn to berating). Especially in online communications latter can be felt hostile, even if that was not intended. However, if needed it's important also explain aspects of community like TOS #8 and _why_ there is TOS #8 (to separate astronomy from astrology).
What is responsibility of pupil is to make their own decisions. I had very good experience with people who were going to be DJ's in explaining different kind of benefits of various equipment. Of course in IRL environment there is huge benefit in possibility to let people test different kind of equipment and make their own observations. In the end they learned but were open about their thoughts regarding looks of gear. Based on information they had they went for best compromise with quality, price and how they, (particularly headphones) should look. As decisions were informed, I had no problem with those, I'm simply not the one who need to sell myself to events so there is a line I'm not willing to cross as educator.
So IMO principles of Hydrogenadio are as sound as they always were but there might be something gained if there could be a way communicating them in different manner. Perhaps new approaches might be found not from different forum cultures but education.
Even individuals have questions, problems needing an answer, there are lot of people who read these forums and remain lurkers. They are however still learning something and potentially spreading influence.
It might be also good to keep in mind, that there are many sorts of people. DJ's I wrote in my example worked and were willing to work for their knowledge. That is not the case with every person out there.
Edit: Disclaimer, I'm not professor of any kind. I have some experience as educator but it's something I have done on the side when there have been demand.
Maybe answer could be found in better delivery of what is Hydrogenadio's purpose.
It's purpose is for those who possess the intellectual capacity to comprehend the TOS to have many discussions within that scope....and those who can't (and/or trolls) to have these recursive threads.
IMO, OP got 'the right kind' of reply in post #10 where he was asked for what purpose he needs a DAC.
He answered this in post #13, where he shows that his thinking is so confused that it is difficult to imagine where to start to help him. He starts a thread asking for advice for buying a DAC, and then proceeds to outline a scenario where the DAC is the least of the problems, and the DAC models he is looking at don't help with it at all.
If he were a computer you would be compelled to push his reset button and reboot, hoping to get him back in a sane state.
Some answers can be seen as an attempt to achieve something like this, but admittedly with a low chance of succeeding.
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/2014-February/002633.html
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/2014-February/002633.html
I'm an audiphile too. But I can only afford a VW.
(sorry; irresistible.)
I take it that means €800 Gus fucktard* audio jewelry doesn't fit your budget.
(*) apologies for the cable-induced jitter.
IMO, OP got 'the right kind' of reply in post #10 where he was asked for what purpose he needs a DAC.
He answered this in post #13, where he shows that his thinking is so confused that it is difficult to imagine where to start to help him. He starts a thread asking for advice for buying a DAC, and then proceeds to outline a scenario where the DAC is the least of the problems, and the DAC models he is looking at don't help with it at all.
Agreed. In fact it appears that he is looking for what is known to me as a Music Player or Media Player.
I have four or more of these in my main audio system, none of which I actually obtained intentionally. One is a networked, feature enhanced BD player, another is a networked AVR, the third is a component of a cable company-provided time-shifting DVR with many added features. The fourth is actually a fifth and sixth, etc.:, a collection of software music players running on a networked PC.
He seemed to more amenable to discussion along this line.
The thread bifurcated into a subthread that might have led into a helpful discussion about music players, while another that related to TOS 8 and did not seem to be going much of anyplace.
IMO, OP got 'the right kind' of reply in post #10 where he was asked for what purpose he needs a DAC.
He answered this in post #13, where he shows that his thinking is so confused that it is difficult to imagine where to start to help him. He starts a thread asking for advice for buying a DAC, and then proceeds to outline a scenario where the DAC is the least of the problems, and the DAC models he is looking at don't help with it at all.
If he were a computer you would be compelled to push his reset button and reboot, hoping to get him back in a sane state.
Some answers can be seen as an attempt to achieve something like this, but admittedly with a low chance of succeeding.
Yeah, it could have been formed better, but it was understandable and he got answered in post #15 and # 30. What he actually needed was A / V receiver.
What happened between #10, #30, #31 looks like peoples best effort to help, but he got overwhelmed with a lot of information and so called culture shock. Discussion fragmented to different fronts he tried to work with, and useful conversation to fully use features of his Minix NEO-X8-Plus with A / V receiver, regarding features he needed from unit, let's imagine price / feature ratio to look for, got buried in there.
So maybe TOS #8 conversation delivered like with concrete examples in one post, like: 'There's no scientific evidence of USB jitter, nor audible differences between same DAC's no matter what unit they are sold with. If you believe otherwise you must to prove your claim via ABX test.' followed with explanation of ABX and why it's one of the basic principles and it's benefits, what it makes possible (again, 'to separate astronomy from astrology.') would have been enough on that front.
With lot of history and lot of people on forums there are bound to have different opinions of what is the purpose of this community, even if people (click past) agree to rules when registering. For me it's always been information, what and where and how to gather knowledge. Foobar2000 aside, products are made by others.
Certain principles must be held or community loses it's value, but at the same time if the actual purpose is not delivered, no information is transferred to knowledge and nothing actually happens but maintaining status quo.
When I wrote about approaching communication from educational point of view, I was serious. For my own experience, I had good basic education and was lucky enough to have very good mentors at work. However, when it came to teaching I noticed that my knowledge alone just isn't enough to get good results, I need people skills too and taking courses in education was huge help.
So what might be possibly done is creating some sort of how to answer to n00bs guideline, or strategy, and which then again, might turn out to be useful if ideas aren't taken from social media, but instead brought into social media.
taking courses in education was huge help.
What course would you suggest for "Basic comprehension of TOS"?
btw, loved that '76 championship
taking courses in education was huge help.
What course would you suggest for "Basic comprehension of TOS"?
Business Law
I take it that means €800 Gus fucktard* audio jewelry doesn't fit your budget.
Absolutely not. And anyway, I could never afford the modifications (http://tweakaudio.com/EVS-2/Gustard_X20_Mods.html). I've had a flood already, some those people want me to burn my house down!
Sometimes I think new members simply want shopping advice and are hoping for Just Enough Science to make an informed decision. And they're hoping that we'll chime in with answers like "[Product A] totally eliminates jitter, making it suitable for even the most resolving systems".
Culture shock indeed when they're told that the question itself doesn't really make sense. It's a bit like walking into a Dick Blick store and asking for their best paper or paintbrush!
"What size do you want and what sort of media will you be working in?"
"Huh? Why are you asking me that, all I want is your best paper and paintbrush"
It was never going to happen with this turkey, no matter how much any of us sugar-coated a presentation of TOS8.
You know, I was willing to overlook the whole TOS8 thing and get on with a pragmatic discussion about a server-based system, but there were just too many subsequent posts demonstrating complete and willful ignorance of the purpose and importance of bias-controlled testing combined with the pretense that the core principle underpinning the foundation of this forum does not apply, despite persistent nudging.
I was willing to overlook the whole TOS8 thing and get on with a pragmatic discussion
In that case I know a 70+ yr old Biochemist who doesn't have a clue about physics/EE, that makes an orgasmic DAC in the OPs price range. The value thing we can figure out later.
... an orgasmic DAC ...
Now there's something deserving of an ABX test.
taking courses in education was huge help.
What course would you suggest for "Basic comprehension of TOS"?
btw, loved that '76 championship
The main issue appears to be that most people don't read the terms of service. In addition, some don't search forums if similar exists already or spend their time getting familiar reading the forum and gaining understanding how things are done here. In principle we should not be having this debate at all, reading TOS is what is at least to expected, it doesn't even help if TOS is well formed, like IMO Hydrogen audio's TOS is., In practice however people just click through TOS like EULA agreements.
In the end, TOS #8 surfaces again and again in conversations like this and that's the ground where there is possible to educate new members.
Btw, as useless as nostalgia may be, one of a kind winner really. / end meta.
It was never going to happen with this turkey, no matter how much any of us sugar-coated a presentation of TOS8.
Sugar coating, or do you mean affective presence? Sugar coating would IMO be counter productive and unnecessary. Social skills applied in education serve purpose to get information passed to pupils knowledge. To put it simply, not every person has the same learning style, despite being intellectually equal. While so called sugar coating might work with some individuals, it might also create environment that could feel paternalistic and self serving to other people. I'm not sure if expanding this conversation to that area would be useful. Of course if someone would volunteer to work with simple English version of, let's say ABX wiki-page, situation could be different, but that's another discussion.
I tried to explain and give examples in my earlier posts what might be implementable. To sum it up.
- Affective presence is already covered by number of people who relate to situation and try to provide answer, often based on their own experience (relevant examples in my earlier posts).
- Interactivity, social media is by the definition interactive environment. Members attended, tried to understand OP's situation and solutions, however, despite some quite telling things discussion fragmented to what I explained in my earlier post, so stage which should have led to...
- Cohesion (of information to begin with in this case). That didn't happen.
Cognitive presence in these situations could be cohesive force. Information as resource is already here in form of theory and practical knowledge. What could be improved is IMO clarity of information regarding responsibility and how it ties (makes possible) separation of subjective experience passed as knowledge from objective knowledge.
More clear and consistent how responsibilities are shared is passed (avoiding lecturing if possible) more it builds towards cohesion and rewarding inquiring subjects cognitive functions (I know where I am, I know these guys know their stuff, I beginning to understand why they know their stuff -> problem solved / I want to know more).
My two cents: Honestly, ignorance is met with brutal persecution on this forum.
New members will often post in violation of TOS8 without realizing it. They're invariably linked to TOS8, which is good, but they're not always given any significant explanation why they're wrong or even what they're wrong about.
And if the member fails to understand their error(s) by their next post, they're met with open hostility.
I hate to single a post out, but #17 is an example of what i'm talking about.
OP was spouting nonsense, really. But instead of trying to correct their misinformation (a link to a helpful article explaining why 192kHz is unnecessary/harmful perhaps, or that whatever jitter there may be is insignificant), they got... that post. And the couple that followed, mocking them for their ignorance.
One could argue that the information is all on the forum and has been endlessly discussed already, but the new user, like anyone, assumes that what they know is the truth. They don't realize they need to read up on the subject. Which means you don't even have to link an article, simply telling a person what subject they need to search for could be enough.
Occasionally a kind member will attempt to explain things to the new member, often with, in my opinion, an overly long and wordy post, using terms unfamiliar to anyone without advanced knowledge on the subject and going into far more detail than is necessary. Even so, that's a kind move on their part and if the person really wants to learn, then that post just might be the start of something wonderful for them.
You see, i find it sad how much misinformation is out there. I feel like when people come here, we have a chance to open their eyes and show them how things really work, how they don't need to spend thousands to get a decent sound setup, and hopefully they'll even understand well enough to be able to pass the information on.
Sadly, we're more likely to see the first type of post i mentioned rather than the second, and all that potential is lost as the user is driven away.
A note: This site remains a wonderful source of information if one knows what they're doing. Also, i've seen numerous threads that degenerated because the new user was very obviously not here to learn. My quibble is that new users aren't given much of a chance, some of them are here to learn, and like anyone who is learning about literally anything (including each and every one of us), they have misconceptions. They should absolutely not be reviled for them.
As a "recovering audiophile," I can really see that it is not productive to react to some of that audiophile stuff with words to the effect, that's just bullshit. It doesn't help. People need to be shown something convincing. And preferably something a bit gentle! Maybe a wiki page on introductory audiophile misconceptions would help, and would avoid the many pages of repetition.
With a member who simply won't take the hint, or even the flat-out statement, this is not the place for you, then a hundred wiki pages, links to articles, etc etc, would not make any difference. Probably we are lucky to only be up to four pages here!
The main issue appears to be that most people don't read the terms of service.
That isn't the forum, or members problem. Any more than comprehension thereof.
ate=1475437739]
I totally agree with this forums demand for prove. And as an "academic" I strongly believe in double-blind testing.
I also have my doubt on various claims in the audio-branch.
That's why I don't just read ad's but visit forums in the hope that people with "live listening experience" with certain components can advise me on that.
[/quote]
Right. Believers may pay it some lip service from time to time, like above. Then go right on believing, like above.
Good luck with your "education" approach.
My two cents: Honestly, ignorance is met with brutal persecution on this forum.
On what basis do you assume "ignorance" is why folks skip the dozens of 'live listening experience' audiomoron forums and join HA, for " 'live listening experience' with certain components" advice?
ignorance is met with brutal persecution on this forum.
Maybe, but beware of excessive "niceness" lest you find yourself overrun by idiots and trolls. Not everyone is willing to re-examine their core audio beliefs.
On what basis do you assume "ignorance" is why folks skip the dozens of 'live listening experience' audiomoron forums and join HA, for " 'live listening experience' with certain components" advice?
Principle, i suppose. When a new member enters there is no basis on which to assume they're trolling, ignorant, or anything else, really.
Until there is evidence to the contrary, i prefer to assume the best since that generally leads to the best outcome for everyone, in my experience.
Maybe, but beware of excessive "niceness" lest you find yourself overrun by idiots and trolls. Not everyone is willing to re-examine their core audio beliefs.
This is true, but i don't think a middle ground would be too hard to achieve. As i stated, not everyone comes here to learn. I was suggesting that until a person clearly shows that they belong to that group, they should be treated with respect.
Honestly, ignorance is met with brutal persecution on this forum.
When a new member enters there is no basis on which to assume they're trolling, ignorant, or anything else, really.
Yet you did.
So perhaps less pontificating and more introspection?
I was suggesting that until a person clearly shows that they belong to that group, they should be treated with respect.
You should take into account that some people are quicker than others in recognizing it. If you have dealt with audiophiles for years or even decades, you know the patterns.
A note: This site remains a wonderful source of information if one knows what they're doing. Also, i've seen numerous threads that degenerated because the new user was very obviously not here to learn. My quibble is that new users aren't given much of a chance, some of them are here to learn, and like anyone who is learning about literally anything (including each and every one of us), they have misconceptions. They should absolutely not be reviled for them.
Why I participate in this discussion comes is because something I noticed in general IRL.
Situation with young adults (not necessarily very young, up to 30 years old) just past their vocational or university degree on the surface looks like it's it's always been, but what I noticed on the side, some things have changed.
Individuals who are really talented still go where they want to go. But they spend a lot of time and effort in social networking. They look for opportunities to get income, expand their CV and further develop their skills. They are taught early that they need to develop social skills to sell their knowledge if they wish such opportunities to open for them.
Individual who are good but balance their interests with other things, might stability of income, family or other factor. However, they are also very good at networking and while they they options aren't the same as for the top 10% they get employed.
Then there are workhorses. They learn the basics and can be good on few things, but for whatever reasons, they don't appear to be very willing to expand from that. People who always come to work, are reliable live mixers for example, but everything they mix sounds the same. They also realise importance of networking but unfortunately their social skills appear often be limited to selling their 'ego' which limits their options.
Then there used to be people who could be very good in very narrow area but it's like they have disappeared. What I see instead are 'Hipsters' who somehow try to sell themselves to whatever position by their social skills. Even skills they have via education doesn't appear to matter for them, they don't necessarily perform their tasks unless supervised, being 'creative' with their CV doesn't matter to them. The work market is just endless rows of door knobs for them. What is sad, is that they exists because their approach relying on social skills and playing a role of professional works!
Thinking of this forum environment, especially first two types tend to be contributors if they find something worthwhile. But they are taught about communication skills and networking and also grown to expects certain things from their environments. Their time budget is limited because of economical realities they must pay attention to networking. Yet, I think potential lies in these people.
People need to be shown something convincing. And preferably something a bit gentle! Maybe a wiki page on introductory audiophile misconceptions would help, and would avoid the many pages of repetition.
With a member who simply won't take the hint, or even the flat-out statement, this is not the place for you, then a hundred wiki pages, links to articles, etc etc, would not make any difference. Probably we are lucky to only be up to four pages here!
I don't know gentle, that's up to community though, but there is difference between harsh and firm. It's again up from different opinions if harsh could be a badge of merit to be proud of or if being instead being firm would be better reputation wise. Then there is how to make something workable in environment where different people perceive things differently. Moderation would be impossible in environment where distinction would be made on subjective basis. That's why I suggested education, where there are defined terms, means and goals.
Anyway, I doubt culture which originates and resembles the usenet era being sustainable in large communities for long. Today gear and software are seen just what they are, tools of trade. Even there are extroverts and introverts like always, I don't see people who could be classified as geeks any more anywhere (that said, I haven't seen audiophiles for few years either).
However, whatever if anything would be made, it IMO has to be based on selfish agenda, gaining influence. 'Gentle' approach, while I see what you mean, could IMO only work if it would based on 'firm'. Idea is not appearing open to cult of audiophiles, which could create hostile environment for objective discussion.
The main issue appears to be that most people don't read the terms of service.
That isn't the forum, or members problem. Any more than comprehension thereof.
In the end, TOS #8 surfaces again and again in conversations like this
I totally agree with this forums demand for prove. And as an "academic" I strongly believe in double-blind testing.
I also have my doubt on various claims in the audio-branch.
That's why I don't just read ad's but visit forums in the hope that people with "live listening experience" with certain components can advise me on that.
I agree to disagree, my opinion that as long as there is this 'leakage' that is needed to dealt with on forum, there is issue, like very example in your quoted, problem exists.
Right. Believers may pay it some lip service from time to time, like above. Then go right on believing, like above.
Good luck with your "education" approach.
I posted basic model in the very post you quoted. That approach is actually used in online education and unless you comment that, I don't know what here is to discuss.
You did 15 posts in 9 years and now want to educate others how they should do their posting with new members so Hydrogen fits your flavor?
You should take into account that some people are quicker than others in recognizing it. If you have dealt with audiophiles for years or even decades, you know the patterns.
Mm, good point. I hadn't thought of that and will keep it in mind. I have a lot less experience than most of the regulars here.
You did 15 posts in 9 years and now want to educate others how they should do their posting with new members so Hydrogen fits your flavor?
Nowhere I have said what Hydrogenaudio _should_ do. I have simply brought options how to work with new members. I have wrote that is up to community to decide _if_ anything should be done.
FYI: In general, I'm not taking part in meta conversations like this. What next, would ABX test results validity evaluated based on post count? Unless there's discussion about content, as far as I'm concerned, there is nothing to discuss.
Nowhere I have said what Hydrogenaudio _should_ do. I have simply brought options how to work with new members. I have wrote that is up to community to decide _if_ anything should be done.
Consider leading the process of education by your example? Goodness knows I'm not having much success, but perhaps you are better at such things than I.
This is hardly a new discussion either. I really think xnor was right about this thread: https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,111392.0.html
A topic stemmed from a discussion started by a person who was banned for violating TOS12 with a history of concern trolling. Let's also not ignore the 20 pages fueled by TOS8 evasion which ensued by a member who still unapologetically operates from placebo.
I wonder how many HA members would for a second even think of the double edge ...
Nowhere I have said what Hydrogenaudio _should_ do. I have simply brought options how to work with new members. I have wrote that is up to community to decide _if_ anything should be done.
Consider leading the process of education by your example? Goodness knows I'm not having much success, but perhaps you are better at such things than I.
I might try, but then there are times when I check Hydrogenaudio daily, then there are times I dont. What comes to gear discussion in general, it's just a bit different where my focus is. Not to advertise any brand, gear from known brands are in general deemed good enough what comes to sound quality. What is discussed is more about versatility, durability, set up time and reselling value than anything else. What comes to home / portable audio I haven't bought new gear for ages but JBL Pebbles because I wanted something mobile that takes it's power just from laptop and I was a bit curious. Yeah, they work like that, one less psu and cables to carry, and that's the only thing I'm willing to say about them.
This is hardly a new discussion either. I really think xnor was right about this thread: https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,111392.0.html
That's the reason why I brought my thoughts in this conversation. This circle of discussion has been seen many times before. And there are always the same points made preserving environment and being nicer and while appearing harsh may reflect poorly to community, then being nicer could be worse, opening doors to people shilling their 'audiophile quality optical cables' and other nonsense and their cult followers.
What solution there could be, what the actual needs are., for what I seen I can only repeat that instead becoming a friendly or nicer, whatever that is, becoming mentors could break the cycle and at the same time actually create more welcoming environment.
But it would take some effort, what I tried to convey when I shared my own experience in my earlier posts. Would it be worth it because of a few individuals, don't know, but taking lurker factor in account too, which still is influence, maybe and if it would attract more contributors. Then yes, considering most of the pieces are already here, yes it might be worth it,
But no point repeating what I have already posted, but few more thoughts which motivated me to participate this time.
Even it's been years since I have met audiophiles IRL and what I read from social media, for me it looks there are audiophiles and then there are just misinformed people who subscript to cult because cults appear more welcoming and company shills have these so called people (marketing) skills. However, after all I think most people stay in reasonable budgets and if music have huge entertaining factor for them, nothing wrong in getting decent equipment.
Then, there are people whom with discussion starts to feel there is something off... Not my place to take the stage really, but I can say lot's of music is born in living room couches with just acoustic instruments and singing. What evolves from there that goes to setlist or albums, regardless from genre, I don't think there are many who pay attention to how it should be listened to. Maybe there are things like throwing a party, dancing, having fun or maybe certain troubadour aspects etc.
But spending ridiculous sums of money to audiophile cat-cable? It's lot of money that could be spent in events and for years there are many sorts of them, also events families with kids can attend to, or buying albums. Then at some point I read about autism and reflecting that towards my past experience and nowadays when I read thread like this, I can't but wonder, what if that actually is a factor? What if some of these people actually have something that comes also with severe learning disadvantage?
I don't know if this is topic that is conversed in social media, but in general people are more aware and attitudes have changed a lot. It's a bit like with ethnicity thing. Humour and manners in dealing with those matters that were acceptable couple of decades ago, just don't fly any more.
Obviously there are different cultures here, but if it is a possibility that things go awry because new member might actually be a retard, no matter what I suggested taking models from education, you might want to at least consider what was suggested in post #98. At least show their towards other other forums or something in a briefly manner.
It doesn't has to be anything to do with nice, or caring about possible disadvantages. It's just that making process longer than and poking fun people who may have serious difficulties doesn't look good.
Here you go, James, et al., a chance to lead by example:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112883.0.html
Here you go, James, et al., a chance to lead by example:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,112883.0.html
I'm hardly looking to lead anything, just follow my own advice. For the sake of lurkers, I think I may give that topic a try, but not right now. I thought I have seen most of it... but good lord.