Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Interesting, polemon. I'm pretty sold on FFox Quantum at this point, as it does seem appreciably faster with the particular set of plugins I run (script blocker, video downloader, ghostery, https everywhere, etc).

I was a fan of Opera (the browser) way back when, not so much the last decade or so though. Edge is very much Microsoft's Chrome, and it is pretty good, but without decent IE-specific backward compatibility it doesn't really have much of a reason to exist. Microsoft unquestionably has the personnel to do really superior emulation should they so desire, but I assume even they do not want to keep the shambling, undead corpse of IE around, if at all possible. It's a serviceable out of the box browser, to be sure, but it doesn't appear to offer any advantage over existing solutions, and may itself have some disadvantages.

Functionally it's possible to get Ryzen (and any consumer Intel chips since Skylake) running in Windows 7, but I don't believe USB 3.1 (gen 2), or more importantly, NVMe boot drives are typically supported, at least not without some effort.

Win10 is a good effort, but the privacy issues have not really been resolved, which undercuts it a bit. That said, even using a fair number of websites or services (Google for instance) has inherent privacy issues of probably even greater concern. In my mind, it's hard to be upset at Microsoft if you have Gmail, etc. I use both, and Android, to boot, so I'm thoroughly tagged and tracked. And of course there's the telecoms, and the .gov, et al.

I use chrome for Netflix, and general browsing with Firefox myself. Edge gets kicked to the curb with Cortana and biometric logins. Maybe if they hadn't killed their smartphone OS there would be a good case for Edge other than as the built in default; full service autosync and services across console, phone and full-fat OS'. I can't imagine anyone installing Edge on iOS or droid, so Apple or Alphabet are gatekeepers.
2
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by greynol -
No, I have a memory and have a penchant for searching efficiently; but if it makes you feel better to dismiss me as a troll collecting ammo against placebophiles, you're more than welcome. It's a conspiracy after all.

But that raises an interesting question, my raising the term conspiracy, that is:  exactly when were you accused of being a placebophile before my pointing out the obvious?
3
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by cliveb -
Oh Clive, c'mon now.

Perhaps you're now just a recovering placebophile...

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,52171.msg467623.html#msg467623

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,52171.msg467857.html#msg467857

Sorry, but I think you asked for it.
So you had to go back over 10 years to find something I said that you feel puts me in that camp?

Actually, I'm in awe that you were able to find them in under 23 minutes. Almost as if you keep close at hand a cache of members' posts that you might want to use as ammo.
4
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by greynol -
No diatribe against inner-groove distortion?

@AJ:
You forgot balanced XLR connections, like what can be found on the veil-lifting Squeezebox Transporter.
5
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by cliveb -
I want to hear from those who hate vinyl exactly what it is that they find so objectionable. Is it just the surface noise (what I call "vinyl roar") and the ticks & pops? Or do some of the other inaccuracies (eg. frequency response, distortion, crosstalk, wow & flutter) make vinyl unlistenable?
For me, it's preamp instability. I've now learned that vynil is a dead silent medium, that does not need heroics/cleaning to reduce surface noise as commonly thought, but rather a stable, albeit bling phono pre. Maybe a dust brush too.
I've subsequently dumped my fancy record cleaner and am in negotiations with Ralphie over a bling stable pre. The >$100 cartridge will have to wait.

To put it another way, if you heard some vinyl that had no audible ticks, pops or surface noise, how confident are you that you would be able to identify it as vinyl?
Other than the NPR and furnace business, I thought we just did??

I asked what I thought was a reasonable question. And I thank Nikaki and DVDdoug for actually answering what I asked. (And it seems to me that their main issue with vinyl is indeed the noise).

But you, AJ, seem to just want to try and make jokes. Are you prepared to actually answer the question?
6
General - (fb2k) / Re: MQA, Dragonfly, & Foobar
Last post by Mike in MD -
MQA decoding is a two-step process.  The first is software only, in which the MQA file is unfolded from 48k to 96k.  The second step is called rendering, in which the special timing algorithm is applied.  This second step can be done only on the DAC hardware.  
According to an article in The Absolute Sound, the Dragonfly DAC can do the hardware rendering step, but must be given the unfolded MQA file from the source.  The Dragonfly can not unfold an MQA file.
MQA is licensed software.  I do not think that FOOBAR2000 can do this unfolding step for you.  So your options are 1) find software that will do the MQA unfolding or 2) use a DAC that will do both unfolding and rendering.  When a DAC does both it is called core decoding.

7
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by DVDdoug -
Quote
I want to hear from those who hate vinyl exactly what it is that they find so objectionable. Is it just the surface noise (what I call "vinyl roar") and the ticks & pops? Or do some of the other inaccuracies (eg. frequency response, distortion, crosstalk, wow & flutter) make vinyl unlistenable?
Noise!!!   Clicks and pops were always the biggest issue for me.    Defects/damage on records didn't seem to bother my friends & family (as long as the record didn't skip) but they annoyed me, especially if it was my record that was damaged/defective, and I really tried to take care of them.  

I could have lived with "normal" background surface noise and preamp noise but now I've been spoiled by digital.   

But... back when I was listening to vinyl I was always upgrading (or wanting to upgrade) my cartridge for "better sound" (better frequency response).  

Most (rock/popular) records seemed to have rolled-off highs, but there were a few gems with "sparkly-clean" sound.    So, I was on a fool's errand looking for a better cartridge.   And, I felt like I was "cheating" if I turned-up the treble...  Reading too many hi-fi magazines about "flat frequency response"...    Now if I digitize a record (because I can't find a digital copy) I use EQ if I feel like it needs it...    That's after click & pop reduction, of course!

45's were generally lousy...  I can't say what was wrong and it's been decades since I've played a 45, but I suppose it was distortion (loudness war? re-grind vinyl?).   The same song on an LP usually sounded much better.  

With LP's, tracking/distortion problems were only occasional.

I never heard crosstalk (or lack of separation) and I never heard wow/flutter from a turntable that wasn't broken.
8
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by ajinfla -
I want to hear from those who hate vinyl exactly what it is that they find so objectionable. Is it just the surface noise (what I call "vinyl roar") and the ticks & pops? Or do some of the other inaccuracies (eg. frequency response, distortion, crosstalk, wow & flutter) make vinyl unlistenable?
For me, it's preamp instability. I've now learned that vynil is a dead silent medium, that does not need heroics/cleaning to reduce surface noise as commonly thought, but rather a stable, albeit bling phono pre. Maybe a dust brush too.
I've subsequently dumped my fancy record cleaner and am in negotiations with Ralphie over a bling stable pre. The >$100 cartridge will have to wait.

To put it another way, if you heard some vinyl that had no audible ticks, pops or surface noise, how confident are you that you would be able to identify it as vinyl?
Other than the NPR and furnace business, I thought we just did??
9
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by greynol -
Oh Clive, c'mon now.

Perhaps you're now just a recovering placebophile...

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,52171.msg467623.html#msg467623

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,52171.msg467857.html#msg467857

Sorry, but I think you asked for it.
10
General Audio / Re: Dare I start another vinyl topic?
Last post by Nikaki -
If it wasn't for the pops, it would sound fine to me. It does sound overall different than a CD, but I don't perceive it as worse or better. Just slightly different.

However, I only have limited experience with actual vinyl. I don't own a setup, but my father did in the past. In those days, I didn't have a CD player yet. My vinyl comparisons are using those "24-bit vinyl rips" one can find online, which I have downloaded due to curiosity to compare them against my CDs. So this might invalidate any kind of comparisons I did vs CDs, not sure.

But some of those vinyl rips were surprisingly clean, with extremely few noticeable pops. And those sounded fine to me; as I said, slightly different sound, but not worse nor better. I don't know if vinyl is pressed from a different master though compared to digital releases. That might be the reason for the majority of the differences I hear, and those differences are very small (to me) to begin with.

With that being said though, in the age of Spotify (and friends), I find myself bothering less and less with using CDs when Spotify is just a click away. In fact, I don't think I played an actual CD in... over a year now? So I can't imagine that I'd be willing to deal with the additional hassles of using vinyl. I do realize though that for many people, these "hassles" are part of the experience. I completely understand why holding a vinyl record in your hands, putting it on, moving the needle, etc, would be a satisfying experience. I totally get it.