http://www.lessloss.com/computer_audio_usb.html

[Konig]

lessloss had started marketing their usb -> spdif converters. Steve got some competition now and i wonder if any1 will buy lynx again.

[Thaddy]

Oh my, are they serious?

Lightened Windows services:
Audible.

Increased memory timings to maximum smooth operation:
Audible.

Changing the card's DMA buffer size:
Audible.

Changing the audio software's buffers:
Audible.

Change the CPU frequency from 3.4 to 2.8 to 1.8 GHz:
Audible.

Changing the memory timings inside the BIOS:
Audible.

Playing the file from USB RAM drive instead of from Hard Disk:
Audible.

Playing the file from a deeply embedded folder instead of from top of directory:
Audible.

Filtering the PS of the computer:
Audible.

Turning off the CRT monitor:
Audible.

Unplugging all external devices, i.e. mouse, keyboard, monitor, etc:
Audible.

Discuss

[gevorg]

What a can of worms they opened, they better explain each case like they did in other parts of their website.

[PsychoZX]

I call BS on most of those claims.

[Iron_Dreamer]

[Scrith]

Laughing by the guy as he came up with that list of ridiculous claims:
Audible

[ObiHuang]

Oh man, I guess it was only time before a company realized how gullible "audiophiles" are and realizes how much it can milk the term "jitter."

[ObiHuang]

Actually I'd bet $20 that in 2 years, we'll get posts claiming they heard differences doing half the things posted there. Think about what people are already doing/claiming.

-We have many many people who buy portable amplifiers bigger (and more expensive than their portable sources to amplify their player's signal to their IEMs.

-We have people claiming they can hear significant differences in various Lossless forms of audio.

-We have people claiming they can hear distinct differences in signal quality by spending hundreds on 12-inch long cables.

-We have people buying $400+ professional sound cards because they believe they can hear the differences between 115db sound/noise ratio and 120db sound/noise ratio OR maybe +/-.5db vs +/- .2db frequency response.

-We have people claiming they've documented differences in sound quality between 6 feet USB cables.

-We have people who insist vinyl has the best sound quality even though every time you play the record, you're rolling off the high frequencies and adding distortion (and not to mention the buildup of dust that adds the beautiful static).

Trust me, that's just the tip of the iceberg. Give it two years and people will turn off their LCD monitors when they listen to audio, or buy 2GB of RAM to listen to their music.

[granodemostasa]

i gotta hear it to believe it (sorry, my ear's can't read figures and arguements, all they do is listen)... but my ear's ain't gullible either.

[ilovesocks]

Playing the file from a deeply embedded folder instead of from top of directory:
Audible.

Wow.

I don't know about you guys, but I only listen to my music when the planets are aligned and the fat lady is singing and I've rubbed ambergris that's been fermented for exactly 3 days and dissolved in honey all over my body.

[lan]

Originally Posted by Konig

i wonder if any1 will buy lynx again.

Well if you needed 24 bit or 88.2khz and above, sure.

Originally Posted by Thaddy

Oh my, are they serious?

You forgot to quote what's right after which I think is the most important thing.

"Even after all of these tweaks, the computer as source could not compete in clarity and low Jitter performance with a synchronously slaved run-of-the-mill NAD CD player."

I agree and that's why I believe the computer can never be a truly high end source. A less complicated and less general purpose external device is the way to go IMO. e.g. squeezebox. I'm not a fan of USB though.

Originally Posted by gevorg

What a can of worms they opened, they better explain each case like they did in other parts of their website.

My argument for all of these types of things is just that you must look at everything from a bird's eye view. We're dealing with whole systems here. They are intricated and some things affect the others. You want specific reasons? Well scrutinizing a singular item will not reveal anything.

Another thing, I do not care what people say as I come to my own conclusions and use my own ears. In that regard, I do not even want an explaination from them.

Originally Posted by Scrith

Laughing by the guy as he came up with that list of ridiculous claims:
Audible

I guess if you have never experience some of those things (and more), then it would be ridiculous. I have though so it's very real.

Originally Posted by ObiHuang

Oh man, I guess it was only time before a company realized how gullible "audiophiles" are and realizes how much it can milk the term "jitter."

There's nothing wrong with coming up with a solution to a problem. Of course, for those who never see it as a problem have a problem with all this.

Originally Posted by ObiHuang

Actually I'd bet $20 that in 2 years, we'll get posts claiming they heard differences doing half the things posted there. Think about what people are already doing/claiming.

Trust me, that's just the tip of the iceberg. Give it two years and people will turn off their LCD monitors when they listen to audio, or buy 2GB of RAM to listen to their music.

I've already been doing this for a long time But this is annoying and another reason for battery powered external source.

[Konig]

They suggested me getting special cables for the router and transporter and PC
to improve the sound quality. I didnt quite imagine how cables can affect how PC and router transmit data until you told us about router modding....

[Thaddy]

Lan, I'm not doubting the fact that a run-o-the-mill transport like a NAD will sound better than a computer, however, you have to admit that some of those claims are rediculous.

Playing the file from USB RAM drive instead of from Hard Disk:
Audible.

It's all 0's and 1's. How does this matter Unless you get into the fact that if you're playing from solid state memory then you don't need to hard drive to be working. But, it has to be up and running if your computer is on.

Playing the file from a deeply embedded folder instead of from top of directory:
Audible.

Once again, 0's and 1's. It's not like the computer has to search like a maniac to find the next X amount of bits to continue playing a song. It's all on the hard drive or cached up in the RAM correct?

I'm starting to wonder what's in the water over there in Lithuania

[lan]

I'm calling BS on the deeply embedded folder thing also.

The thing about the USB RAM drive is interesting. My own thoughts is I prefer not to have too many internal drive devices. Motors cause noise. My fans are actually externally powered. My extra harddrives and DVD burner are external. One thing though, the fact that it's USB means it's an external device and well, that's a bit contradictory to unplugging the mouse and keyboard thing

[TheSloth]

Originally Posted by ObiHuang

We have people who insist vinyl has the best sound quality even though every time you play the record, you're rolling off the high frequencies and adding distortion (and not to mention the buildup of dust that adds the beautiful static).

You were doing just fine until you said that. It seems that you don't know a great deal about distortion. Hint: all distortion was not created equal. And so what if you are rolling off the high frequencies? I'm not trying to say one is better than the other, but I don't think you fully understand the technology involved in either. There are technically viable reasons why vinly in good condition should sound better. To list such an argument along with the others that you have rightly identified as somewhat ridiculous (i.e. could not be backed up by anything other than the crazy ears of a very small number of people) is uninformed.

Some people's favourite speaker is the esl57, an all of 49 year old design. Are they crazy, or stupid, or both, or are they genuinely hearing something pretty darn amazing in the sound? I mean, it rolls off the treble, and has very weak bass resonse by today's standards...