Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › D2000 D5000 OWNERS BE AWARE!!!!!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

D2000 D5000 OWNERS BE AWARE!!!!!!! - Page 9  

post #121 of 206
There is another thread about FLAC vs WAV that didn't go anywhere: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=244456

Aaron: you should really tone down your use of capital letters, excalamation marks, different font colors and font sizes. Think about if every poster did the same....

<font police off>
post #122 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaso View Post
There is another thread about FLAC vs WAV that didn't go anywhere: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=244456

Aaron: you should really tone down your use of capital letters, excalamation marks, different font colors and font sizes. Think about if every poster did the same....

<font police off>
Thanks and You are right. I am not sure why but they gave me a very challanging time for suggesting a change to an $18 connector instead of using the existing adapter.
post #123 of 206
Aaron, your persistence is admirable.

If I could make a humble suggestion, you might want to consider letting this argument fade off into head-fi oblivion.

You're clearly hearing some nice improvement sans adapter & with uber solder. My suggestion? Go with it. You've duly performed your head-fi duty by sharing this nugget of wisdom with us all m'man...

Fact is, there are always gonna be some who refuse to be "enlightened"...but don't let it get under your skin, and don't turn it into a personal crusade...it just ends up making you look a little whacky even when you have only the best of intentions. I mean, you surely have much better ways to focus your mental energy, right?

Peace,

Graz
post #124 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graz View Post
Aaron, your persistence is admirable.

If I could make a humble suggestion, you might want to consider letting this argument fade off into head-fi oblivion.

You're clearly hearing some nice improvement sans adapter & with uber solder. My suggestion? Go with it. You've duly performed your head-fi duty by sharing this nugget of wisdom with us all m'man...

Fact is, there are always gonna be some who refuse to be "enlightened"...but don't let it get under your skin, and don't turn it into a personal crusade...it just ends up making you look a little whacky even when you have only the best of intentions. I mean, you surely have much better ways to focus your mental energy, right?

Peace,

Graz
You are right. I actually do not take it that personal. I just tried to respond as a matter of courtesy to those who took the time to share their opinions.
post #125 of 206
[QUOTE=Roam;3023330]Bzzzt! Wrong. . In other words, no, they did not measure better, and furthermore they were measuring the wrong things.

I won't go into the maths since none of you will understand it anyway, but suffice to say a lot of low-level details & information are lost when converting to & from 16/44.1 digital, and in fact the wonderful THD and SnR measurements are meaningless.

At this point you're probably thinking "didn't I just say measurements are meaningless?", and you'd be wrong. What I'm saying is that this specific set of measurements, that is those concerning 16/44.1 digital aren't worth much, because they measure the wrong things.

I can take a connector, amp, wire, or whatever, and run a full spectrum of tests on it as opposed to a single test like THD or SnR. If everything tests the same, it will sound the same. What we hear in music may elude some of our measuring tools, it will not get through them all. I can look at my tube amp and point out why it sounds better than solidstate, I can tell you why a cobalt core transformer will sound better than standard M6 cores, this is all measurable and quantifiable.

/QUOTE]

1) In much of audio we measure not so much the wrong things, as only those things that people have the equipment and imagination to test. I do not believe that we have sufficient knowledge of the hearing process, let alone the ability to run tests of electronics to distinguish between ordinary and really good equipment.

2) You have a pretty high opinion of yourself and a low one of everyone else. You should consider reversing this.
post #126 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Friedman View Post
I can tell you that 30 years ago these arguments were not popular. After a general consensus over many years developed did any of these arguments ever come to public light? I remember at that time how people would argue as you are backed by their own set of numbers. I use to argue with them. It is easy now to explain why solid state Amps or digital stats were misused.
I was there 30 years ago. We in the instrumentation field knew back then why it was wrong, and why the amps sounded like crap despite their vanishingly low THD measurements. Hint: plug a large amount of negative feedback into a standard 2nd order control systems equation, a bad control function (an inherently non-linear amp, which they all were back then) can't be fixed with NFB. We knew about it, we could measure it, but we were ignored since this was not in the interests of the audio field and their THD wars.


Quote:
My point is that a dynamic system with interaction is hard to measure accurately for the resulting sound quality. That is you can measure a signal going through a cable. It is quite another thing to try to measure a continuous matrix of signals moving through a cable with drivers acting on one end and the wave effected and hence how that further effects the following signal its source and the resolution of it all; hence a dynamic system. I wondered the same thing many years ago until I met a guy by the name of David Karp from Eardrum Audio. He told me long ago to use my ears. He would be able to detect every nuance in a way that was remarkable. He was extremely technically inclined and was the one that taught me that measurements get distorted in a "Dynamic System". Although an analyzer can better measure a signal going through a wire, the ear can be a better detection device of how the signals get resolved in said dynamic system.
Let's get back on topic here. It is your contention that a 1/8 to 1/4 adaptor, and by extension all contact-type connectors in the signal path will significantly degrade an audio signal. Now here's the fun part, I've actually measured these things, along with all sorts of other connectors. A 1/8 to 1/4 adaptor of decent quality measures very close to not having the adaptor, and in practice I can't hear a difference. An XLR connector on the other hand sounds noticeably better than a standard 1/4" phono plug, and the measurements support this. There's a reason why all high performance connectors such as cable TV jacks, the cable for your computer monitor, your computer CPU and instrumentation probes all use pin-type plugs & sockets. They measure better and work better, and yes, they do sound better.
post #127 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roam View Post
I was there 30 years ago. We in the instrumentation field knew back then why it was wrong, and why the amps sounded like crap despite their vanishingly low THD measurements. Hint: plug a large amount of negative feedback into a standard 2nd order control systems equation, a bad control function (an inherently non-linear amp, which they all were back then) can't be fixed with NFB. We knew about it, we could measure it, but we were ignored since this was not in the interests of the audio field and their THD wars.




Let's get back on topic here. It is your contention that a 1/8 to 1/4 adaptor, and by extension all contact-type connectors in the signal path will significantly degrade an audio signal. Now here's the fun part, I've actually measured these things, along with all sorts of other connectors. A 1/8 to 1/4 adaptor of decent quality measures very close to not having the adaptor, and in practice I can't hear a difference. An XLR connector on the other hand sounds noticeably better than a standard 1/4" phono plug, and the measurements support this. There's a reason why all high performance connectors such as cable TV jacks, the cable for your computer monitor, your computer CPU and instrumentation probes all use pin-type plugs & sockets. They measure better and work better, and yes, they do sound better.
You are really getting into areas that I have not commented on at all. This thread is only referring to an adapter on a headphone cable. I did not comment on any other connection. The headphone signal going through a headphone wire is low level signal and my observation is that adding an adapter and hence mass to the original connector softens or if you will smears the sound. This is something that I have tested and experimented with over 30 years. The only other thing I will say is that I have observed that the different solders have different sound signatures to my ears. Also different connectors sound different. For example Gold covered connectors in general tend to sound warm and silver covered connector sound sharper and not as warm. High content silver solder tend to sound brighter than non-silver solder.

In summary I am talking about audio signal and not other types of electronic signals and in particular the affect of using a heavy adapter in the headphone signal path.
post #128 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Friedman View Post
OK. BY the way I only use Wave. Believe it or not I was able to hear a SLIGHT difference between flac, lossless and wave. With the cheap storage today there is not much reason to compress. The reason wave sounds slightly better is because the chips have an easier time processing wave. There is less work for the processor to re-compose in wave; hence reduced jitter.

Please seek professional psychiatric help. There are medications that can help you.

These concerns about processing jitter are based on presumptions surrounding problems with computer audio ten years ago. These days, the average processor can work the audio stream with both hands tied behind it's back. It's not using a whole 1% of the available cycles.

Your concerns about jitter when ripping are also at least 10 years old. I can rip the same track on 10 different cd drives at varying speeds and get the exact same stream.
post #129 of 206
Ericj, why did you have to include the first line of your post? It's the kind of thing that we really don't need here. The rest of your post was a very valuable contribution. Why start it with an incredibly rude personal attack?

I agree with you, though, on the rest. There is no way to hear a difference in lossless codecs. There is no difference to hear.
post #130 of 206
Time for a history lesson, or "why are headphone plugs called phono plugs?" This goes way back to the days of telephone switchboards where an operator would physically have to plug in a wire to connect you to the person you want to talk to. These plugs were, surprise surprise, called phono plugs. They were designed for robustness as they had to be plugged in & out countless thousands of times, audio quality was a secondary consideration as the voice bandwidth back then was maybe 50-5000Hz at best, and with countless of miles of copper phone lines a mere connector doesn't enter the picture. The phono plug was never designed for high-fidelity, it's an inherently flawed system for hi-fi audio. Adding an adaptor to a headphone jack isn't going to gum up the signal any more than it already is.

The same is also true of RCA jacks, they're also an inherently flawed system and no amount of Eichman plugs or WBT Nextgen jacks is going to fix it. If you want proper signal integrity, use an XLR plug, which uses the pin-type contact found in all high-performance connector systems.

Regarding silver solder. The reason it sounds bright and harsh is because people don't know how to solder with it. Silver containing solders don't flow as well and have higher melting points, which leads most people to high temps and longer dwell times on the joints. Put one of these joints under an x-ray machine and you will see very nasty intermetallic grain boundaries and lots of grain growth, in other words, a bad solder joint. This will of course crap up the signal trying to pass through it. There's no mystery nor voodoo to it, it's all easily visible, measurable, and explainable.
post #131 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post
Ericj, why did you have to include the first line of your post? It's the kind of thing that we really don't need here. The rest of your post was a very valuable contribution. Why start it with an incredibly rude personal attack?
Because obsessive-compulsive disorder is a very serious psychiatric ailment that causes millions of people to endure unnecessary misery?

I'll try and lay off the "you're crazy" angle from now on, though.

Quote:
I agree with you, though, on the rest. There is no way to hear a difference in lossless codecs. There is no difference to hear.
Right. He's suggesting that the playback buffer experiences some jitter because the decoder process can't keep it full, or is working so hard to keep it full that it preempts the outward flow of the playback buffer, which is nonsense in 2007.

In 1997 on a 133mhz pentium, *maybe, if you used windows. In OS/2, BSD, or Linux you'd be fine.

These days you can transcode 1080p video streams in the background without preempting the playback stream.
post #132 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericj View Post
Please seek professional psychiatric help. There are medications that can help you.

These concerns about processing jitter are based on presumptions surrounding problems with computer audio ten years ago. These days, the average processor can work the audio stream with both hands tied behind it's back. It's not using a whole 1% of the available cycles.

Your concerns about jitter when ripping are also at least 10 years old. I can rip the same track on 10 different cd drives at varying speeds and get the exact same stream.

There is a site used by audio professionals devoted to tweaking the computers in order to eliminate interrupts in order to obtain better audio performance and reduced jitter. A leading engineer with E-mu referred me to it. It is:

http://www.musicxp.net/index.php

It is comforting to know that all the audio jitter in computers has been resolved 10 years ago. I do not understand why Esoteric still sells OEM a $2,500 transport with very LOW jitter too many high end CD manufactures if they can use a $30 CDROM that can produce NO JITTER? Dr. Johnson of Spectral Audio who invented HDCD could learn a lot from this thread and save $2470($2500-$30) by using said $30 CDROM drive with NO jitter. Why he compromised and uses a LOW jitter esoteric drive which he pays up for $2500 is a mystery.

You also mention that you get the same result at different speeds extracting from a CD ROM. Every review that technically tests these drives shows higher error and jitter rates at higher speeds. In fact I had a conversation with Plextor and they recommended extracting at the lowest speed of 4 xs to do extraction since that reduces the error rates. BY the way for that reason most professional copy machines work at the lower speeds.

Also there is a program called EAC that you can locate all over the net which everyone swears by as the best extracting program. The history behind the developer and how it came about is interesting too. I realize that there is error correction. However, not all error correction is created equal.
post #133 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post
Ericj, why did you have to include the first line of your post? It's the kind of thing that we really don't need here. The rest of your post was a very valuable contribution. Why start it with an incredibly rude personal attack?

I agree with you, though, on the rest. There is no way to hear a difference in lossless codecs. There is no difference to hear.
If you read my comment I did not say that there is necessarily different information between lossless and Wave but that some processors have an easier time decoding it. Simply wave is in a more raw form than Lossless and there is less to decode for a processor. There is another thread where someone mentions that to him lossless sounds brighter. There is also an experiment that I read where someone transposed wave to lossless back and forth 10 times and found deteriorating sound quality. Hence his conclusion is that it is not exactly the same. I have not tested this myself.
post #134 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roam View Post
Time for a history lesson, or "why are headphone plugs called phono plugs?" ...
But they are not. Phono plugs are the rca plugs, where phono is a shortening of phonograph.

The jack plugs used on the old switchboards were indeed the same as headphone plugs as far as I've read but not called phono, sometimes referred to as phone plugs for the obvious reasons.
post #135 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Friedman View Post
There is a whole professional site used by audio professionals devoted to tweaking the computers in order to eliminate interrupts in order to obtain better audio performance and reduced jitter. A leading engineer with E-mu referred me to it. It is:
http://www.musicxp.net/index.php
Which is irrelevant to the topic at hand. That site discusses the recording of sound using a computer, and synching the computer to the input device(s) and setting it up to minimize drop-outs and interruptions caused by the hard drive doing virtual memory swaps and other such nonsense. It focuses on how to strip down a Windows computer to make it reliable so it doesn't crash or do other stupid stuff. I see nothing there regarding jitter and playback quality, which I might remind you is the topic under discussion.

Speaking of which, playing back digital media, be it from a hard drive or CD drive is not the way to do it, both are inherently flawed processes. Both involve lots of drive control lines, servo feedbacks, and phase-locked loops, all of which create lots of RF noise which then contaminates everything. This is true of everything from a computer CDROM to a hard drive to TEAC's VRDS mechanism.

If you're really serious about accurate noise-free reading & playback, you'd do the following; use EAC's read until right system to pull the data off the CD or hard drive and load it onto a flash memory chip, an SD or CF card will do nicely. Then shut down the drive and physically disconnect it with relays before reading the bits of the SD card and into the DAC and output stage. The jitter, noise, and data error specs will be at least an order of magnitude better than any CD drive.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › D2000 D5000 OWNERS BE AWARE!!!!!!!