HiFace, sensitive information - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy 

Hi

 

Since you see more HiFaces than anybody else, can you guesstimate when the change back to the large clocks took place? 

 

(For instance, my HiFace was shipped from TweekGeek  May 10th, so in your estimation, did the change back to the large clocks occur before or after that date?)

 

Thanks

 

USG

I have a rough idea that the change to the smaller clock happened around beginning of March; I'm really unsure when it changed back though - If I was pushed I would say May/June, that's as close as I can get. Marco would be best to ask about this?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkeny 

I have a rough idea that the change to the smaller clock happened around beginning of March; I'm really unsure when it changed back though - If I was pushed I would say May/June, that's as close as I can get. Marco would be best to ask about this?
 

John, 

Do possibly remember which clock my hiface had?  I don't know if I should really be concerned but I would like to know since I received my unit at the end or march (I will be amazed if you can!!).
 

well it should be easy enough to do a test while only having the model with the smaller clock, since I would be surprised if someone could tell a large difference between 44.1 and 48khz files if the 48khz is quite noticeably better than 44.1  on the same unit, theres your comparison tight there

Sleepin Dan, You are either a shill for M2Tech or have absolutely no knowledge of digital circuitry.

Yes I did A/B both versions,   and yes in stock form the small clock sounds worse than a $50 soundcard at RBCD (44.1khz),  at 48khz I didn't detect much difference but all I have is a Led Zepplin DVD rip in 48khz. When I put the battery on it was the version with the correct clock,  I didn't bring it up again because I was being blown off by shills and cool aide drinkers.

I would have liked to shove the bad version straight up Marco's A$$ but it wasn't worth the plane ticket.  My condolences  to the brilliant engineers at M2Tech who designed the Hiface only to have it ruined by bean counters like Marco who is just a spokesman puppet put up to look like he is their technical guru. 

M2Tech owes the folks with the bad units a full refund and an apology for their wasted time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy dan 

I remember suggesting this test to Regal in the original thread, but nothing came of it.  I do remember he fitted a battery and suddenly was over the moon about the sound, and of course a battery won't make up for any shortcomings with the oscillator itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubu1 

John, 

Do possibly remember which clock my hiface had?  I don't know if I should really be concerned but I would like to know since I received my unit at the end or march (I will be amazed if you can!!).
 

Absolutely, no idea, sorry Bubu.

Don't try to open the case, the wires are glued into it. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal 

 

M2Tech owes the folks with the bad units a full refund and an apology for their wasted time.

 

 

X2.

I personally feel bad as I recommended the Hiface to quite a few people. I really hope they replace the faulty units asap. The Hiface is still in my opinion a great product at a great price ... as long as they keep the quality the same.

One of the reasons the Hiface is superior to most of its competition is that it uses a separate clock for 44.1. If they skimp on the quality of that particular clock, the Hiface looses its edge over the competition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal 

Sleepin Dan, You are either a shill for M2Tech or have absolutely no knowledge of digital circuitry.

 

Yes I did A/B both versions,   and yes in stock form the small clock sounds worse than a $50 soundcard at RBCD (44.1khz),  at 48khz I didn't detect much difference but all I have is a Led Zepplin DVD rip in 48khz. When I put the battery on it was the version with the correct clock,  I didn't bring it up again because I was being blown off by shills and cool aide drinkers.

 

I would have liked to shove the bad version straight up Marco's A$$ but it wasn't worth the plane ticket.  My condolences  to the brilliant engineers at M2Tech who designed the Hiface only to have it ruined by bean counters like Marco who is just a spokesman puppet put up to look like he is their technical guru. 

 

M2Tech owes the folks with the bad units a full refund and an apology for their wasted time.

 

 

Jeesus, Regal, calm down, Dan was only asking a sensible question as was I. He's no shill & does know about digital - I don't know why you are attacking him? 

So, you say that you put the battery on a different Hiface unit to the one that you took pictures of - OK! We are all trying to get to the bottom of this in a calm rational way.

A logical approach is the best way to tease out what's going on. I too would have imagined that there would be as noticeable a difference between 44.1KHz & 48KHz on the "bad" hiface as between the "bad" Hiface & the "good" Hiface at 44.1KHz. It's simply a logical assumption. Are you saying that the 44.1KHz was worse than from a cheap sound card but the 48KHz was about the same a s cheap soundcard?

Others might like to do this test?

Yes, I'm a MOT before anyone points this out & I do have an interest in this but I'm also trying to be fair & even-handed about this & trying not to jump to conclusions - there's more testing to be done, I think.
 

No Dan was implying that I didn't know what I was talking about. If you remember I was attending a wedding 300 miles away and had several posts at once when I got back summarizing my findings from the week before.   I'm done here,  Jkeny you obviously have skin in the game as a distributor so maybe you should calm down?

I was ripped off and have every right to be angry as do anyone else who received the bad batch.

Done,  glad I have a correct Hiface battery powered even though I had to buy two to get a good one,  but I'm done bickering about it.  Obviously no one will fess up to the mistake,   its plain as day if you have a decent DAC and amp and don't listen to pop (otherwise you shouldn't invest in a Hiface in the first place.)

Unsubscribed

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkeny 

Absolutely, no idea, sorry Bubu.

Don't try to open the case, the wires are glued into it. 

No worries.  I was just curious. Wishful thinking on my part that you would remember my specific unit!!  I do like to tinker but I really have no desire to open up my unit and run the risk of having to send it back to you for repairs!  

Regal, 

I stated my trade interests & everybody can see I put it in my signature also - people can judge for themselves what I'm saying. Calming down is what I was suggesting that you should do. 

I'm just trying to inject a bit of logic into this & if there's a problem with the clocks then it should be looked at but if it's a problem elsewhere, then that should be looked at. So let's try & do some tests to clarify the situation.

Has anybody compared the two in a blind listening test? Because there seem to be quite a few people asking for dates, specs, pictures...trying to determine through some other means than listening whether or not they have the "right" one. A digital transport, if competently designed and executed, shouldn't have a sound.

P

Actually Regal I'm suggesting exactly what Jkeny says.  Testing between 44.1KHz and 48KHz will show if there is indeed an issue with the clocks.  If it sounds similar with both sample rates, then the issue, if there is one, comes from elsewhere.  Do you not see this as a sensible test to do?  

It's possible to select different sample rates on a PC - you don't need material recorded at that sample rate.  If you need help, then ask and someone will show how to do it.

Honestly, you are seeing attacks where there are none.       

Hey gentlemen, I think it's better if we all work together here to figure this one out.  Regal has definitely got some experience with this issue which can prove valuable, so I would really like to see him back into the discussion...  Sleepy Dan did not mean anything bad, he even said that in the post above...

Shamu, thanks for starting this thread!

Does anyone have  a file in both 44 and 48khz that we can all download and test?  It's hard to compare between different songs!