Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › HiFace, sensitive information
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HiFace, sensitive information - Page 24

post #346 of 425

Ok, you have a correspondence from Tweekgeek & I asked Marco via email (but I won't reproduce here). The two are diametrically opposite statements!

Which is correct?

 

The Legato thread did have this post from Gordon but again you are only revealing half of that thread's relevant posts (or maybe you didn't understand?)  - a post about 2 down says  :

Quote:

sample alignment doesn't work like this...

and if it did, it would be 48dB louder...

Which is correct?


Edited by jkeny - 9/15/10 at 12:10pm
post #347 of 425
Thread Starter 

I have to be on Jkeny's side this time... It doesn't really surprise me to see those statement from Hiface competitors... I for one can't listen to the difference claimed in volume.

post #348 of 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by shamu144 View Post

I have to be on Jkeny's side this time... It doesn't really surprise me to see those statement from Hiface competitors... I for one can't listen to the difference claimed in volume.

 

and from your earlier post today:

 

[we] should leave the issues that USG is mentioning for the time being and go back to the main topic, related to clocks in the Hiface.

 


FWIW, Digger and Shahrose also reported that the HiFace plays louder.

 

So it's up to you to draw your own conclusions from Gordon Rankin's explanation of why the HiFace plays louder.

 

I posted my impressions of the smallclockFace and my disappointment with the replacement largeclockFace.

 

I thought the clock issue, that the small 44.1 clock was sonically inferior to the large 44.1 clock, had been resolved when my inferior sounding smallclockedFace was exchanged for a better sounding largeclockedFace,  but apparently it's still in dispute.  

 

So, I suppose you're right,  "we should go back to the main topic, related to clocks in the Hiface" and try to resolve that issue first....  

 

USG

post #349 of 425

I wonder a hiFace bought in the middle of Dec '09 would sport the lovely big clock or the evil small clock? What would be the timeframe when this grave substitution happened?  I guess Dr. Evil... err, Marco and M2Tech wouldn't want to disclose this information, but maybe Mr. John Kenny, The hiFace Guru, who opened more hiFaces than any other mortal human beings could have an educated guess, seeing innards since February. But does he want to make this guess?...

post #350 of 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebhelyesfarku View Post

I wonder a hiFace bought in the middle of Dec '09 would sport the lovely big clock or the evil small clock? What would be the timeframe when this grave substitution happened?  I guess Dr. Evil... err, Marco and M2Tech wouldn't want to disclose this information, but maybe Mr. John Kenny, The hiFace Guru, who opened more hiFaces than any other mortal human beings could have an educated guess, seeing innards since February. But does he want to make this guess?...


 

My guess is that you have one of the early production models which is the all big clock.

 

Well, why don't you tell us?  How does it sound to you?  Have you tried the sox resampler to run some tests?

 

I have the one small one big clock unit and in blind tests against an all big clock there was NO difference.  I had the option to return it but chose not to do so. 

 

And it is so not cool to call Marco Dr. Evil.  Unfounded sarcasm is really not appreciated.  This must be against forum rules where you are not allowed to call others names. You could at least have the decency to wait until there is absolute proof that he deserves that name.  He did disclose information: he said that on paper the small clock has even less jitter than the big one.  He answered all my emails and inquiries on time and in an honest manner.  Others like sleepy dan have made excellent points on this, I'm sure you've read them.

 

I see you are calling on John to answer you, this must be a joke, right? 
 


Edited by xdanny - 9/17/10 at 9:58am
post #351 of 425

@ shamu144

 

Back to the clock issue.

 

Have you done any more comparisons between the small clock 44.1 and the large 44.1 clock?

 

Have you attempted to exchange your small clocked HiFace yet?

 

It's not unreasonable for m2tech to do this on a per customer basis, since mine was exchanged that way.

 

USG

 

post #352 of 425


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdanny View Post

I have the one small one big clock unit and in blind tests against an all big clock there was NO difference.  I had the option to return it but chose not to do so. 


 


Even though I'm on the other side of this issue, in the interest of furthering our knowledge base,  could you tell us a little about your test?  Tracks played, equipment used, stuff like that.

 

Did you test stock HiFaces or modified units?

 

USG

post #353 of 425


USG, here is what I posted a while back.  One of John's customers was kind enough to let me borrow his all-big clock unit modded unit in order to compare it to mine.  Below are all the details,  I believe such an important test should be done in a blind manner.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdanny View Post

Gentlemen,

 

I received the "all big" clock unit from John yesterday (Saturday) about 3pm, charged it for a couple of hours and after the kids went to bed I tested it against mine (one big clock 48khz and one small clock 44.1khz), just by myself for about 4 hours.  Today, my friend Michael came by and we tested them again for about 2 hours.

 

WARNING:  BOTH UNITS ARE THE jkeny MODDED VERSION and the gear I used is listed in my sig line.

 

Setup:

- 2 computers about the same age and hardware specs, running foobar with KS.  Windows XP.

- 2 identical 75 ohm 6 foot BNC cables from Radio Shack.

- 2 identical 6 foot usb cables

- no attenuators were used, no other foobar plugins, no equalizers etc etc

- both units were plugged into input 3 and 4 of my DAC, both BNC inputs

- a Harmony 880 remote was used to switch back and forth between inputs

- volume on the preamp was set once and then left alone at the same setting for both sessions, yesterday and today.

- cables were connected by a third party.  We did not know which was which until we finished.

- we listened to one track at a time.  Pushed the "Play" button at the same time on both keyboards, both foobars were set to "repeat track".  This gave us time to switch back and forth until ready to move to the next song.

- Michael knows nothing about hiFace and has not seen this thread/forum.  He does have a nice system at home and loves 2 channel audio.

- We used 16/44, 24/88 and 24/96 recordings from both HDTracks, Chesky and 2L, together with some of the best sounding rips in my collection.  All FLAC.

- at the end of the test we played a bit with the upsampler (sox) in foobar, but this did not influence our decision about the outcome of the results.

 

Some of you probably know that regal labeled my system as inadequate for this test.  Let me assure you that while not on par with George Lucas' gear, it is very detailed, you can hear the singer's subtle and light breaths, lips separating, fingers lightly touching the piano keys and sliding up and down guitar cords, on Melody Gardot's "Baby I'm A Fool" (My One And Only Thrill) a slight non musical noise towards the end of the song was present, probably made by someone knocking something over in the studio...  My room is also treated, there are 12 4'x2'x2" absorption panels, 4 4' bass traps and 11 poly diffusers.  The room is 16' x 19' x10' tall, about 3000 cubic feet.

 

 

RESULTS:

 

During my session alone last night I tried really hard to hear a difference.  Really hard.  But could not.  Only that at times I found myself forgetting to switch between inputs, that's how good both units sounded.  This is consistent with my first blind test, where the foobar sox upsampler was used and I always liked the original version of a song not knowing that the small clock handled the 44.1khz.

 

Today, Michael's impression was that input 3 had slightly crisper highs than input 4 on certain songs only, but he thinks he liked the input 4 overall a bit better, especially with George Michael's "Patience" (Patience).  Since we were able to switch really fast back and forth between inputs, he did say that he would not be able to tell the difference had the switching took longer, like 10 seconds or more.   His closing statement: "if I were to walk home with either unit I would not care which one."   (Input 3 was the one big one small clock and Input 4 was the all big clock unit).

 

If anyone has any questions about the test or songs used please ask.  I took a few pictures of the messy room..

 

Please understand that the purpose of this test was not to convince anybody of anything.  It was for my peace of mind in light of all the controversy surrounding this little gadget, as like everybody else I only want what is best for my system.

 

I decided to keep the unit.

 

Now bring on the heat...


Edited by xdanny - 9/17/10 at 2:24pm
post #354 of 425
Thread Starter 


The small clock unit that I had in my possession untill 3 days ago was not mine, but a friend of mine. You understand I have no interest in all this, but to help the community to close a gap between two side that seemed to have opposite views on the Hiface, and is often generating heated debates.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post

@ shamu144

 

Back to the clock issue.

 

Have you done any more comparisons between the small clock 44.1 and the large 44.1 clock?

 

Have you attempted to exchange your small clocked HiFace yet?

 

It's not unreasonable for m2tech to do this on a per customer basis, since mine was exchanged that way.

 

USG

 

post #355 of 425
Thread Starter 


Xdanny, you really like going in circle don´t you. We made clear the differences we heared are between stock Hiface units, and not between modded units.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdanny View Post

 

 

I have the one small one big clock unit and in blind tests against an all big clock there was NO difference.  I had the option to return it but chose not to do so. 

post #356 of 425


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shamu144 View Post


Xdanny, you really like going in circle don´t you. We made clear the differences we heared are between stock Hiface units, and not between modded units.

 


 

I was not posting out of the blues, I was answering to Sebehyfarku, but:

No, I am not going in "circle" and the differences we "heared" are not as clear to many of us as they are to you.

 

A heavily souped-up Mustang may be equal in performance to a stock Ferrari.

But a heavily souped-up Mustang will still be inferior to a heavily souped-up Ferrari.

 

I can understand how a modded small clock will equal the performance of a stock big clock, yet:

What makes you think that the small clock, as crappy and of such inferior quality as you say it is, can all of a sudden resurrect, rise to the occasion and equal the performance of the larger clock when BOTH are fed a clean power supply?  If the larger clock is SO much better than the smaller one, then how come it shows NO improvements when modded, because according to you the small one definitely catches up to it??  Please explain that in a clear and concise manner, because sir, it just doesn't make any sense.
 

post #357 of 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdanny View Post

My guess is that you have one of the early production models which is the all big clock.

Well, why don't you tell us?  How does it sound to you?  Have you tried the sox resampler to run some tests?

 

Yes, I tried some 44.1/48 comps, I couldn't hear a goddamn diff.

 

Quote:
And it is so not cool to call Marco Dr. Evil.

 

 

Why so serious?
 

post #358 of 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebhelyesfarku View Post

 

Yes, I tried some 44.1/48 comps, I couldn't hear a goddamn diff.

 

 

Why so serious?
 


Well, normally I'd be laughing with you on this one because it is kind of funny, but the man's reputation is at stake here, so it's a bit sensitive. 

 

But you didn't say, how do you like the sound as it pertains to your system?  Does it sound good enough to you to the point where you are not interested in opening up the unit to see which clocks you have?

 

Thanks!

post #359 of 425

Sorry to interrupt this discussion about small vs. big clocks and my apologies if this was already answered somewhere in this 24 page thread.  All I would like to know if anyone could give me a clue as to whether there is any hope for a working OSX (latest dot release) driver for my 2010 MBP.  The driver I downloaded and installed today produced no sound and then 2 kernel panics in quick succession.  I used an Oyaide DR-510 cable hooked up to an iBasso DB1 DAC, if that matters.

 

I have a coax version of stock unit.  Any suggestions are welcome.  Sent an email to M2tech Tech Support, but have not heard anything back.  Don't want to run Windows just to use Hiface...

 

post #360 of 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdanny View Post


USG, here is what I posted a while back.  One of John's customers was kind enough to let me borrow his all-big clock unit modded unit in order to compare it to mine.  Below are all the details,  I believe such an important test should be done in a blind manner.
 


IC, I remember reading that a while back but I'm going to defer to Regal's comments regarding that test.

 

You do bring up an interesting point though: 

 

If one clock sounds better than the other on USB power, why shouldn't that translate over to battery power?

 

USG

 

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › HiFace, sensitive information