mikeaj said:

Even supposing there were differences to detect, usually the big changes are between different low-end gear or maybe between low-end and midrange, for a number of reasons.  It's usually not going to be the expensive product that's a revelation or a tier way above.

Click to expand...

With CD players in particular, I've found that low and midrange equipment is of remarkably high quality, and are remarkably consistent. A high end CD player is more likely to be wonky because of a boutique manufacturer coloring the response to achieve a "house sound signature".

Solid state amps are similar, but more expensive amps either have more power or distortion and noise specs that extend beyond the inaudible levels that are common with midrange equipment. Again, high end tube amps are the most likely to perform out of spec, but they're designed to do that.

mikeaj said:

I was thinking about real changes, like along the lines of Laserdisc -> DVD, but maybe it's applicable elsewhere.

Click to expand...

My high end laserdisc player cost ten times what my cheapo bluray player cost. You're right, the low end and midrange categries don't really apply here.

Quote:

bigshot said:

How do you connect an external DAC to an iPad?
I'm basing my comments on a line level matched direct A/B comparison of my Macs' and iPods' audio out to grood standalone CD and SACD players. The sound with uncompressed audio is identical. If there is a difference I'm not hearing, it really can't be miles apart. I would have heard it.
My Mini is now running into my AV amp so I can decode 5:1, but I couldn't tell any difference because of that, except that 5:1 sound is a huge improvement over two channel.
It seems to me, if a computer or portable device sounds exactly like a $1000 standalone player, there isn't much room for improvement over that.

Click to expand...

 
The ipad can be connected with the "camera connection kit" that makes you able to get USB out from the ipad.
What speakers are you running with your reciver btw?

ultrabike said:

I honestly don't think we have all the answers, and for me it's easier to understand that different topology amps/DACs would sound different, specially when coupled with different types of cans.  For example, my Total BitHead, my Sansa Zip, my Creative Zen, and my laptop all sound different (my laptop beats audio is hands down worse btw).

Click to expand...

It's hard for me to wrap my head around this, but I'm realizing that in the PC world, there is a lot of jerry rigged solutions that produce a range of results, from craptastic to good. I've always had Apple products and they've always performed exactly the same... perfect out of the box. I've found the same to be true of most CD players and receivers or amps. All the ones i've had just plain worked until they died.

danne said:

What speakers are you running with your reciver btw?

Click to expand...

A combination of JBL towers and studio monitors and a Sunfire HRS 12 subwoofer. The rears are Klipsch bookshelves.

Quote:

bigshot said:

It's hard for me to wrap my head around this, but I'm realizing that in the PC world, there is a lot of jerry rigged solutions that produce a range of results, from craptastic to good. I've always had Apple products and they've always performed exactly the same... perfect out of the box. I've found the same to be true of most CD players and receivers or amps. All the ones i've had just plain worked until they died.

Click to expand...

Big, do you use any parametric eq'ing or hardware? And what music player are you using on OS X?

Oh yeah! I've been finessing the EQ for the past four months! EQ makes ALL the difference. It's a six band parametric. I need a graphic too for little bumps but I can't afford it right now. My Rane analogue one won't jive with the 5:1.

I use iTunes as my music server. Video is played back using Plex. About 35 TB of online storage on four Drobos. Sony bluray player. Yamaha AV receiver.

My system is a solid 2:1 with smaller speakers to fill in 5:1 for movies. I have an Epson 8500UB 1080p projector and a ten foot screen. The room doubles as a listening room and screening room.

Quote:

bigshot said:

Oh yeah! I've been finessing the EQ for the past four months! EQ makes ALL the difference. It's a six band parametric. I need a graphic too for little bumps but I can't afford it right now. My Rane analogue one won't jive with the 5:1.
I use iTunes as my music server. Video is played back using Plex. About 35 TB of online storage on four Drobos. Sony bluray player. Yamaha AV receiver.
My system is a solid 2:1 with smaller speakers to fill in 5:1 for movies. I have an Epson 8500UB 1080p projector and a ten foot screen. The room doubles as a listening room and screening room.

Click to expand...

And where do you place your eq since there aren't really rules to placement?

I started by using automatic EQ. Then I've been adjusting by ear using a variety of classical recordings. A sound engineer buddy is coming by soon with a signal generator to help me fine tune it to flat.

Quote:

bigshot said:

I started by using automatic EQ. Then I've been adjusting by ear using a variety of classical recordings. A sound engineer buddy is coming by soon with a signal generator to help me fine tune it to flat.

Click to expand...

What is automatic EQ? Presets? Flattening out a EQ for playback excessive much? or is that for producing/mixing.

Quote:

liamstrain said:

I think definitely - I would not at all be surprised, for instance in improved D/A conversion chips or music encoding, or even better transmission protocols (async timing) etc. Things that actually can affect what happens with how digital data is encoded and decoded. THAT makes sense. But not the wire they are transmitted on. 

Click to expand...

 
Right.  The things you mention make a lot more sense for making an appreciable difference.  But there's not even much evidence to show that even these kinds of changes add up to any type of practical difference in home audio playback, so long as the baseline you're comparing to is reasonably okay (which can be done pretty cheap these days).
 
 
One thing that bugs me* is how people seem attracted to the little tweaks, sweating the tiny things that could possibly conceivably make a change, things that—if they truly are valid—are so small that nobody's yet been able to validate them in controlled listening tests or bench measurements.  To me, if you want to obsess at details that small, I think you should be taking care of business in all other aspects that everybody knows actually makes a difference, e.g. room treatment / correction / EQ.  Or purchasing multiple copies of your favorite headphones so you can find drivers that are better matched or sound better.  I mean, the difference between different headphone samples of the same model, or different headphone positioning of the same headphones on the same person's head, seem to be an order of magnitude or two above the differences in some amplifiers, not to mention some cables, not to mention digital cables.  IMHO, something doesn't add up.
 
*not that I'm actually bothered.  People are free to do as they please.  I mean that it seems counterproductive, or that I think that priorities may be misplaced.  It's a curiosity.  And I think it has to do with some tweaks seeming cooler than others and not particularly with what actions would be rationally motivated by some kind of price-to-performance analysis.
 
I want to see a high-end headphone placement robot.  It puts headphones on the exact same spot on your head, every time!

paradoxper said:

What is automatic EQ? Presets? Flattening out a EQ for playback excessive much? or is that for producing/mixing.

Click to expand...

The equalizer has an automatic adjustment with a microphone. It didn't work very well. But it gave a good jumping off place. It identified an issue at the crossover point between the full range mains and the subwoofer. The volume balance between the six channels was all messed up though, so I had to do a lot of adjusting by ear to get the channels to couple. Once I got that working, it knocked the response a little off, so I had to adjust that... Which knocked the coupling off again, and so on. Lots of parallel parking, but I'm close now.

I listen to a lot of classical music, so flat response is my goal. I am looking to get to a totally balanced place. No frequencies boosted, none attenuated.

Don't forget your room treatments - that was the biggest barrier I had in getting anywhere near a flat response in my mixing room. 

I'm limited in that because this is a living space, not a work space. But luckily, the room acoustics are quite good and there aren't any glaring problems like glass doors or low angled ceilings. I've taken care with the placement of the speakers and layout of the furniture. The rest is up to the EQ.

http://animationresources.org/pics/clclubhouse2.jpg
http://animationresources.org/pics/clclubhouse.jpg

Nice! Consider me jealous. My home space is much more limited (darn city condo's)