Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › JKenny Audio Ciúnas DAC and Ciúnas SPDIF
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JKenny Audio Ciúnas DAC and Ciúnas SPDIF - Page 20

post #286 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

biggrin.gif

As I wrote that it did strike me the PWDs et al. are hardly 'top end' I guess, compared to $40,000 dacs eek.gif

(start of rave - may be TL; DR)

The interesting thing about the 'science' crowd is that it isn't science. As far as I was able to determine during a deeply unsatisfactory year or so combing those forums. Those that proclaimed scientific principles and 'facts' the loudest seemed in general to have no idea that Aristotle's science (deductively based) gave way to Galileo (hey, how about we perform the experiment to check whether our deduction from current theory actually works? Before we say anything?) many centuries ago tongue.gif

A good deal of my scientific work includes measurement of ambiguous stimuli, similar to what we on head-fi use our ears for smily_headphones1.gif Reliable metrics with good predictive validity are routinely developed in many scientific fields. That the listening we do as audiophiles might also have real validity seems supported by anecdotal evidence that we can meaningfully share impressions and find we frequently agree. I haven't tried to model this statistically; there would be ethical and other issues to setting up a real study on head-fi. (But a simulation to test assumptions is a real possibility). The other frequent gripe - poor aural memory - is true as far as it goes but ignores real-world fact about how memory actually works (chunking and the role of language).

As a statistician as well as researcher my best guess is the agreement occurs well above chance and with good 'effect size'.

In other words, there is a point to head-fi and its reviews such as yours (HC, Prep et al), Purrin's group, Project86's, Skylab's and others. We're not just a social club after all wink.gif

(end of rave)

Sorry for the O.T. - er, where was I?

 

I think it was Einstein that said: "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts". 

 

The reality of science is that the more we learn, the more we learn we don't know. Knowledge generates more questions than it answers. By that logic you can make the argument that we are actually getting dumber, not smarter. Einstein didn't say that. That was me. 


Edited by alancohen - 7/5/13 at 10:20am
post #287 of 524

Only if you equate intelligence by the accumulation of facts rather than the ability to ask the important questions biggrin.gif

Sorry, was having too much fun reading your philosophical post.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen View Post

 

I think it was Einstein that said: "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not every that can be counted counts". 

 

The reality of science is that the more we learn, the more we learn we don't know. Knowledge generates more questions than it answers. By that logic you can make the argument that we are actually getting dumber, not smarter. Einstein didn't say that. That was me. 

post #288 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNBC View Post

Only if you equate intelligence by the accumulation of facts rather than the ability to ask the important questions biggrin.gif

Sorry, was having too much fun reading your philosophical post.

 

 

 

Ahhh, and there in lies the rub. Science is impotent to decide what is important. 


Edited by alancohen - 7/5/13 at 10:22am
post #289 of 524

Indeed.  Unfortunately the two are required to obtain grants.  Gotta show the taxpayers productivity.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen View Post

 

Ahhh, and there is lies the rub. Science is impotent to decide what is important. 

post #290 of 524
^ Nice posts.

One point people often misunderstand: Science is not certain and doesn't claim to be. It's fundamentally a tentative practice. It tries to improve our descriptions of the world, but doesn't expect - barring a final theory of everything I suppose - to reach the final and perfect description.

Part of the cause is that so-called facts are generated from instruments we build based on the theories and models we have right now. Science assumes these models will be replaced by better ones, and so far they always have been. That makes these 'facts' (counts, if you prefer) vulnerable. A new theory will count the same phenomena in a different way, and introduce new things to measure that possibly weren't previously known.

Einstein's work is a good example. The new models he introduced were not just 'better' (like a linear progression) but profoundly revolutionary (decidedly non-linear - a sideways leap). The linear progression (electrical theory says this therefore that) imagined by some in the head-fi 'science' forum is fiction.

That's why I like Purrin's approach - he respects the numbers but knows they only tell part of the story and that the 'subjective' listening is just as important. Surely this is no more uncomfortable than the various dualities physics deals with?

Anyway, straying way off-topic here biggrin.gif
post #291 of 524

We biologists tend to forget these truths but definitely true.  Very easy to get lost in the weeds.

 

Better tools can definitely lead to better models.  Epigenetics opened our eyes to new ways of thinking.

 

Ok, back to the Ciunas.

 

I was thinking, how can we get USB input into the Ciunas from say a non-computer based source?  Why?  Everyone once in a while I like to listen to music without having to turn on the computer.  Is there a transport out there for iDevices, smart phones, etc. that has a USB output rather than the typical optical or SPDIF?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

^ Nice posts.
One point people often misunderstand: Science is not certain and doesn't claim to be. It's fundamentally a tentative practice. It tries to improve our descriptions of the world, but doesn't expect - barring a final theory of everything I suppose - to reach the final and perfect description.

Part of the cause is that so-called facts are generated from instruments we build based on the theories and models we have right now. Science assumes these models will be replaced by better ones, and so far they always have been. That makes these 'facts' (counts, if you prefer) vulnerable. A new theory will count the same phenomena in a different way, and introduce new things to measure that possibly weren't previously known.
post #292 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNBC View Post

We biologists tend to forget these truths but definitely true.  Very easy to get lost in the weeds.

 

Better tools can definitely lead to better models.  Epigenetics opened our eyes to new ways of thinking.

 

Ok, back to the Ciunas.

 

I was thinking, how can we get USB input into the Ciunas from say a non-computer based source?  Why?  Everyone once in a while I like to listen to music without having to turn on the computer.  Is there a transport out there for iDevices, smart phones, etc. that has a USB output rather than the typical optical or SPDIF?

 

 

I think we still need the computer for the various players like JRiver, Amarra, PureMusic etc. that enhance the experience so much. 

 

Personally, I never turn my computers off. My desktop, laptop and MacMini music server stay on all the time. 

post #293 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

^ Nice posts.

One point people often misunderstand: Science is not certain and doesn't claim to be. It's fundamentally a tentative practice. It tries to improve our descriptions of the world, but doesn't expect - barring a final theory of everything I suppose - to reach the final and perfect description.

Part of the cause is that so-called facts are generated from instruments we build based on the theories and models we have right now. Science assumes these models will be replaced by better ones, and so far they always have been. That makes these 'facts' (counts, if you prefer) vulnerable. A new theory will count the same phenomena in a different way, and introduce new things to measure that possibly weren't previously known.

Einstein's work is a good example. The new models he introduced were not just 'better' (like a linear progression) but profoundly revolutionary (decidedly non-linear - a sideways leap). The linear progression (electrical theory says this therefore that) imagined by some in the head-fi 'science' forum is fiction.

That's why I like Purrin's approach - he respects the numbers but knows they only tell part of the story and that the 'subjective' listening is just as important. Surely this is no more uncomfortable than the various dualities physics deals with?

Anyway, straying way off-topic here biggrin.gif

More off topic rambling here:
It appears to me that the "cables are all the same" stance is really nothing more than Objectivist "group-think" as cables are such an easy target. If you are going to bash cable swappers, you may as well beat on Op Amp rollers, and tube rollers, or anyone else who says one DAC sounds better than another DAC.
post #294 of 524

My computer's fan is a little noisy for times I am running DAC directly to active speakers.  For headphones, computer all the way.  Mac Mini, probably next on my list.  Problem with PCs is that if something fails I can fix it so I may never end up with a Mini unless I learn to let go.  PCs at work though tongue.gif.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen View Post

I think we still need the computer for the various players like JRiver, Amarra, PureMusic etc. that enhance the experience so much. 

 

Personally, I never turn my computers off. My desktop, laptop and MacMini music server stay on all the time. 

post #295 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNBC View Post

My computer's fan is a little noisy for times I am running DAC directly to active speakers.  For headphones, computer all the way.  Mac Mini, probably next on my list.  Problem with PCs is that if something fails I can fix it so I may never end up with a Mini unless I learn to let go.  PCs at work though tongue.gif.

 

 

I used to feel the same way re: PCs and Windows. I'd been a PC since 1992 and had my first internet connection in '94. I used Mozaic as a browser. No IE yet. Windows 3.1 baby. 

 

But since I switched to Mac about 5 years ago, I haven't had to fix anything. And Microsoft owes me at least 3 months of my life back from all the time I spent watching Windows reboot. No more. 


Edited by alancohen - 7/6/13 at 3:14am
post #296 of 524
Quote:
it depleted after 8-10 hours. after 8-10 hours, there was a lot of static/crackling noise and then it would not be recognized by SB touch.

I just happened to stumble on this.  I have your same charging issue with my JKSPDIF-MK3 (previous gen)

I thought my iPhone's usb wall adapter was working until I lost sound.  It didn't do out with a crackle though -- it was a clean cut, and I attribute that to my Yulong D18 being ultra picky about getting a clean spdif signal.  I think I'll try the iPad charger next.

post #297 of 524
You mean you were using the iPhone charger to charge the JK3? Stands to reason the iPad charger would work better. Let us know...

Just catching up on some of the off-topic posts: WNBC, wondered what your field was. Social psychologist here with sociological leanings (though originally I trained in physics and math). Was not in the plan, but in recent years have found myself advising medical doctors on their research designs and doing their statistics. Has been interesting working with data and research problems in two different fields.

Chris J: yep I get your point wink.gif. Interesting thought that there is 'group-think' going on there. Ethically, perhaps not something I should pursue!

alancohen: still use a PC at home for windows programming, but like you life's been much easier since adding a Mac Mini. The only glitch was it got slow, solved by increasing the RAM to 8GB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynnytsky View Post

I just happened to stumble on this.  I have your same charging issue with my JKSPDIF-MK3 (previous gen)

I thought my iPhone's usb wall adapter was working until I lost sound.  It didn't do out with a crackle though -- it was a clean cut, and I attribute that to my Yulong D18 being ultra picky about getting a clean spdif signal.  I think I'll try the iPad charger next.
post #298 of 524

Focus on parasitology research with a background in genetics and molecular biology.  

 

Social psychologist.  You must be having a blast on this website. wink.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

Just catching up on some of the off-topic posts: WNBC, wondered what your field was. Social psychologist here with sociological leanings (though originally I trained in physics and math). Was not in the plan, but in recent years have found myself advising medical doctors on their research designs and doing their statistics. Has been interesting working with data and research problems in two different fields.
post #299 of 524
Wow - sounds fascinating!

Yes wink.gif This site has been 'interesting' at times. I generally ignore the academic temptations though and just enjoy what it brings to the hobby!
Quote:
Originally Posted by WNBC View Post

Focus on parasitology research with a background in genetics and molecular biology.  

Social psychologist.  You must be having a blast on this website. wink.gif


post #300 of 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

Wow - sounds fascinating!

Yes wink.gif This site has been 'interesting' at times. I generally ignore the academic temptations though and just enjoy what it brings to the hobby!

"Interesting"?

 

Hmmmmmmm.  wink_face.gif

 

No further comment!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › JKenny Audio Ciúnas DAC and Ciúnas SPDIF