[Quick review] Auzen X-Meridian vs Hiface
Aug 16, 2010 at 4:59 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 18

rmask

New Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Posts
37
Likes
0
Equipment: CA 840 as DAC, Auzen on Input 1, Hiface on Input 2;
Source: Foobar 1.1 both soundcards set to use KS, no resampling, all plugins disabled, bitperfect verified;
Sets: STAX SRS-4040II, GS solo 2007 w HD650;
Cables: Chord prodac pro RCA<>RCA (0.5 meter).
 
A/B test was done blindly, randomly switching outputs in foobar and dac.
 
I've chosen a very familiar disk (to us) ripped to flac using EAC w. 100% accurip info:
http://www.chesky.com/core/details.cfm?productcode=UD095
 
Conclusions: Not much to conclude - Neither I, nor my friends (a professional musician and a studio engineer) COULD NOT DIFFERENTIATE ANYTHING ...
 
Either all this jitter problem is just BS to sell snake oil, both soundcards are of equal quality (there is a cheap transf. spdif circuit in auzen), there is something wrong with my equipment (unlikely), our ears (unlikely, we could clearly differentiate the subtle nuances in Chesky's compilation, headphone systems), etc.
 
Your opinions?
 
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:10 AM Post #3 of 18
Thanks Mask for a bit of fresh air in the midst of the jitter paranoia surrounding this forum. I found that upsampling to 192kHz on the PC (if your dac support it) seems to deal with whatever jitter there is. I am still going to try Jkenny modded hiface out of curiosity at the end of the month and see if that make a difference. My knowledgeable friend suggested it is unlikely to make any audible difference. Will report back.....
 
Aug 16, 2010 at 12:36 PM Post #4 of 18
Jitter is pure snake oil, good post, need more anti-marketing around here.
 
Nothing wrong with foobar, software is simply a matter of preference, any percieved differences are either placebo or intentional coloration (lol xxhighend... nub coder, ripoff price).
 
Aug 16, 2010 at 12:54 PM Post #5 of 18
 
Jitter is pure snake oil, good post, need more anti-marketing around here.
 
Nothing wrong with foobar, software is simply a matter of preference, any percieved differences are either placebo or intentional coloration (lol xxhighend... nub coder, ripoff price).

 
1) I haven't heard the HiFace, I can't comment...but I don't really trust small italian companies coming out of nowhere that don't provide any technical data/measurements and end their white paper by "trust your ears". Provided that they have the gear to measure jitter(and I sure as hell hope they do), why not proving their point w/ figures huh.
 
2) of course, you're talking from experience? did you compare Reclock, uLilith, XXHighEnd and foobar? no, you haven't.
 
Aug 16, 2010 at 1:42 PM Post #6 of 18


Quote:
Jitter is pure snake oil, good post, need more anti-marketing around here.
 
Nothing wrong with foobar, software is simply a matter of preference, any percieved differences are either placebo or intentional coloration (lol xxhighend... nub coder, ripoff price).

 
 
 
Please post your equipment and the equipment you have had experience with.
 
Please include all DAC's, software, computer hardware, operating systems, etc.
 
 
Aug 18, 2010 at 2:12 AM Post #7 of 18

 
Quote:
that foobar is the weak link, try Reclock in KS/WASAPI...and what's in your DAC then? DAC/opamp/SPDIF receiver? what kind of PSU?


Why is the foobar a weak link? All software players SOUND the same as long as they do not modify the sound wave (no resampling, no processing, etc.). Easy to check making a loop and comparing input and output signals using the software of your choice. I do not see any point in Reclock, other than syncing audio to video, or making the video framerate smoother. Foobar has built-in KS/WASAPI/ASIO support...
 
The DAC is a standard cambride audio 840C cd player (based on AD1955). More info here.
 
Aug 18, 2010 at 2:26 AM Post #8 of 18
To be fair, people have had trouble differentiating entire DAC units in blind comparisons (with volumes matched), so going from one transport to another might be a change too subtle to detect.
 
Jitter is a real thing - how much of it gets into the sound we are listening to is debatable however. The CA840 might have an input circuit that makes all transports sound more or less the same. To get a bigger difference in jitter, try ripping a song off a CD, and compare playing the original CD vs the ripped track through the hiface or the auzen X-meridian.
 
Aug 18, 2010 at 7:26 AM Post #9 of 18
 
All software players SOUND the same


Not quite...why don't you try Reclock? and come back tell me that it sounds the same as foobar if you dare.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/493678/a-better-sounding-alternative-to-foobar2000-or-a-musing-in-the-realm-of-bit-perfect-streaming/225#post_6682421
 
"To me and my system, after several days of testing, the best player is MPC with Reclock and MadFlac, i try Foobar, Ulilith, KMPlayer, StealthPlayer, XXHighEnd all of them claim to be BitPerfect all of them sound different all of them pass the HDCD flag intact"
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/asio-media-player-classic-195176/#post6602970
 
"ReClock uses Kernel Streaming/WASAPI interfaces. BTW, this pair MPC+R provides best sound i've ever heard from PC. So i prefer to use it for music and movies"
 
Aug 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM Post #11 of 18
 
You chopped off the most important part of his post


Well, it was implied that we're talking about bit-perfect players duh. See the ppl I quoted, yes all those players pass the HDCD test. But everything sounds the same to your ears apparently, so don't expect to hear any diff between audio players hah.
 
Aug 19, 2010 at 1:23 AM Post #12 of 18

 
Quote:
To be fair, people have had trouble differentiating entire DAC units in blind comparisons (with volumes matched), so going from one transport to another might be a change too subtle to detect.
 
Jitter is a real thing - how much of it gets into the sound we are listening to is debatable however. The CA840 might have an input circuit that makes all transports sound more or less the same. To get a bigger difference in jitter, try ripping a song off a CD, and compare playing the original CD vs the ripped track through the hiface or the auzen X-meridian.

 
No perceivable differences (I did this during the "return period", both "transports" were volume matched, if there was a significant difference in volume levels (I do not remember)).
 
CA840 is supposed to have some "jitter correction" design. Info from their "marketing" FAQ (check the CA website :) ).
 
 
Aug 19, 2010 at 1:44 AM Post #14 of 18

 
Quote:
 

Not quite...why don't you try Reclock? and come back tell me that it sounds the same as foobar if you dare.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/493678/a-better-sounding-alternative-to-foobar2000-or-a-musing-in-the-realm-of-bit-perfect-streaming/225#post_6682421
 
"To me and my system, after several days of testing, the best player is MPC with Reclock and MadFlac, i try Foobar, Ulilith, KMPlayer, StealthPlayer, XXHighEnd all of them claim to be BitPerfect all of them sound different all of them pass the HDCD flag intact"
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/asio-media-player-classic-195176/#post6602970
 
"ReClock uses Kernel Streaming/WASAPI interfaces. BTW, this pair MPC+R provides best sound i've ever heard from PC. So i prefer to use it for music and movies"


Thank you for the links. But I won't :) I've compared the foobar's digital output (looped at digital input) to the original sound file. BOTH SAMPLES WERE IDENTICAL. I'll post both files If I still have them. And it is easy to check this for yourself. Kernel streaming is just kernel streaming. Software does the decoding and than passes the data to your soundcard via "most direct path i.e. KS". And that "path" is always the same, unless you add something software wise.
If there is a perceivable difference, than there are some background modifications done to the decoded sound chain (some resampling, some processing, etc.) and the placebo is a very powerfull effect too.. :wink:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top