agreed. i have a totl agilent audio analyzer. i do not use it for listening pleasure but in professional applications. for listening pleasure, yes pleasure just listen to what you like! there is no right or wrong. if it sounds like poop to one it might sound like gold to another. that is where there is so much hifi gear. you cannot dispute much of it sounds different to the human ear. therein lies the whole point. it is for enjoyment not science! something might measure great but someone does not like it and vice versa. in the professional recording environment of course we employ a different set of rules. although there are also good and bad recordings but that is an entirely different chapter.
I can go with that. I really always hope that people will get the answer they're looking for using the appropriate method. all the DSPs and EQs I use in foobar(or outside) are set almost entirely by ear to please me and only me.
take something like a benchmark DAC on USB, loop it into a QA401 audio analyzer(also USB, double damage combo!!!), and come back to me about the USB bottleneck in a playback system.
as long as you keep thinking that your ears are a proper way to judge fidelity, your arguments will be wrong. our senses are good to decide what we like! there is no other tool for that purpose, but a human being is not a spectrum analyzer. where is your reference sound? you went to the studio and listened to the song in the mastering room? because that's the reference sound for a CD. not how the band felt live that one time, and not how you're used to hear it on your previous not transparent gear.
I was born listening to vinyls, it's easy enough for me to understand how the first CDs didn't sound right. because my only idea of right was vinyls played on one of the warmest amp/speaker I have ever heard since.
I totally agree with you about the importance of a reference. without a set reference there can't be a concept of fidelity. but you can't just assume that your memories of past listening are the proper reference to judge fidelity. that's just not logical.
and it's the same for players. a lot of people have opinions, but how many cared to measure the output using different players in different settings with their own DAC? I know I've tried and the variations didn't make me think I should change the player I'm used to. but maybe with some other DAC there would be a different result? IDK so I don't judge. again, measurements are the correct method to test fidelity. and you can burn a CD with some test signals and measure the output all the same, and find out how much better(or not) the CD player really is. it doesn't have to change your preferences or your listening habits, but at least you would know for sure that you're not confusing personal preferences(based on taste or anything else) and fidelity.
If you read my postings earlier you will note that I'm stating that at times I think CD is better. At times I can't tell the difference by listening. Though USB has maybe never come up sounding better than CD to my ears except maybe once.
You talk about measurements but I think there would little way of testing. If there was proof it would be a complete thread all to itself with 1000s of posts.
When I say reference I'm also saying just for comparison. Much of my equipment is just that, simply tools for audio reference. Graphs aside, a listener can forget what something sounds like so having the equipment around helps to add audio contrast to what your hearing.
For me again it was simply messing with equipment. At the start in 2009-2010, it started with me not having settings right and not having WASAPI with Foobar. The first inklings of sound quality still kept my CD collection as my personal reference.
And back in 2009-2010 we had a grand shift of sorts. HD audio was emerging and the methods for reduced syncopation, either by the DAC or by the computer, was at the time, still being hammered out. So then, yes. The CD was the reference as it was still the paradigm. So in 7 short years somehow USB has become reference as the short lived memory of formats has changed and it will change again.
Personally when CD coaxial playback listening sounded different it took awhile to notice. It was taking the same music in a 16 bit 44.1 FLAC file and playing the exact same song on CD. Now I will be the first to admit my equipment sounds different all the time. I don't understand why but it simply just does. But in some listening the CD seemed to be more natural with less audible distortion.
So obviously thinking that maybe USB has slight distortion it can be almost an implied placebo. But I seem to hear the same distorting factors much of the time with USB and not with CD. You can almost simply call it a playback character.
The amount noticeable sonic clarity is maybe only noticeable in extreme situations? One eye opening experience for me was testing Winamp again. Again a perfect example of simply back to back listening as a test.
I challenge anyone to listen to Winamp then Foobar2000 WASAPI back to back and say they can't hear a difference. And yes, much of these opinions are simply sound signature taste. Some folks like tube sound, some like solid state sound. And the arguments to the effect of tube personality VS solid state could parallel USB VS CD?
Still scientific measurements in the form of graphs are also debatable. Our latest graph comparison for a USB filter seems to show changes to the signal? Still what changes they are is simply still a question.
this is ot but maybe someone can answer. i use a high end hub with a lps as part of the usb filtering. i plug usb sticks to play muisc in the other ports. i find this provides very good sound. i was wondering if i can plug a usb hard drive in? i know those might be very noisy. so i am guessing the usb stick is a lot better than the hd. the only thing is it does not have the size. otherwise it probably is fine if i plug it in the mobo and load to memory in jrmc.
i found toslink from the spinner to be much better but it cannot reach the resolution of usb. so there, i am torn. plus of course everyone elses argument of convenience. a dedicated music pc i do not see being any worse than any hardware/software music server. if you are going to play games, surf the internet etc. then i would get a nuc for audio or a aurender. of course the nuc is much less expensive but now i feel much the same thing. the nuc is a lot different than a massive pc. a lot less noise. not sure if it is on par with aurender but much less money. you can build a great nuc for $700. more or less depending on what you do with a sound card etc. if you just want usb from the mobo it can be less than $500. the aurender may be better, i don't know but to many cost is a factor. a dedicated nuc will certainly outperform a general usage big pc. actually quite frankly the psu in the nuc should be better than the one in the aurender. there is still probably more noise but how much i am not sure. a purpose built music server that only does one thing can have less noise even with it's cheap parts. of course you can also build an aurender-esque devicethat may in fact perform even better. just google diy music server.
afaik the intona is not 480mbps needed to run the higher resolutions. that is the problem with isolators. they are all usb 1.1 even though it says 2.0 i am not sure unless this is something new. i feel there are better ways to isolation. galvanic is not really needed here. that is for electric shock. if it has any bearing on audio quality i also do not know. i agree i challenge anyone to hear the difference between bit perfect players on a pc. for starters most pc's are terrible for audio. as i said just choose your ui and that is all. i would probably use asio over wasapi however. as asio is designed for audio. wasapi is just a windows service that was added because of the current state of high end audio. in most situations asio should outperform it. a custom asio driver should also be in order but i do not wish to pay for it. the defacto steinberg driver should work. that is what is used to make all your cd's.
take something like a benchmark DAC on USB, loop it into a QA401 audio analyzer(also USB, double damage combo!!!), and come back to me about the USB bottleneck in a playback system.
as long as you keep thinking that your ears are a proper way to judge fidelity, your arguments will be wrong. our senses are good to decide what we like! there is no other tool for that purpose, but a human being is not a spectrum analyzer. where is your reference sound? you went to the studio and listened to the song in the mastering room? because that's the reference sound for a CD. not how the band felt live that one time, and not how you're used to hear it on your previous not transparent gear.
I was born listening to vinyls, it's easy enough for me to understand how the first CDs didn't sound right. because my only idea of right was vinyls played on one of the warmest amp/speaker I have ever heard since.
I totally agree with you about the importance of a reference. without a set reference there can't be a concept of fidelity. but you can't just assume that your memories of past listening are the proper reference to judge fidelity. that's just not logical.
and it's the same for players. a lot of people have opinions, but how many cared to measure the output using different players in different settings with their own DAC? I know I've tried and the variations didn't make me think I should change the player I'm used to. but maybe with some other DAC there would be a different result? IDK so I don't judge. again, measurements are the correct method to test fidelity. and you can burn a CD with some test signals and measure the output all the same, and find out how much better(or not) the CD player really is. it doesn't have to change your preferences or your listening habits, but at least you would know for sure that you're not confusing personal preferences(based on taste or anything else) and fidelity.
Its not that MM dislikes computer music, in this thread http://www.head-fi.org/t/834646/great-find-cleanest-usb-audio-best-sound he is sharing some tweaks he found to improve usb sound.. Additionally he said " i was a recording and sound engineer for over 40 years" He just prefers spinners over USB base sound. Furthermore he has Parkinson pretty bad, so I am sure he would like USB to work as spinners do for him, as it would take a lot less effort to enjoy his music.
I came to this thread read from start to finish to learn all about best audio player software. What I came away with all of the reading, some are more favorable than others, one is to expensive, but very good, and controversy as to computer vs spinners. + dac. Personally I would like to enjoy both. Especially because computer offers convenience. However I have been using spinner + dac, for years. Ironically and old ES as spinner as I found that to be my favorite transport from many I tried including the elite and wadia.. Also went the route of HD DVD player
As for the 10k vs 300K system, I heard the 10k and less sound just as good as a 300K system. Its all about putting together the components and speaker system including cables synergistically to bring out the best, just what one is trying to do today with computers. From this thread it appears the latter is getting close.
Happy Listening,, stop listening to the systems (computer/spinner + dac) and enjoy the music.
my ears are indeed not a spectrum analyzer. my ears have feelings and emotions. trust me i know about taking measurements. i feel for listening enjoyment it is best to go with your own ears. recording is a different story. as for this thread i still feel the real choice here is the ui. they all sound very similar to me. i am not against computer audio at all. i think it just has to take time to mature. right now, using a general purpose pc for music enjoyment is unlikely to yield great results imo. a custom built nuc can certainly do better. perhaps as good as a hardware/software music server. to tell the truth i do not even like my aurender. you cannot just play any ip. must set up dlna and so on. that is what i mean it has a ways to go perhaps. trust me, it is going to get a lot better sooner than we think. eventually i have no doubt it wil surpass any spinner in fact. the main problem right now is a pc's usb is laden with noise and data loss. all this stuff will be relics. just watch. i am not telling everyone to get a spinner. that is for a hardcore few old folks such as myself. all of these software packages offer much more in terms of usability. i feel the software is actually fine. soon i am sure there will be a different protocol than usb. having to "fix" the usb with 5+ different devices in the chain suggests to me something is really not right. ethernet is great but few dacs have it.
the dac3 is a different story. benchmark, which sees much studio usage makes a point of doing the best they possibly can. in it's price range it is great. they use a different topology and methodology than other manufacturers. so you picked on that fares pretty well. also, you can build a fine system for $10k.
i just maintain as of right now i would be more interested in the ui than the sound of all these offerings. they do sound different but not drastically imo. i never said everyone must use a spinner. i expect few to. it depends on where your priorities lie. eventually pc music will be the only game in town. i am sure of that.
i agree completely. the equipment is a means to deliver the music. the music is the experience. i would just pick whatever anyone thinks sounds good and stay there. too many people are focused solely on gear. of course if one prefers gear to music that is fine with me to. i never tell anyone what they should do. i merely make suggestions that i have found positive.
btw, forget the hd question. that hub is 2.0. those drives are slow enough. i can just read to memory from the host pc. using thumb drives in a very high quality hub i fel is worthwhile. again, i merely suggest that i do not say it or anything is gospel. furthermore every single thing you read on any audio forum should be considered ymmv. just as you said the intona with the dac3 was ymmv. i do find it no surprise it had little effect on the dac3 though. they do a very good job being as it is crossover pro equipment.
my ears are indeed not a spectrum analyzer. my ears have feelings and emotions. trust me i know about taking measurements. i feel for listening enjoyment it is best to go with your own ears. recording is a different story. as for this thread i still feel the real choice here is the ui. they all sound very similar to me. i am not against computer audio at all. i think it just has to take time to mature. right now, using a general purpose pc for music enjoyment is unlikely to yield great results imo. a custom built nuc can certainly do better. perhaps as good as a hardware/software music server. to tell the truth i do not even like my aurender. you cannot just play any ip. must set up dlna and so on. that is what i mean it has a ways to go perhaps. trust me, it is going to get a lot better sooner than we think. eventually i have no doubt it wil surpass any spinner in fact. the main problem right now is a pc's usb is laden with noise and data loss. all this stuff will be relics. just watch. i am not telling everyone to get a spinner. that is for a hardcore few old folks such as myself. all of these software packages offer much more in terms of usability. i feel the software is actually fine. soon i am sure there will be a different protocol than usb. having to "fix" the usb with 5+ different devices in the chain suggests to me something is really not right. ethernet is great but few dacs have it.
the dac3 is a different story. benchmark, which sees much studio usage makes a point of doing the best they possibly can. in it's price range it is great. they use a different topology and methodology than other manufacturers. so you picked on that fares pretty well. also, you can build a fine system for $10k.
i just maintain as of right now i would be more interested in the ui than the sound of all these offerings. they do sound different but not drastically imo. i never said everyone must use a spinner. i expect few to. it depends on where your priorities lie. eventually pc music will be the only game in town. i am sure of that.
i agree completely. the equipment is a means to deliver the music. the music is the experience. i would just pick whatever anyone thinks sounds good and stay there. too many people are focused solely on gear. of course if one prefers gear to music that is fine with me to. i never tell anyone what they should do. i merely make suggestions that i have found positive.
btw, forget the hd question. that hub is 2.0. those drives are slow enough. i can just read to memory from the host pc. using thumb drives in a very high quality hub i fel is worthwhile. again, i merely suggest that i do not say it or anything is gospel. furthermore every single thing you read on any audio forum should be considered ymmv. just as you said the intona with the dac3 was ymmv. i do find it no surprise it had little effect on the dac3 though. they do a very good job being as it is crossover pro equipment.
Computer audio for stereo retrieves and delivers all you would hear from a CD; but, what's missing today, that's to say, what has not matured, is the means to download multi-channel DSD and deliver it wirelessly to a pre/pro. The future of music reproduction is multi-channel, lot's of channels, an orchestra of them. All this input about what software is best for computer audio is mostly meaningless, considering all the software out there today pretty much will get the job done.
i think purists will still prefer 2 channel stereo and it will never die. at least not anytime soon. it is like a fine single malt whiskey. some people will always enjoy it. even if you try to force them to drink malt liquor.
It looks like this topic went slightly off the original question.
So I will ask maybe again, but more specific:
Can you recommend some FREE audio player with INTUITIVE GUI?
Before I used WMP12. I like the system of library. But I have problems with playing of .ogg.
Of course I tried Foobar. The GUI is simply...not intuitive. I tried also to apply about 4 skins without success and I really don't want to spent a week to get it to work and look like SW of 21st century (If you know, what I mean).
I don't want to pirate e.g. JRiver so I'm looking for alternative...
Thank you
P.S. i don't have any high-end PC sound nor speaker/headphones.
That's why I'm more concentrated on the GUI...
Can you recommend some FREE audio player with INTUITIVE GUI?
Before I used WMP12. I like the system of library. But I have problems with playing of .ogg.
Of course I tried Foobar. The GUI is simply...not intuitive. I tried also to apply about 4 skins without success and I really don't want to spent a week to get it to work and look like SW of 21st century (If you know, what I mean).
I don't want to pirate e.g. JRiver so I'm looking for alternative...
Thank you
P.S. i don't have any high-end PC sound nor speaker/headphones.
That's why I'm more concentrated on the GUI...
Can't say which free software is the easiest to navigate (while still providing all the features you need) but this list might help:
http://www.freeware-guide.com/x64/audio.html
Just scroll down to the 'Players' section.
I mostly use Foobar since its the most versatile freeware but also tried Tuniac which was ok and wanted to try Small Player but its 64-bit only (the machine I needed it for is 32-bit).
maybe winamp? i don't know because i have not used it in like 15 years lol. i liked the gui but unless it has seriously matured it is nothing like jriver or roon. of course those are not free though. that's a hard one. unfortunately good work usually costs something. foobar is honestly great for free but very difficult if you do not really know your way around windows. i understand. applying a skin can be a serious pita. the paid ones you just select a skin. done. don't mean to be a jerk i know you want free. it might not exist though.
There is a huge problem with Winamp. Back to back tests against Foober 2000 will show anyone even your Grandma that Winamp is a complete failure sound wise.
Anymore the only thing Winamp would be good for is it's ability to sift through files fast. You can pop 100 Gigs of Mp3s into Winamp and it will almost put them in order in realtime.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
