[71 dB]

Not all CD players and Bluray players and Digital interfaces transmit digital equally (FACT)

What do you mean by "equal transmit"? What makes transmit not equal?

If transmit is not equal in some way, what are people supposed to do about it? Are there solutions you are suggesting?

How does my NAD C565BEE transmit? Poorly? Decently? Well? I have enjoyed the sound from this player a lot for years. Should I stop enjoying the sound because there might be a CD-player somewhere in the World that in your opinion transmits better?

These may look silly questions and they are silly, but I want to illustrate what you are doing here. What is the point of this? Making people doubt everything doesn't help them enjoy music.

 

[whitedragem]

alright, on a bus.. (certainly not an elitist, but for the sake of understanding, happyto tqlk about a topic. (this thread HAS a topic))

I will edit this post an give some thpughts on why it is fangerous to only have one type of sound quality 'grade to aim for' in a world where 'everyone' may want to make stuff cheap and sell for profit max...

having a tier of excellence isnt such a bad thing.

not being able to tqlk about factors that may be involved in achieving the highest grades of 'capability', and traits that might be associated with such, (in a science forum assuming the closest we have,here, that might be associated with engineering and objectives), so that we can find 'budget equipment that approximates such', would be beneficial (is why I do talk about this, here).

given how many subjectivists who want their 3000$ dvd players to sound equal quality to 'a cd player of similar (previously) pricepoint' (and replace those compares with whatever evolution we hope equals 'last gen' as tech upgrades, ie the example first given in this thread regarding a bluray player, and latest generation disc spinners being uhd players, albeit with their poor market adoption..) cd transports sell.
I am arguing some *might* get better value for money with their 44khz 16bit 'redbook' CDs with a CD transport, and some of the people who feel that their UHDplayer is equal(something I propose to test for onesself), might want to post positive discourse progressing that line of logic and 'exploration' in the digital transport quality doesnt matter thread..

nothing elitist, just trying to look at this stuff.

if I was being eliist I'd proposition I have owned kit whose modern equivalents, by price point, could tally half a million dollars.
when I seriously agree that an Astell and Kern SE700 combined with AK Zero1 IEMs can sound so similar as to 'the tier 1' goodness that some out their have... (at which point load the "rig" up with all that well mastered, well engineered, well played instruments, and well written music etc etc)

if you knew me you would know I prefer to listen to good music through the a bluetooth mono speaker, rather than unenjoyable music through the a great stereo.

of course knowing how to get better sound from whqt I hav to work with is what is all about..
again post thumb typed on a very bouncy bus,.. these are just my bullet points I'd like to explore or write into a responce...(notes to self to attempt to return this thread to having a point and not just be filled with pointy stick spanish inquisistion feeling..)

 

[whitedragem]

umm no one should quote or work off the above post until I remove this... (it isnt ready yet and might make a dialogue go wayward quickly) I am sure cut n paste 'selective quoters'could have a field day...

be patient. you can get even more frustrated with the post I ultimately write I assure you...

 

[bigshot]

This guy is one of the few people I've blocked. I don't remember who he is... I'm one of those people who isn't good at assigning people to avatars... but I'm pretty confident he isn't worth the time.

 

[gregorio]

nothing elitist, just trying to look at this stuff.

if I was being eliist I'd proposition I have owned kit whose modern equivalents, by price point, could tally half a million dollars.

As you have mentioned it, I take it you are trying to be elitist? However, you’ve failed because half a million dollars isn’t elitist, it’s pretty much the opposite in my world, it’s cheapskate.

umm no one should quote or work off the above post until I remove this …

You don’t get to tell us what we can or can’t quote or post about. You don’t want us to quote it, then don’t post it in the first place, which actually is pretty good advice, because you didn’t answer a single question and it was all waffle anyway!

G

 

[bigshot]

I am always puzzled by the assumption that more money means better sound quality in things like DACs and amps. When I was in the market for a blu-ray player, I decided on a high end one from Oppo. Nowhere were there claims that the picture quality was any better than a $120 Sony blu-ray player. The higher price was justified by features (it could play just about any format, region free, Darbee, build quality, wifi sharing, thumb drive playing, SACD ripping, etc.) I guess home theater people understand that HDMI output is HDMI. But there were reams of reviews about the DAC chip and the analog outputs talking about how they sounded better than other players. When I got the player, I did some blind comparisons and that wasn't true. It sounded the same as my other player. I ended up with an Oppo HA-1 that had their top of the line sound, and that didn't sound any different either.

Why don't home theater people convince themselves that money buys picture quality the way audiophiles convince themselves that money buys sound quality?

 

[Ryokan]

You would hope $50,000 speakers would sound pretty good?

 

[gregorio]

You would hope $50,000 speakers would sound pretty good?

Depends, I’ve heard very expensive audiophile speakers that sounded rubbish, quite a few times. Speaker performance is at least as much (if not more) about the room acoustics than about the speakers themselves and audiophiles normally spend a relatively tiny amount (or none at all) of time/money on acoustic treatment.

I would expect $5k speakers (with good acoustics) to sound significantly better than $50k audiophile speakers (with typical audiophile acoustics).

G

 

[Ryokan]

What are the speakers that have impressed you most @gregorio?

 

[gregorio]

What are the speakers that have impressed you most @gregorio?

For the reasons I gave above that’s pretty impossible to say. I could tell you rooms that impressed me and the speakers used in those rooms but even that wouldn’t help greatly because some of the best rooms had custom speakers (built by the BBC, JBL or others) and in addition to good construction and treatment, these days they also use correction systems like the Trinnov. Off the shelf speakers/rooms that impressed me were by Meyer Sound (Bluehorn system), I was also quite impressed by JBL M2s I heard recently but neither of those are suitable for consumers. Heard a Genelec One system that was very impressive but still a bigger room than most consumers would have.

G

 

[whitedragem]

oh dear... muppets and misfits need only apply (a more suitable thread topic based on forum goers responces thus far...)

any chance we can stick to a topic?
I know I want a hostility free environment, but I feel that is beyond achievable, so, 'muppets and misfits' it is...(I didnt change it, yet, but given the SS 'crew' have destroyedANOTHER thread....

 

[gregorio]

I know I want a hostility free environment, but I feel that is beyond achievable …

Of course it’s achievable, you just have to stick to the facts/science, not make-up or repeat nonsense/falsehoods contrary to the facts or ask if you don’t know the facts/science. Why is that “beyond achievable” for you?

G

 

[whitedragem]

This thread isnt for you mon amigo.
the facts are out there... you want to debunk what you feel 'isnt a thing', this is not the place.

this doesnt need to get personal, we do not need to attack people who think differently to us.. (if they are simply looking to find associated 'science' to a theory...)

I have asked repeatedly for posts to be about the topic.
I have steered a straigh-ish line towards that goal.. I am seeking a thread with positive discourse.
(now seriously: "bugger off" and go write in the trillion threads you have overseen to only contain discussion you believe in)
Beliefs other than yours might exist, but you will never allow OTHERS to discuss- you have ZERO value to this thread, and seem incapable to discern basic information that informs so
(hence the implied profanity, as I said, if the only tool you leave me is a hammer then I will do what is right to keep the peace.. next stop is imploring a moderator to get involved)

well done you have (once again) successfully derailed discussions that didnt hold your line of thought.

If I came across this thread, years from now, I would be unlikely to read five pages in to find a post that may continue the topic.
(you are against exploration, and therefore anti science. go away. this thread isnt for you. go write in 'transport quality DOESNT matter)(a playgroung made for you and your ilk to 'play' in)

edit: inserted 'bugger' to replace 'sound effect'.

 

[castleofargh]

Without concrete evidence of variables actually having enough impact to become noticed, exploring all the hypotheses as to why it might, is not that different from wondering how space aliens travel faster than the speed of light to visit us. First, establish that there are differences in sound in a way that can convince all the guys who won't believe you otherwise. Then we're all on the same level about facts, and we can draw the various possible causes that would explain it.

There will always be heavy suspicions for a belief that entirely relies on a poorly controlled sighted impression (usually made worse by delays too long for memory accuracy between each sound sample). The change of sound can be gigantic and leave zero doubt to you, if we don't have the gear and no objective data validating an obviously audible change, or some well controlled blind test suggesting clear audibility at a statistical level, we will not care. Not because we lack curiosity, but because people making things up about sound differences are everywhere. And they're all extremely confident. It would be crazy to just accept every empty claim about sound change ever made on the forum, so we don't do that. Give us something that strongly suggests you're not just one more person who got the wrong idea from a bad experiment or from one dysfunctional anecdote.
Without it, I personally will stick with my signature, "What is freely asserted is freely dismissed".
But that's me, someone else might take offense if you are casually claiming something he thinks must not happen. What you think of as simple curiosity and open mindedness on a topic, might look like nonsense with an agenda to someone else, who will think it's his mission to shut you down to protect the more gullible HeadFiers.
Now, trolling is a really poor way of doing that, and I don't think it earns any points in an argument.



I did not watch your entire video (don't think anybody will. It's slow with subpar sound, and it's as long as Avatar II that I did not go see). But I agree with people being like cats and jumping into the first box that looks like it might fit, then remaining there with people who almost exclusively agree with each other. The internet made that worse somehow, thanks to all the crap algorithms deciding that what we want is 30 more servings of what we just checked.
We're all humans, and we all think by default that what we believe true is true. That's why we do need solid arguments to even bother looking for what we don't believe in. Some will simply never acknowledge anything that doesn't go their way. Many such people exist and there is close to nothing you can do about it.
In this section, most of us will at least consider objectively oriented demonstrations. It's something. When I see method, when I see a controlled variable, I instantly put more value into what the guy is suggesting. I'm wired like that. I will still probably be more tempted to look for flaws in the test if I don't believe in the result, I'm only human, but I will tend to take serious approaches seriously and at the very least analyze the content seriously.



To try and bring something, I have had cases where using a cellphone to feed my portable DAC didn't sound "as good" as the same DAC plugged into my computer. I do not know why this happened. My guesses at the time were:
- the cellphone was giving way less than 5V to the DAC through USB and that DC power is the only power source on that DAC. That did happen a lot with cellphone brands using all the tricks in the book to look better than they were with battery testing in reviews. That I've confirmed to exist, as for sound difference, regardless of possible distortions in extreme cases, it could at least lead to slightly quieter output, something that can very much be audible.
- the cellphone doesn't have the optimal dialog with the DAC and falls back to an older, more basic streaming solution. Maybe also forces only 48kHz(something that did happen). But did it cause an audible change? I didn't know how to test and confirm that, and I don't know if someone did for a specific cellphone and DAC in a way that goes beyond "trust me dude, I know what I heard".

And I know it's the pot calling the kettle communist when I say it, but you should try shorter posts if you wish for any of what you say to reach someone. I still haven't read the first post entirely, I gave up midway each time I tried, just like plenty of people will not read this because it's too damn long. ^_^

 

[whitedragem]

first post, attempted to introduce how overt the changes between two price point 'transports' were to sound quality.

I am super sensitive to playing back 44khz at 'non even sample' multiples (like 48khz).
on android phones we can lock the transmit to 44khz. (on some BT IEMs it can even make an audible difference like it will from a reference sound card into a high quality processor or DAC)

having listened to the evolution of 'cheap' digital (ie consumer sound cards in the late eighties/early nineties/mid nineties and so on) the subtle differences in FM synthesis chipsets was the traits we were often looking for...
most of this stuff is experientially audible, but it takes many years to refine testing methods that work reliably and 'knowing what traits to look for'.

being able to talk about a topic is a fair ask.
asking others hostile to discussion to 'leave well alone' is also a fair ask.
The long post that started the thread off was with awareness as to what the science section necessitates as 'discourse'.
The internet has so many articles and discussion on these things (it is essential for digital to work, that the science behind it is secondary/foundation to many other discussions).

Transports are 'not all equal' in sending digital.
this is a thread to post on THAT topic.

naysayers have their own thread, cause they are incapable of muzzling off topic banter. (end of, yes?)

@castleofargh A+ elegant answer. one of only TWO POSTS that moght even be considered ON TOPIC (a headfi rule for forum posting generally if I understand)
I am not trying to twist anyones minds... hence why I havent just owned a tonne of 'evidence'.
rome wasnt built in a day, and head-fi is read by many more people than we have subscribers.
it is important to offer something for everyone.

apologues to pull you in (that video was literally a time waste akin to what the unruly do daily, here..)
The diplomancy given (and no doubt time taken to walk that line) is an effort appreciated.
Whilst I believe the content of my posts are fair (effort gone to to explain method and theory and results etc), it didnt push anything... but just to open a topic.
‐------------------------------
Having owned world class transports and done superclock mods (and having the matching kit to hear the results), this stuff may be rocket science apparently (armchair enginners love to quote engineering logic and IDEALs as if they are fact), but the effort to learn and gain understanding on this stuff is useful for many.

quite certainly there is more USEFUL discussion on transport quality all across headfi. (it is fact for many)
I suppose most know not to post such technical understanding in the science sections cause of too many without courtesy manners and respect ruling the roost.
the intention of this thread was for headfi as a site.
(and hobbyists to play and experiment)

the frequency sweep difference I wrote about was nauseating on one pass (as ot should be) and wothout any engagement or 'emotion' on another.
subjective and anecdotal.. sure.. (but the post went further..as did the following posts) and as MAY HAVE OTHER POSTS if the zealots didnt ruin EVERY THREAD.

Four pages, first post that actually was to topic (beyond my own), from a mod who SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD to write a diplomatic fence sit in order to keep the peace.