[mmerrill99]

You may have missed it, but the USB noise prior to reduction was already at or below -120db. That's way below the audible noise floor.

 

I was thinking the same thing, wondering "why does this guy care about stuff that is at -120 db".

My assumption was that his graph scale must be miscalibrated, because he claimed to be able to hear 60 Hz hum when it was at -110 dB.

If the graph isn't miscalibrated, why bother?

Very simplistic thinking being demonstrated in these posts

 

[watchnerd]

 
If you don't believe in Fidelizer's principles, that's fine by me. People find different products with different principles in mind and that's the charm of this hobby after all.
 

 
Believing in principles?  What principles are you referring to?

 

[watchnerd]

Very simplistic thinking being demonstrated in these posts

 
Care to elaborate?
 
The graph shows hum at -110 dB.  Either the graph is wrong or he has superhuman hearing.

 

[nick_charles]

I see no meaningful difference...
 

 

[mmerrill99]

I see no meaningful difference...

No meaningful difference is shown in the RMAA measurements for the optical cable, either


Yet an FFT shows a 5-10dB improvement in noise floor

 

[bfreedma]

Using galvanic isolation between computer

Yes, I'm asking, because it's a roundabout way to assess RFI.

If you really think RFI is a problem, you don't need Fidelizer or galvanic isolation DAC to test that. You crank up the CPU to max with a simulated work load and use a RFI detector, which will give you a reading in dB.

Archimago has already measured the noise coming over USB cables & even using his mediocre measuring equipment, he measures a 5 to 10dB drop in all noise (it's not just RF)
http://archimago.blogspot.ie/2015/05/measurements-corning-usb-3-optical.html

First you discredit Archimego, then you use his data.

As I said if his amateur pseudo-measuremnts show a reduction in the noise floor of 5-10dB, who knows how much more a real measurement would show?

You may have missed it, but the USB noise prior to reduction was already at or below -120db. That's way below the audible noise floor.

Who said anything about hearing the noise floor directly? It's about the effect a fluctuation ground noise spectrum can have on the sensitive analogue circuits inside D to A converters - the clock & the voltage or current references - it's the secondary effect of noise fluctuation on these processes

Not that any of that is relevant to the discussion of Fidilizer changing process priority and processor affinity.

As I said, a possible mechanism for its effect is changing the noise spectrum of the computer

You assume his views on Fidilizer are incorrect based on his measurement setup, but then also assume that the measurement you quote from him is not only viable but probably presents a best case scenario? How did you logic your way into that conclusion?

You also really seem to like to throw theories against the wall without a shred of supporting evidence. I'd like to hear your specific theory on how setting process priority and processor affinity could possibly change the "noise spectrum" of a Windows PC. In fact, I'd like to see your evidence that changing those two elements actually results in any change in the processing , clock, and associated voltages presented in a system operating under the light load typical of a system executing audio playback. If there aren't enough CPU cycles being consumed, the process priority setting is meaningless. There is no CPU state slower and less impactful than idle.

IMO, the entire discussion of RFI is meaningless in the context of what Fidelizer actually does. Unless you can produce evidence otherwise and not just keep postulating about some "possible mechanism" that you can't quantify or even describe.

 

[mmerrill99]

Fidelizer doesn't just do the two things you mentioned & you would be aware of that if you listened out even bothered to read the page linked to by Windows X so you are building a starman argument.
I'm just suggesting a possible mechanism for its operation.

 

[nick_charles]

None of the measurable nose/distortion levels should be audible in either case (with or without the doodad) but without some DBTs at the very least there is no evidence that it actually makes an audible difference
 
Has anyone done any DBTs with this software ?

 

[bfreedma]

Fidelizer doesn't just do the two things you mentioned & you would be aware of that if you listened out even bothered to read the page linked to by Windows X so you are building a starman argument.
I'm just suggesting a possible mechanism for its operation.

I've read the page in detail - numerous times. IMO, nothing in Fidelizer would support your "possible mechanism", whatever that might be. I'd be interested in your being specific in what you believe Fidelizer does that supports your claim. Are you just being contrarian or do you have specifics to post?

Frankly, it would be trivially easy to identify what Fidelizer does by utilizing a Windows install change tracker. I won't do it, because even though I don't agree with Windows X, it's his product and IP and it wouldn't be fair to him to publish the changes made to Windows components and registry. That said, after decades of tuning Windows systems, I have a very good idea of what Fidelizer changes based on the screens shown on the web site and the associated narrative.

At this point, I'm repeating myself and you're refusing to be specific in your claims, so unless you want to propose something specific that can actually be analyzed, I'm going to drop out of this played out discussion.

 

[watchnerd]

Fidelizer doesn't just do the two things you mentioned & you would be aware of that if you listened out even bothered to read the page linked to by Windows X so you are building a starman argument.
I'm just suggesting a possible mechanism for its operation.

 
I read the page.  I didn't see anything resembling a reasonable technical explanation.

 

[Guidostrunk]

Regardless of measurements, or scientific babble. Hell, I still have no clue what it actually does. My ears hear a huge improvement in SQ, running pro. I even made an appreciation and impressions thread. Of course everyones MMV.
http://www.head-fi.org/t/794314/fidelizer-appreciation-and-impressions-thread

 

[nick_charles]

Regardless of measurements, or scientific babble. Hell, I still have no clue what it actually does. My ears hear a huge improvement in SQ, running pro. I even made an appreciation and impressions thread. Of course everyones MMV.
http://www.head-fi.org/t/794314/fidelizer-appreciation-and-impressions-thread

 
 
How did you do the comparison? Are you talking about a sighted evaluation, how can you be sure that what you perceived is reliable ? It is dead easy to be fooled in any number of ways with the best will in the world...

 

[Guidostrunk]

Bro..... Seriously, I really don't care about the "science" behind it , or testing or whatnot. Hey. If I'm fooled so be it.
I downloaded the free version first for schiits , and giggles. Never expecting anything. Bought pro 1 week later. There's my testing method. My ears said yes. Lol.

How did you do the comparison? Are you talking about a sighted evaluation, how can you be sure that what you perceived is reliable ? It is dead easy to be fooled 

 

[watchnerd]

Bro..... Seriously, I really don't care about the "science" behind it , or testing or whatnot. Hey. If I'm fooled so be it.
I downloaded the free version first for schiits , and giggles. Never expecting anything. Bought pro 1 week later. There's my testing method. My ears said yes. Lol.

 
Curious, what's your hardware?

 

[Guidostrunk]

I'm using an old Laptop> foobar for flac, Tidal, and spotify. Nothing really special. Lol

Curious, what's your hardware?