[pompecukor]

of course, I firmly believe that opinions should be supported with data. I cannot make measurements but I can tell you that, I have heard idsd signature, mojo, dragonfly red and a dac tempotec in comparison AB without and with isilencer and in all cases, with isilencer I clearly perceived (without being a difference like night and day, that's not it) that with isilencer it sounds cleaner, more airy and the bass with better texture. Measurements are important but two headphones can have, for example, the same frequency curve and sound different. How can the soundstage be measured? for example, I read that dragonfly cobalt in measurements was equal to red and cobalt was therefore only propaganda. I had cobalt for two weeks (then went back to Amazon, just bought to hear it) and it doesn't sound like Red. Cobalt is more analytical, in more detail. I in direct comparison A / B so I heard it when supposedly by measurements, there are no differences. Because it can be? I have no answer

You do understand that this gimmik comes before any conversion and that digital data zeros and ones are all there is at this point. Please you explain to me how such an item can add anything to the sound. I mean come on. How can it become more "textured bass". Even if we are talking galvanically isolated ground, the most you would expect is that if you have an electronically noisy PC (like GPU whining) going through on the ground signal and adds some noise. Then that is one this. I know how noise works and how shielding can help it. But what you are describing sounds like tipical snake oil. And I honestly believe that you are not lying to me. I honestly do. You know how some swear they can here the sound difference in and RCA cable after 150 hours burn in? That is what I think is going on. Burning in RCA cable...

You cannot compare this with a headphone in a headphone even slightest foam padding difference can change the sound. It is waves, there is reflection. I it is analog.

Even thought I am not a fan of MQA, but that is one example. the data is even signed (I know that this hardware is only rendering, but just for the sake of example) how could it be signed and then read bit for bit inside the DAC if there was any "real" function of the isilencer.

Anyway I am not an expert at this. But you will agree that if what they claim is a fact. At this stage we are not speaking about a speaker, so it should not be subjective. It is the same exact recording. Same exact dataset going in and being received. There must be a way to demonstrate this with an exact measurement. As I said, I am considering this. That is why I am interested.

@ijorgian I wanted to ask you, do you think IFI could make measurements if they wanted to? Of course, they designed the bloody things.
If they attached measurement to it supporting the claim, do you think it will hinder the sales? No of course not, it would make them sell more sway a lot of those on the fence to paying money for it. Which audiophile wont shell out 50 bucks for measurable "more textured bass" anytime, when most even most starters have total hifi gear value starting at 2k
So tell me based on the above, why do you (ijorgian) think there is no measurement available?

Alas you think it is a coincidence that their attorney adviced them to use the exact word as you see in the items description "your music will seem...." hence it relies on perception. So cannot be challenged. If it was factually, don't you think they would just state "you music will be....." instead of the "seem".

 

[bandwidthbandit]

Any conversation with usb “purifiers” makes me check out. It’s literally, scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for anything to purify the sound from a digital signal.

impossible.

Any heard difference is due to the powers of suggestion, placebo, and cognitive dissonance at a lighter wallet.

I almost want to start a company selling USB sticks to audiophiles that promise to improve the sound, knowing that 80% will agree it does

 

[pompecukor]

I almost want to start a company selling USB sticks to audiophiles that promise to improve the sound, knowing that 80% will agree it does

Seriously people will buy it.... and some will hear the difference, even if you put two wire in there and nothing else. This, unlike the "purifiers" has be proven so many times. Starting from the day of the first such experiments when they split focus ground into two and injected part with water and a much more people recoeved in that group than the group that was not injected with anything.

 

[elira]

It’s literally, scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for anything to purify the sound from a digital signal.

Conceptually it's a digital signal, but through the cable there's an analog signal. In an ideal world the digital signal would be perfect, but in reality you have issues like jitter and noise. Depending on the DAC's design this cold be an issue or not.

 

[ijorgian]

I can't give you a technical explanation, because I don't have one. I am not an advocate for any brand. I have the jitterbug from AQ and the isilencer from IFI. I use it connected like this: ipad with tidal + isilencier / jitterbug + dac + headphones and with both devices I notice differences. With jitterbug it sounds sweeter, smoother. With isilencer I perceive more air and separation of instruments and better texture on the bass. To my ears, that difference exists, it is not about suggestion, I bought the purifiers by amazon with the intention of, if I did not notice anything, return. And I have kept them because I notice improvement. I do not know if this is measurable, I suppose that some way there will be to do it. I can only tell you about my ears. Do not expect a huge difference, they are subtle but, in my case, perceptible differences that make me keep these devices in my listening set up. I don't think it was suggestion but I can't tell you firmly that it isn't. I can only say that I perceive it. I would also like to have more technical data on this to understand what is happening with the filter. But I can assure you that I perceive the differences. Of course, they are not miraculous improvements but for me they are there

 

[pompecukor]

I can't give you a technical explanation, because I don't have one. I am not an advocate for any brand. I have the jitterbug from AQ and the isilencer from IFI. I use it connected like this: ipad with tidal + isilencier / jitterbug + dac + headphones and with both devices I notice differences. With jitterbug it sounds sweeter, smoother. With isilencer I perceive more air and separation of instruments and better texture on the bass. To my ears, that difference exists, it is not about suggestion, I bought the purifiers by amazon with the intention of, if I did not notice anything, return. And I have kept them because I notice improvement. I do not know if this is measurable, I suppose that some way there will be to do it. I can only tell you about my ears. Do not expect a huge difference, they are subtle but, in my case, perceptible differences that make me keep these devices in my listening set up. I don't think it was suggestion but I can't tell you firmly that it isn't. I can only say that I perceive it. I would also like to have more technical data on this to understand what is happening with the filter. But I can assure you that I perceive the differences. Of course, they are not miraculous improvements but for me they are there

Ahh. I failed to point out that you are in fact not even using it on a computer but rather an iPad, which has battery. So no AC current even to speak of. It is all DC, no GPU fans and no PSU either. So even the whole "switching power supply argument becomes invalid". I am sorry but in that case it is even more snake oil.

Did you see the recent debunk of AQ 2000usd rca cable? Took some guts for the owner to bite the bullet.

If you look for a difference, you will hear it. that is how we are created. Was my point sort of.

 

[ijorgian]

Ahh. I in fact failed to point out that you are in fact not even using it on a computer but rather an iPad, which has battery. So no AC current even to speak of. It is all DC and not GPU fans either. I am sorry but in that case it is even more snake oil.

Did you see the recent debunk of AQ 2000usd rca cable? Took some guts for the owner to bite the bullet.

If you look for a difference, you will hear it. that is how we are created. Was my point sort of.

Yes, I saw the cable thing. In my opinion, while there are better and worse cables, there is an abusive business selling cables at prices that are not justified. As for the isilencer, I repeat that I was not looking for differences, I only ordered through Amazon that I can return without asking and I decided to keep it because with this device on, I notice a slight improvement. If I did not notice it, I would say it, I do not win anything but I understand your skepticism and more speaking of something as personal and subjective as audio. I just gave my subjective impressions and, if it is due to a placebo effect or not, I don't know, I will not rule it out because the possibility is there. It would be nice if other people who have tried these products could give their impressions!

 

[pompecukor]

Conceptually it's a digital signal, but through the cable there's an analog signal. In an ideal world the digital signal would be perfect, but in reality you have issues like jitter and noise. Depending on the DAC's design this cold be an issue or not.

I am sorry, but I have the feeling that you just read those words somewhere. Do you really know what jitter is when used in congenction with USB?

No it is not conceptually digital. It is 100% factually and truly digital data.

Let me try to use an example to demonstrate to you where you are wrong and for this example you will not require any technical background...

So let us pretend that you know what you are doing and have the right drivers running and give your USB DAC exclusive right from windows to pass through the music. Also that you are listening to the highest qualities typically available. You data rate (amount of digital data per second) will be about 9Mbps.

Now you probably seen those expensive SD cards that photographers use. Those that have 90Mbps writen on them. It means they are in fact capable of receiving up to almost 10x the amount of data that you are passing through when you listen to very high quality music.

If you put those cards in a cheap chines (5usd) USB 3.0 card reader and plug it into a PC. Then select your favorite HD movie, picture and software aswell and start to copy them over to the SD card. You will see in fact the speed will be quite close to the "write" speed claimed by the SD card manufacturer. You will be copying over at 9x the speed that you send music data to your DAC for playback.

I hope you understand that at this stage there is really no difference if you are copying music vs. a software or a picture file. Do you? Some time I have my doubts so just checking.

The difference only start on the DAC side, that is incase it is music it will start to decode and translate it to an analog signal.

When you do the above experiment, then imagine you have 100 SD cards. You copy the files from PC to SD card, then from SD card one to SD card 2, then from SD card 2 to SD card 3. Do you realize that even on SD card 100 you will have the bit perfect carbon copy of the original files? This is not conceptual anything. That is just how "digital" works. Ones and zeros.
If any think were changed along the way then the software would not even run. It is very easy to use any hex editor to compare the two files. And to remind you that in the above experiment we copied, that is transported the data at 9x the speed at which you are sending it to your DAC.

If you accept the above, then how do you imagine that in your case the digital data gets "changed"/"manipulated" on the USB level?

Ohh... you mean devices with no buffer or CRC error correction. Making it possible that some error get in the mix. We'll my friend if that happen it will never change how deep or textured the bass would sound. You would rather hear a drop out or click. Sort of like what you here now when the IFi device moves from one track with MQA to another one with a different coding. You have all heard that noise. That is sort of what an error would sound like. Removing that will never add dept and such. That is just nonsense.

I my not be as good explain this. Here is an article that may help. If you are not too blinded by your belief system. I suggest you read it.

https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5971

Also you could visuallize IFI arguing with itself. As one of the supporters of MQA, with the Neo for example you get full hardware decode and render. So not just render like on the Sig. Then all the claims of MQA warranting that you get the same exact sound bit for bit at your DAC level with their technology would already be a fail won't it. You don't see them adding the statement that you will only get the if you in fact use and USB gimik in the chain. MQA purple lights up on the Neo with or without Isilencer does it no? I hope you are seeing the irony there.

 

[pompecukor]

Yes, I saw the cable thing. In my opinion, while there are better and worse cables, there is an abusive business selling cables at prices that are not justified. As for the isilencer, I repeat that I was not looking for differences, I only ordered through Amazon that I can return without asking and I decided to keep it because with this device on, I notice a slight improvement. If I did not notice it, I would say it, I do not win anything but I understand your skepticism and more speaking of something as personal and subjective as audio. I just gave my subjective impressions and, if it is due to a placebo effect or not, I don't know, I will not rule it out because the possibility is there. It would be nice if other people who have tried these products could give their impressions!

I really respect the maturity that you have show by saying that you do not rule out. You are going places sir.

If you ask if others have heard it you will get a positive answer. that is 100%. The point of our discussion was measurement. if you remeber. You did skip to answer my buttom line question. "why do you think that concrete measurements are not plublished" se. computer, same material. one set of data without I silencer in the chain and the other with.". I know you don't know why. But if you had to guess, what would be your answer.

About the "I did not listen for the difference" that is impossible to do. You tried to compare of course your mind will listen. I am not saying that you "wanted" it to be better. I am saying that It has be demonstrated so many time on humans that if they look for something it will be there... sort of. It is not a conscious thing. It is subconscious.

 

[newworld666]

I am sorry, but I have the feeling that you just read those words somewhere. Do you really know what jitter is when used in congenction with USB?

No it is not conceptually digital. It is 100% factually and truly digital data.

Let me try to use an example to demonstrate to you where you are wrong and for this example you will not require any technical background...

So let us pretend that you know what you are doing and have the right drivers running and give your USB DAC exclusive right from windows to pass through the music. Also that you are listening to the highest qualities typically available. You data rate (amount of digital data per second) will be about 9Mbps.

Now you probably seen those expensive SD cards that photographers use. Those that have 90Mbps writen on them. It means they are in fact capable of receiving up to almost 10x the amount of data that you are passing through when you listen to very high quality music.

If you put those cards in a cheap chines (5usd) USB 3.0 card reader and plug it into a PC. Then select your favorite HD movie, picture and software aswell and start to copy them over to the SD card. You will see in fact the speed will be quite close to the "write" speed claimed by the SD card manufacturer. You will be copying over at 9x the speed that you send music data to your DAC for playback.

I hope you understand that at this stage there is really no difference if you are copying music vs. a software or a picture file. Do you? Some time I have my doubts so just checking.

The difference only start on the DAC side, that is incase it is music it will start to decode and translate it to an analog signal.

When you do the above experiment, then imagine you have 100 SD cards. You copy the files from PC to SD card, then from SD card one to SD card 2, then from SD card 2 to SD card 3. Do you realize that even on SD card 100 you will have the bit perfect carbon copy of the original files? This is not conceptual anything. That is just how "digital" works. Ones and zeros.
If any think were changed along the way then the software would not even run. It is very easy to use any hex editor to compare the two files. And to remind you that in the above experiment we copied, that is transported the data at 9x the speed at which you are sending it to your DAC.

If you accept the above, then how do you imagine that in your case the digital data gets "changed"/"manipulated" on the USB level?

Ohh... you mean devices with no buffer or CRC error correction. Making it possible that some error get in the mix. We'll my friend if that happen it will never change how deep or textured the bass would sound. You would rather hear a drop out or click. Sort of like what you here now when the IFi device moves from one track with MQA to another one with a different coding. You have all heard that noise. That is sort of what an error would sound like. Removing that will never add dept and such. That is just nonsense.

I my not be as good explain this. Here is an article that may help. If you are not too blinded by your belief system. I suggest you read it.

https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=5971

Also you could visuallize IFI arguing with itself. As one of the supporters of MQA, with the Neo for example you get full hardware decode and render. So not just render like on the Sig. Then all the claims of MQA warranting that you get the same exact sound bit for bit at your DAC level with their technology would already by a fail won't it. You don't see them adding the statement that you will only get the if you in fact use and USB gimik in the chain. MQA purple lights up on the Neo with or without Isilencer does it no? I hope you are seeing the irony there.

I am not sur your exemple is accurate .. as you can copy 100 times same file on 100 SD cards .. and for sure all files will be bit to bit identical ..
But................. time to do the copy will never be identical, and can be even worse comparing two SD cards readers.

I have no idea in which way it can affect the final sound and if any ifi purifier can do anything against this.. but it's definitely not comparable to a simple Computer copy.

As I am using Qubuz and not the lossy MQA, I just know that when I compare :
-> a File bought on Qobuz reading on SD from my Fiio M11
-> with Qobuz same file streaming
-> and both under UAPP with same EQ with my IER-Z1R

=> what I ear as music is not totally identical as it should be !!!

And I don't say any purifier would make both sound identical... just I don't know why streaming and file reading are different.
I have not compared A/B with my DLNA server of the same file ..but maybe it should be worth to do.

 

[pompecukor]

I am not sur your exemple is accurate .. as you can copy 100 times same file on 100 SD cards .. and for sure all files will be bit to bit identical ..
But................. time to do the copy will never be identical, and can be even worse comparing two SD cards readers.

I am not sure to know in which way it can impact the final sound and ifi can do anything against this.. but it's definitely not comparable to a simple Computer copy.
As I am using Qubuz and not the lossy MQA, I just know that when I compare a File reading on SD from my Fiio M11 and Qobuz same file both under UAPP with same EQ with IER-Z1R => music is not totally identical as it should be. And I don't say any purifier would make both sound identical.

The problem is that you are comparing music on the analog side between two devices that have impact. If we stay at the USB level then it is not yet music. Just data. literally ones and zeros you know that don't you? If you claim some of those bits get "randomly" changed at the USB before the data is in fact converted to music, then as I said you will hear error, click and such. Corropted data. And thus in reverse you would here eorr free music. Not "more dept" and "bass texture" and such". Please think about it a bit in your head.

But again to follow me you will have to agree that what passes through your USB are literally one's and zeros only in series of 8 digits. If you have an argument with that part then I won't waste my time. It is not "music" at that stage. It is just pure data.

 

[simon740]

Can you please stop littering the topic?

 

[Baten]

Can you please stop littering the topic?

it's really a mess at this point

 

[bandwidthbandit]

So anyway, has anyone used the new signature side by side with a schiit stack (magni/modi), or the Schiit hel, that can do a subjective comparison of SQ?

 

[jirams]

it's really a mess at this point

All slippy with Snake Oil.