[qusp]

show me your hirez music library

 

[customNuts]

Quote:

I somehow think the perfect phase alignment and timing, and the 3-way amping may have made up for the slight loss in audio quality from the AD-to-DA process. Which means that if the prototype + universal JH16 were that good at the meet, we can only imagine how much better the final product using digital input + custom JH1x could be...

I agree with you tigon_ridge. I personally believe in bottlenecks - garbage in, garbage out. The jh-3a should IMHO really open up and deliver (even more) when fed digital.
 
As far as the gr8 algorythm, I will wait for a smaller, cheaper version that doesn't have the DAC.  For me that would certainly be the better  'ultimate portable rig'.
 
ie; iphone --> gr* transport (sans DAC) --> jh-3a-->jh16
 
What an exciting/crazy/brutal time to be addicted to head-fi.
 

 

[cooperpwc]

Quote:

show me your hirez music library

x2. This high-res argument is greatly a red herring. It may not be down the road but by then you might not be listening to today's JH-3A. It is like these people that bought the Protector because it was the ultimate system and they would stop upgrading. They did... for three months.
 
The best solution is the practical solution. It is the one that works today. IMHO YMMV etc.
 

 

[khaos974]

Quote:

...
Skepticism is good and I can easily relate since the comments here about a product can make you believe that it is the next best thing to sliced bread, however being sarcastic about something you did not audition is also not a reasonable thing to do...
 
I will not make any further comments on this. I just wanted to share my opinion...

 
Don't read too fast

, I didn't address my post to you at all, and when I said the best of Canjam it was a hyperbolic comparison, what I meant was that I got the impression that some canjammers placed the JH combo on the same level of a high end rig or even better, something along an Weiss DAC + Beta 22 + HD800, but don't read too much about the example, it's just here to illustrate "high end".
 
I know transducers account for most of the SQ, nevertheless, the source IS an ipad line out, ergo, one of my hypotheses must be true, whether it means the limiting factor (bottleneck issue) is garbage, the ipad is good, or all DACs are good enough.
 
I was not being skeptical at the quality of the JH combo (although I am a bit skeptical, I mean I'm still hoping to try the combo, but I did not express any doubt about the quality of the JH combo in my posts), it was a true question regarding the importance of the source, there was no sarcasm in the previous post except the "magic hat" hypothesis which I did not expect anyone to take seriously.

 

[Sonic 748i]

For some reason I think Jude was able to borrow a universal pair of the JH16 Pro's along with the prototype JH-3A and is going to write up a very informative read. I'm just hoping this.

 

[SHADYMILKMAN]

It would appear that my ideas arent completely thoughtout or realistic. I have done some more research and my implementation would mean that the DAC would be useless. I would keep the signal digital with an inline fiber optic oe/eo converter. I mentioned bandwidth because that is how digital data throughput is measured. I just figured, that digital in, 6 x digital phase/timing/amplification, _DAC_, to analog output; was.is cumbersome. It would appear that I was unknowingly interested in deprecating the DAC and just have a complete digital amp. sorry for the confusion there.
 
digital in, digital P/T/A, optical out, military-spec oe/eo in-line converter (use a ITU-T O.172 compatible converter, used in synching networks over fiber connections), new consolidated balanced/grounded multichannel termination to the IEM. it is in NO WAY this simple its just an overview of an exotic idea that may be based in fantasy ... if the components are small enough (which the ones i have been looking at can easily be implemented on the amp side and the IEM side), it would be a way to have a higher ceiling for expansion the next time that the IEMs or whichever way JHA decides to go forward, gets updated.
 
if i had any more knowledge i would try to find out how to implement this foolishness in a reasonable manner (money is certainly not a huge concern here, at least not when losing a DAC, and adding similar components for optical transmission) ... which is why i wanted to ask. if you guys could continue to help refine the idea/tell me how it isnt feasible i will continue to appreciate your feedback.
 
thanks: @souprknowva, @tigon_ridge, and @qusp, for all your replies!

 

[khaos974]

You do realize that in your idea the the transducers get a digital input, right? I really can't see how it would work.

 

[SHADYMILKMAN]

that's what the inline converter is for, my understanding is that it converts the optical signal into an electrical signal, that the BA's can use. the new line can provide more than the 3 channels to the BA's which also has the ability to provide for expansion down the road instead of the possible 2x2 pin arrangement. an all in one high quality connection, which is the thrust of the idea here.

 

[khaos974]

Unless it has a DAC inside, no won't convert to analog.
A digital signal is digital, whether it is optical or electrical, converting from one form to another won't change its digital nature.

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Quote:

that's what the inline converter is for, my understanding is that it converts the optical signal into an electrical signal, that the BA's can use. the new line can provide more than the 3 channels to the BA's which also has the ability to provide for expansion down the road instead of the possible 2x2 pin arrangement. an all in one high quality connection, which is the thrust of the idea here.

Quote:

It would appear that my ideas arent completely thoughtout or realistic. I have done some more research and my implementation would mean that the DAC would be useless. I would keep the signal digital with an inline fiber optic oe/eo converter. I mentioned bandwidth because that is how digital data throughput is measured. I just figured, that digital in, 6 x digital phase/timing/amplification, _DAC_, to analog output; was.is cumbersome. It would appear that I was unknowingly interested in deprecating the DAC and just have a complete digital amp. sorry for the confusion there.
 
digital in, digital P/T/A, optical out, military-spec oe/eo in-line converter (use a ITU-T O.172 compatible converter, used in synching networks over fiber connections), new consolidated balanced/grounded multichannel termination to the IEM. it is in NO WAY this simple its just an overview of an exotic idea that may be based in fantasy ... if the components are small enough (which the ones i have been looking at can easily be implemented on the amp side and the IEM side), it would be a way to have a higher ceiling for expansion the next time that the IEMs or whichever way JHA decides to go forward, gets updated.
 
if i had any more knowledge i would try to find out how to implement this foolishness in a reasonable manner (money is certainly not a huge concern here, at least not when losing a DAC, and adding similar components for optical transmission) ... which is why i wanted to ask. if you guys could continue to help refine the idea/tell me how it isnt feasible i will continue to appreciate your feedback.
 
thanks: @souprknowva, @tigon_ridge, and @qusp, for all your replies!

dude, you cant send digital data to the drivers, try running a DTS signal through your DAC into your amp and headphones youll see what i mean. The conversion from optical to electrical wouldnt magical turn the signal from a square wave to a analog waveform, there would be no dac chip in there. i mean no offense, but you really ought to quit persuing this train of thought, its not going to lead anywhere.
 
and to qusp, i know you probably read what i wrote on pg15, but they sounded about as close to real as ive ever heard out of heaphones, when the song the grudge started by tool, i almost just sat down on the ground. and dont even get me started on what happened when i listened to aftermath by Origin...
 

 

[qusp]

there is no way the convertor would be anywhere near what is needed to come even close to the components in the JH3a and where would the power come from? would you have power lines and batteries in the cables/IEM as well?? its getting pretty crowded up there in your world and I meant it when I said that fibre cable would be horrendously microphonic and inflexible, enough that you would not be able to tell even if it was good sound. I dont believe that the devices you mention have a dac as far as audio is concerned, they might convert an optical transmission to an electrical one, but it would still be digital ala coax spdif after that (not something the transducers can use for music, would sound like a very high pitched fax that only dogs can hear.or if it had already been converted, why did you go to the trouble of optical in the first place?
 
you are making this more complicated for what benefit?? I dont understand how doing it that way would be any better even if it was possible. digital amps give off large amounts of heat and RF, for their size and they rarely have a very high quality dac unit, certainly not like is being used here already.
 
no problems bouncing ideas around mate, but these are the sort of things that really need to be researched before you start making recommendations in a public forum best when you have an idea that involves a specific technology, to look up the datasheets to see what they do. you wont be able to get rid of the amp unit any time soon, so easier to have all the components in there close to each other, otherwise you end up with distortions in the time domain, which is a big part of why this thing was developed in the first place.
 
even just 1 foot of wire can lose you quite a bit of DNR to RF  at the top end of the scale; 140db very quickly turns into 125

 

[SHADYMILKMAN]

hey, i mean thats why i post, to learn, so i humbly thank you ... regardless it merely an idea, some are worse than others, this happens to apparently be one of them. however i was just looking for an alternative yet viable way to utilize a single termination connector to the IEMs instead of a 2x2 pin setup.

 

[qusp]

no problem man, i'm not trying to discourage you, but yeah conception->research->disclosure->feedback rather than conception->disclosure->feedback->backtrack->research is more productive in general
 
with me??

 

[SHADYMILKMAN]

fair enough, no need to be condescending.

 

[qusp]

that wasnt my intention, just simple workflow that would help to move through such things more efficiently as you seemed to skip the research bit and by that I mean looking how the components work together and in relation to each other, rather than just going by the brief overview of the functionality independantly. I apologize if I offended you