[sonci]

Why, does he put more processor on background processes and system cache, then programs?

 

[sonci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif a defragmenting HDD adds massive ripple to the PSU 12V rail, thoppa measured that...so getting rid of HDD's serves at least one purpose, and the less ripple on the PSU the clearer the sound. but jitter from HDD's, I don't buy this

So, what to use for audio Library?
And why PC CD player adds this much of EMI, it stays off most of the time, no?

 

[chipzahoy]

It's their loss, not ours.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif HA-HA, Good for you! Probably, most of people here use PC audio, and just dont care about expensive CD player or amplifiers, but, if you try to remove the cover of an Arcam or Naim, yo'll see strange cables, shields, grills, etc, even my modest Denon CD player, have 3 barriers between PSU and the board, also the option for turning off the small lcd screen, during playback, for risk of "interferences". It cannot be all, snake oil

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif So, what to use for audio Library? And why PC CD player adds this much of EMI, it stays off most of the time, no?

a local SSD + a NAS maybe? a PC case is an EMI/RFI factory.

 

[sonci]

Neh, A NAS would be even worst, cause all data would pass through LAN, so adds more jitter anyway,
SSD, 1Tera? I'll pass that..

 

[m1abrams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif Neh, A NAS would be even worst, cause all data would pass through LAN, so adds more jitter anyway, SSD, 1Tera? I'll pass that..

Please explain how sending data via the LAN will add jitter?

Also for audio playback only there is NO reason to set up ASIO with low latency. It does nothing for you but possibly add clicks and pops. ASIO sure helps bypass kmixer but using low latency for playback only is pointless.

 

[sonci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by m1abrams /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please explain how sending data via the LAN will add jitter? Also for audio playback only there is NO reason to set up ASIO with low latency. It does nothing for you but possibly add clicks and pops. ASIO sure helps bypass kmixer but using low latency for playback only is pointless.

Dont blame me, just read the manual...

 

[leeperry]

I don't believe in transport jitter over TCP/IP if you set the latency high enough in foobar...we're reading data 300ms ahead of playing it.

OTOH DAC jitter is very real.

sure...latency and jitter are linked, but a local SSD + a NAS won't ruin your PSU ripple as would a local HDD/optical drives.

 

[xnor]

The question you have to ask yourself is, why do other people (who have a decent soundcard / DAC) get incredibly good results (i.e. way too good to hear a difference) from RMAA even though they didn't apply any of these "tweaks"?

.. no SSDs, no NAS, no special cables or shielding ...

 

[sonci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnor /img/forum/go_quote.gif The question you have to ask yourself is, why do other people (who have a decent soundcard / DAC) get incredibly good results (i.e. way too good to hear a difference) from RMAA even though they didn't apply any of these "tweaks"? .. no SSDs, no NAS, no special cables or shielding ...

There are no:"incredibly good results", in audio, and forget RMAA

I dont know what you call "incredibly good results" and what do you compare to, there's no way you can go near a 10kCD player with a "decent soundcard / DAC",
Believe me, my system sounds fantastic, yet.. it does not..

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why, does he put more processor on background processes and system cache, then programs?

Setting the processor scheduling for best performance of "background services" is a common optimization for recording studio computers. The reason being is that the ASIO driver and audio drivers are a background process. Giving the background services more preference in processor scheduling means the ASIO driver gets more processing so can work more reliably at lower latencies.

But you also have to remember that recording studio people are fanatical about low latency. They need low latency when doing tracking, overdubbing, generally anything where you are trying to match up with other audio. If there is even a slight delay due to too much latency then things are off. It is very difficult to have minimal latency while avoiding glitches due to buffer underuns and such.

We don't care about low latency when just listening. We don't care if a larger buffer causes more latency. We do care that setting a larger buffer minimizes the chances of audio glitches. Bigger buffers are better for us for listening. Bigger buffers are bad for studio folks needing low latency.

Since we are free to choose to use larger buffers I'm not sure that setting processor scheduling to "background services" is actually necessary or helpful. With a larger buffer the ASIO driver (or audio driver) isn't as time critical. I have my processor scheduling set to "background services" yet I'm not sure that it is actually helping and could conceivably be hindering.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif There are no:"incredibly good results", in audio, and forget RMAA

Why? RMAA is a valid way of measuring. You have yet to provide any credentials as to how this will honestly benefit sound in any way.

Quote:

there's no way you can go near a 10kCD player with a "decent soundcard / DAC",

Proof? What about the Benchmark DAC which we all know is built well beyond what is necessary?

Quote:

It cannot be all, snake oil

There are businesses built on selling snake oil where their whole offering is snake oil.

 

[sonci]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why? RMAA is a valid way of measuring. You have yet to provide any credentials as to how this will honestly benefit sound in any way.

Please just enter an high END Audio store, and compare the sound to a consumer PC built mainly for gaming



Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Proof? What about the Benchmark DAC which we all know is built well beyond what is necessary?

Well, Benchmark is not just a "decent soundcard / DAC" from the bunch, its high end, still it gets the bits from the radiant PC, and still it sounds better connected to a CD player then to a PC.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif There are businesses built on selling snake oil where their whole offering is snake oil.

If, Arcam, Wadia, Naim are built on snake oil, then lets turn to our Logitech speakers and pretend its high end..

 

[sonci]

Delete

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonci /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please just enter an high END Audio store, and compare the sound to a consumer PC built mainly for gaming

What if it has an outboard DAC? What if it uses an audio grade soundcard?

You're leaving too many variables open to interpretation.

As for entering a "high-end" store, I've done it plenty. You seem to assume that I haven't which tells a lot about you.

(PS: This still doesn't answer why one shouldn't perform RMAA testing and offers nothing to discredit it.)

Quote:

Well, Benchmark is not just a "decent soundcard / DAC" from the bunch, its high end, still it gets the bits from the radiant PC, and still it sounds better connected to a CD player then to a PC.

Once again . . . proof? Your opinion is meaningless when it comes to making a statement of fact.

Quote:

If, Arcam, Wadia, Naim are built on snake oil, then lets turn to our Logitech speakers and pretend its high end..

We can measure the differences between speakers and show the differences are indeed audible. I was mostly referring to stores and manufacturers that sell audio "tweaks" . . . such as $1K wood blocks or $500 wood knobs.

This point seems lost on you though.