The Computer Audiophile

Stuff like this is way more interesting to me. HQP and PGGB produce different results, like chocolate and vanilla. Whichever one is your taste, that’s fine with me. Even cooler, perhaps use one for certain albums and the other for the rest. Options are fantastic!

Said with an exclamation 🙂

Wow, who peed in your breakfast this morning? We are talking about audio, a fun hobby, without the requirement to participate in any of this, yet you’re talking like there’s a government mandate to pay an upsampling tax. It looks like the absolute most you can spend on pggb is $1,050. That isn’t even as much as the sales tax on some usb cables. If you don’t like something just move on.

Thanks for sharing your view. I respect that, even though I don’t know your name (only joking about that last part and added it for humor in this overly serious discussion). 🙂

Hi guys, I’m unsure why we are all wasting time on this, “you’re wrong, no, you’re wrong” style of discussion. It makes NOBODY look good or smart or more worthy of a consumer’s hard earned money. You now what checks all those boxes for me? Humility, confidence in one’s product, and end result that increases my enjoyment of music. Thats just me though, and I’d never force my views onto others. Both @Zaphod Beeblebrox and @Miska are valuable members of this community and have created products that people love. Continuing this line of back and forth is like two amp manufacturers arguing about using feedback vs zero feedback. Both designs have fans, and both have people who say the other is absolutely wrong. The bottom line is how consumers enjoy the results of the product. Seriously that’s it. All this technical discussion is neat, but doesn’t really matter to 99% of people. If one app is technically correct but doesn’t produce the audible results people want, it matters not. Plus, nobody is keeping score of points made by anyone. We all use the products, like what we like, and move on. Arguing can only sour this experience. For the record, I like both HQP and PGGB. The technical discussion is way beyond my ability to understand it. I’m left with only the music, and use that to decide. No babies or puppies are harmed, so I have no desire to see a continued argument.

Agreed.

The great thing is that we as consumers can decide what to purchase or not and evaluate risk/reward pros/cons. Fairness and what should be done is in the eyes of the beholders. There shouldn’t be unnecessary gatekeepers for audio software.

People have many reasons for retaining their anonymity. I don’t judge them, but I’ll judge the product or opinions. MQA, the company tried to say Archimago’s work exposing MQA was invalid because he was anonymous. I think we all agree that’s senseless.

Can you be a little more specific about what you mean by memory drive?

This is the argument that MQA used against me during the RMAF debacle. When it comes to objective data, the identity of someone is far less important because the conclusions and data can be dis/proven by anyone with the right skills.

An audio site isn’t the best place to discuss international business law. Similar topics arise every so often. Given the number of jurisdictions, cultural customs, etc… it’s always a dead end discussion. For example, as a US based company I ignore GDPR just like I ignore Sharia law.

I cleaned up the sideshow. Back to the actual apps.

It’s neck and neck and neck. Tidal may be winning by a hair.

That has “leaked” every 6 months for the last 5 years :~)

Just a note about anonymity. I know and have personally met @Zaphod Beeblebrox. His anonymity is no different from @Archimago who I know and have personally met. Let’s not fall down the MQA-esque anonymity trap, knowingly or unknowingly.