vrao

I read thro 14 pages briefly, haven't tried to read in detail, so forgive any inconsistencies. Migeulito had a great post. A stereo system can generate sounds outside it's boundaries. I'm enjoying that experience right now ... What is interesting now is my understanding of phase in stereo reproduction. After rooms treatments and careful calibration ..... it's an immersive experience (one is part of the musical experience). The Ethegenic song Peter refers to I just played as a reference. The crow at ~ 1:30 is above the speaker placed outside and 5-10 feet behind (much further behind other times). At the same time water flows between the speakers ground level to the right. Things flying from left to right, in and out of the speaker boundaries from everywhere. I.e. Vertical sound stage. Proper phase setup can get sounds from all directions. The experience is heightened with eyes closed. There is a component of subjectivity out here... The chief audio engineer from a very prominent recording studio came by for a listen recently. Within the first 30s, he commented on the phase accuracy of the system. In my room first reflections are treated. Also bass traps. Reflections are needed, not the harmful ones .... that corrupt imaging and phase information. Low "system" distortion (not just the front end, also speakers), with an excellent transient resposnse will preserve any phase information. Treating the room reduces further distortion. One can hear all recording/post-processing errors. hope it helps... VJ

Clockwise - Aqvox, Audiocadabra, Oyaide Neo, Peter's original $1 wonder. Others as I remember YFS - 2 types and Audioprana Photon. There could have been a few more, but it's been a few years, and I don't care to remember.

Among all USB cables that I've tried Clarixa and Lush are my top favorites. While Clarixa in my previous speaker-room configuration had a bit of a harsher/sharper presentation, not so currently. Just recently when comparing the Clarixa to Lush did I realize that synergy. Don't get me wrong Lush is a great cable, but the differences are apparent. While Lush adds a bit of meat on the bones, there is a very subtle background haze (SNR), and the transients are not as flushed out. While the horizontal sound stage is about the same (maybe a bit smaller with Lush), it's the vertical sound staging where Clarixa shines.

A. neuroscience: pleased to make your acquaintance . Good to see another fellow enthusiast! As far as I can see from your posts, you're in a similar thought process as me. Couple of possible suggestions: First and foremost pay extra attention to the exact mechanical to electrical conversion process, and the criteria related to it. Hearing has been refined and perfected in the last 200 million years .... the keys are in the basics Think beyond, way beyond the typical auditory scene analysis (I'm sure you have). ASA is just the starting point. Most important for reproduced music, try a holistic approach -- total system distortion, rather than nitpicking on individual components. This is where a complete system approach such as Phasure has an edge! Every component is meant to synergistically match with others, up and down stream, and provide an overall positive effect along the chain.

Accurate about the room, rest no comment I now consider the room and the play back equipment ... like the right and the left hand ... for a small scale and low volumes ... one hand may work (like holding a small item). But when things get big and complex, both yin and yang need to cooperate otherwise things fall apart. (Not to deter this into an acoustic treatment thread)

Let's not be kids and keep the thread on track. I know is a loaded thread with loaded information, but one has to learn to control their urges... FYI: functional imaging is just not fMRI , so Jonny just let it go and play with something else ... most here derailing the thread are emperors with no clothes ...

Peter: I had a naive neighbor who recently dropped by for listening. Apart from being completely overwhelmed and partially confused with the playback ( an engineer BTW ), also preferred the Clarixa. The Lush was placed in the system for shorter time though!. functional analysis: there are a few more ways to get the information from the brain- clinical and imaging (not just fMRI). Costs however will exponentially rocket with imaging. Yes there are ethical issues that arise if it's just checking cables, but can be a boon to figure out how and where audio memories are stored and how to elicit emotions thro music in dementia patients . However I can decode some of Peters work psychoacoustically in my listening room. (Topic of another discussion) one thing different (to add to the complete phasure system): I have the audio room acoustically treated, and it has helped significantly propel system performance and listening experience.

" Basically, measurements that are currently performing are nearly meaningless for a human auditory perception. " (just for completion and clarification) ... but measurements do provide the proper path for development.

Guys, hopefully not a duplicate post. Lost the prior ... the people who say have evidence for placebo effects- post those scientific data, one can easily poke holes in each and every one them (topic of another discussion). in my setup, Clarixa is preferred ... a better vertical sound stage, in addition to the typically described holographic process.(also another topic) fYI I've experimented well to nearly USB 10 cables. If one does not hear a difference... maybe it's phychological or system limited... there is no doubt that cables sound different ... Does that make me a cable fanatic ... absolutely not I hate this variable, and am happy that Peter does the hard work for me! in that way the Lush is a bargain, for the labor and all the experimentation time required, adding to the cost of labor and parts. how does it work? Maybe some change in the sound spectra? There are nano or pico variations in electrical parameters that effect sound (temporally too), and probably a cascade phenomenon since it's in the beginning of the chain. These may or may not be measurable. No EE though of is this?! ... those guys are unable to comprehend this process Also so do people remember the amps from the 80s with .0000001% distortion that sounded crap? While th SETs with >5% sounded awesome? I'm sure some super competent EE designed those amps with high negative feedback! all in all the measurements may or may not show any differences (if measured accurately and the entire spectrum of information, some might not be measurable or thought relevant). Simple explanation — One decides to make a mouse for the computer, and calculations say the square mouse is the easiest, the best performing and the most convenient ( or semicirclular) from the measurement perspective. However, from the human ergonomic perspective, this is the worst measurements possible. Basically, measurements that are currently performing are nearly meaningless for a human auditory perception. Peter is in no way obligated to discuss any IP related information … do we see any other cable manufacturer on the forum discussing audio (almost feel like this give some armchair members some superiority complex, almost like a Bugatti is in the hood and every one wants to race their Honda to prove a thing or two)? The same reason troll consume the discussion. Also this is probably one of the best USB discussion threads in CA. fully disclosure: I have a completed phasure system .. and am a proud owner happy listening VJ

He he he ... the "Worlds most interesting DAC"

NT

Interesting, Not to sound to like a fan boy but .... looks like you had already made up your mind before listening to NOS. Evaluating NOS-1 without XXHE (especially mac) is like using a bicycle without wheels. I'm not sure if anyone uses MAC with the NOS .... definitely a no..no. I was definitely into macs (all my files are still in AIFF), a difficult process to go back to windows, which I did specifically for XXHE. I think Peter created a temp mac driver and possible settings to give a flavor to a wider community. I'm sure he was also evaluating other viable softwares. I heard just what you did with same settings same player a while ago. I tried most other softwares on the mac as well with the NOS, got an idea as to how it performs and moved to XXHE, which is better! Remember with Peters DAC the sound is "tweak able" newer versions is better i presume as I've yet to install version 7. The important point is that NOS is only a DAC. Any sound you here is from the upstream software, So all the issues you had would be related to software. IF you get an opportunity listen with XXHE, please do. All that can be said is if you have not heard that combo, then you cannot "really" comment on the sound quality.

@ Barrows Hi, "There are a lot of audiophiles who seem to love the sound of NOS/no filtering DACs even playing at 16/44.1 rates, even though this approach clearly has tons of digital artifacts, at high levels, well within the audible range. There is nothing wrong with that, but it probably is a good idea to at least know that you are hearing additions to what is in the music." This does not make sense to me. Artifacts meaning that the recording engineers have a habit of letting digital artifacts onto the music? And the other DAC manufacturers are making sure these are filtered out? Where does one draw the line? As far as I know the $$$$ or even $$$$$ CD players are trying to get the extra information from the CD - ambient, subtle very last of the details. The more the better it is, apart from other factors, of course. This is an interesting subject, I would like to learn more. p.s this is also my first post on CA, but found your response quite interesting. Kind Regards,