prot

Audiophile grade = the audiophile cannot hear it. Non-existent by definition

That part ... the skipped samples.

How about I put you in charge of that? You may wanna use triple silky paper only while I'm testing that so called "player" of yours

Not sure where is that but would you care going into some detail about that SFS setting and especially the lost bits? Cause I'm pretty sure the OS and the hw *inside* the PC doesnt lose or otherwise "disturb" any single bit ... at least not since that stoopid Pentium1 error got corrected last century.

That's it?! Seriously!? Every retard and their puppies are screaming and swearing on CA because you made an UNTESTED ASSUMPTION a few years ago? Well, gotta admit you're good. P.S. yes you can run your software from the cpu cache...just need to write your own OS and convince Intel/Arm/etc to give you the special (and prolly nonexistent) api that guarantees your code stays in cache

Looks like you guys managed to "unprove" Sh-Ny already and are now running your horses straight through the theory of evolution. At least you are not wasting any time...

Of course you do ... it's called quantum audiophile light and it comes directly from the audiogod's arse ... can only be sold in diamond jars with a 17N silver top screwed 3.14 times counterclockwise ... it's the only way to be sure

This may become an annoying mantra, but may I ask how exactly did you test all those things? Any abx or blind testing? PC storageX vs. storageY would be easy to do with the foobar abx plugin. But linn vs. auralic may get pretty ugly ... so, how exactly did you test that?

Pretty solid but I dont know who are u lecturing here...pretty sure my post said phase & flat freq were not the only things to care about. Would also be great to stop throwing that comparison link at me ... afaik, I first posted it a few weeks ago, it might just be that I know what it does The objective point is quite real and pretty much by definition. It's not perfect (may never be) but already very good. This point gives you a sound that is closest to the original recording ... it also includes all your equip & room (e.g. acourate does that) However, you may no like that sound ...and that's the only matter of taste ... and why we have EQs

That depends on what you compare. Foobar ABX is a wonderful tool. Or, e.g. in case you compare cable pairs, Jud also mentioned a very nice way: use one cable from set1 and one cable from set2, see if you hear any left/right imbalance ... ask someone to change cables for you, see if you can identify the 'better' one. It may get quite complicated with stuff like AO...you'll need two identical PCs for that ...and so on ...

I'm pretty sure that decimation != downsampling. Other than that, you are right, there is way too much processing and everyone will be happier with less ... prolly not gonna happen soon though.

good for ya ... but do we all have to suffer ? also, it might just be too much for some

Surprinsingly, me too

Would you care to detail which part of "phil's tweaking"? And how exactly does it "make sense"? Pretty sure that the mobo doens *not* have a "clock speed" ... could it be that you are a user of that "turntable with bits" ?

Glad it worked for you. I have no dsd-dac and no idea how/if that works.