erin

We could only arrive at the objective measurement from our subjective experience. Without the subjective experience the objective measurement would only be theoretical. The subjective experience goes hand in hand with objectivity. They are two sides of the same coin. We only have measurements because of our desire to improve our subjective experience. But the measurements are not the end goal. The enjoyment of our subjective experience is the end goal. Even engineers who design electronic components like audio DACs and audio opamps listen to them after the prototype is built before putting them into production. The subjective experience is ultimately the end goal. But measurements play a big role in getting to the end goal. They are two sides of the same coin

Objectivity is based on subjective experience. In the field of audio we survey people to find out the average frequency range of hearing. We survey people to determine the average limits of psycho acoustics. We survey people to determine an acceptable level of signal to noise. From these averages, engineers design equipment to record and playback audio to a subjectively satisfying degree. The objective data based on average perception determines the baseline that we call objectivity. Objectivity and subjectivity both matter equally. Without truthful subjectivity we wouldn't be able to find a baseline for our objectivity. So i don't think the battle is between the subjective and the objective, but rather between truth and sincerity, and ignorance and insincerity. If we don't know the answer, we're better off to say we don't entirety know why, rather than to invent a story to make us seem more knowledgeable than we are.

I record vinyl at 48khz. Why? Because some records have measurable audio up to 24khz and for the sake of thoroughness and because i can, i do capture that information in the digital recording. Why not? Its my recording so i can do whatever i want. 😁 Additionally, i perceive that my DAC sounds slightly better playing 48khz files. I don't know why so don't ask. I cannot hear 24khz so its a mystery.. but its my experience.

The objective reply is that 16 bit recordings have 96dB dynamic range. With dithering, they can achieve 100dB dynamic range. Subjective comment: surely this is enough dynamic range to capture 99% of music recordings and definitely enough dynamic range to capture recordings from vinyl records. Subjective comment: In my experience, there is nothing wrong with 16 bit recordings. I have never heard any dynamic compression due to 16 bits being used. Any differences in sound between 16 bit and 24 bit recordings are due to the way the DAC chip manages the audio conversion from D to A. Any sonic difference is caused by the hardware, not the actual 16 bit data.

Ok, you are correct. I didnt see that untill I checked on Amazon after reading your comment

The Belkin F3U133 is certified. Pro Series Hi-Speed USB 2.0 Cable http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-F3U133-06-Series-Hi-Speed-Six-Feet/dp/B00000J1TX USB.org - View Catalog Item But that was the only cable I could see listed on the USB.org website for Belkin that was certified. Not to say that the cable you mention isnt, but its not on the USB website. I'd go for the F3U133 which looks more solid anyway. But, the shortest length is 6 ft. If you want shorter, perhaps the gold one is OK.

In that case you should probably obtain a reputable, but non "hi fi" branded CAT7 cable to compare to the Audioquest. Then you will know if it is the CAT7 in comparision to CAT5 or 6, which is making any difference.

Well according to this organisation, there are plenty of USB cables that meet the 90 ohm specification. USB.org - USB-IF Compliance Program Seems like you just need to find a cable that has passed the compliance testing.

I've been there and done that. Yes the ethernet cable made a difference on my system. I just compared pre made cheap multistrand cable vs some solid core install grade cable terminated by myself. It cost me nothing to try. There was a difference. Wasnt huge. But was audible. Do I care? No not really. I dont run a network streaming system anymore. But, If I was going to fork out the big bucks for an "audiophile" "anything" cable I'd want to try it in my own system and have a two week trial with a "no quibbles" fully refundable return policy. Otherwise I wouldnt bother to try it. Simple!

Can be confirmed or denied quite easily with a loopback test.

So much fun when the experts eat their own words. There are a few people around here and on other forums saying this stuff for years. Actually I'd like to see some proof of citation? evidence? test results? Ive yet to hear any Mac that sounds better than a Windows PC . Doesnt mean it is true, just my personal experience.

Just a quick reply, without going into massive detail. And no, I wont be drawn into a debate about the best DAC chip, this is not what this post is about. Older DAC chips such as TDA1541A and PCM58,63,1702,1704 have very good linearity. From what I've read, the TDA1541A can generally reproduce 15.5 bits accurately. The Burr brown 18-24 bit chips can reproduce at least 16bits accurately. The 24 bit versions can probably do at least 18 bits without breaking a sweat. More modern delta sigma 24bit chips have been measured to reproduce 14-16 bits accurately. Im sure the ES9018 will easily do 16 + bits. The interesting point to debate comes down to the individual implementation of the power supples on the DAC PCBA. Does the power supply provide at least -96dB of noise in order for the DAC to produce the full 16bits... food for thought. The other consideration is signal to noise ratio of both a live performance, whether that be a solo guitarist playing in their bedroom or attending a rock concert. Background noise is always there! Only anechoic chambers and other surreal specially constructed rooms come close to zero background noise. Im happy to argue that 90dB signal to noise is perfectly acceptable. 16 bit recordings acheve this. IMO sample rate is the bigger concern. 48khz should be the minimum and 88.2khz the maximum required -ever! Recordings are made for humans not bats. Oh but harmonics... yes I still will argue that 88.2khz is the highest we need. Any more is a waste. I think your generalisation that DACs only make use of 12 bits is a little wrong. It may apply to some chips, but I doubt these are the sorts of chips the average audiophile is using these days. Perhaps something out of a cheap 1990's walkman, or cheap car CD player? With regard to volume control. Some will hear it, some wont. Depends on the gear in the audio chain. Those that can hear it will find a noticable worthwhile improvement, those that cant, will wonder why the functionality has been removed.

I've got a question regarding the affinityset.exe files on your google drive. I assume that they make the squeezebox process run on one particular CPU core, but I may be mistaken? Do we need to double click the .exe files to make them work? Is the setting permanent or does it need to be done every time the PC is started? Can someone please educate me regarding these files? thanks Erin

The question is: Who is a tester and who is a user? I have a fair idea who the user is.

If I was them I'd be very worried. It's easy to see the difference between marketing company guys and true enthusiasts. The true enthusiasts / DIYers have been saying this and that makes and improvement for years. The marketing company guys come along and troll threads and try to say "bits are bits" and "your circuit is no good" etc. I figured them out long ago.