Norton

Just a wonderful performance and recording

Thanks, I checked email header and seems genuine from Roon.com. Really odd though that I got no reply whatsoever in the last 7 days from my 2 emails to [email protected], nor from a enquiry via the Roon webform, nor from posting on the forum. I guess they don’t want new customers? I think I’ll stick with JPlay for iOS.

I’m experiencing a bewildering situation with Roon, I wondered if anyone else has had the same? On Monday, after ending a free trial, Roon invited me to buy with a discount “..To claim your discount, reply "proceed" to this email.”. Email looked genuine ([email protected]) so I replied. After 24 hrs I heard nothing, so I sent a reminder to same address , 24 hrs later nothing still so sent an enquiry on their web form. Another day passed and still no reply or access to Roon, so posted a query on the Roon forum, which was declined and apparently sent as a note to accounts within a few minutes. 24 hrs on from that, still no Roon access nor a response to any of my queries. Could this original email be a scam, or is this just a taste of Roon customer service post takeover?

But is that a hard definition, and if so , whose? And indeed what do we mean by a Master recording and the implied provenance, if there can be multiple masters? For example, if a 70s analogue recording is transferred by the record company to 24/96 and then distributed as RBCD as a “remaster” and I then make a bit perfect rip of that CD, can I be said to have a lossless copy of the original analogue master? I’d suggest not and that, far from a hard definition, lossless is just a meaningless marketing term

The question is only meaningful if you can define what “lossless” means. Bearing in mind that it will not be possible to reconstruct exactly the original recording from the vast majority of consumer distributions of music in any format , lossless is a meaningless marketing term. In practice , it just means that it is possible to take a consumer distribution and reconstruct the file that immediately preceded it in the distribution chain.

Anyone paired one of the current crop of ECD DACs with the UPL96ETL? I’m still enjoying mine with the DA96 of same vintage and put a significant part of the SQ down to the UPL. Wondered how it sounded with latest gen DACs.

I don’t think the 105 can accept DSD over USB DAC input, see https://www.oppodigital.com/KnowledgeBase.aspx?KBID=135&ProdID=BDP-93 You can play DSD from network shares or USB storage attached to the 105. I can’t remember if it applies, but probably best to ensure SACD Priority is set to DSD. It may well also work via DLNA, using something like JRiver/JRemote, MConnect or JPLAY but you will need to enable either DoP or not DoP ( can’t remember) in the relevant software settings.

I understand your point and while the subjective threshold of “good enough” itself undermines claims to objectivity, on this occasion I disagree with you. The reason why the Pass examples are such a damning indictment of the “objectivist” approach is precisely because the conclusions lack the nuance you mention. Using the same model, same test equipment and with similar data, one reviewer deems the amp to be so bad as to be a waste of design and manufacturing effort, while the other praises its superb measured performance and underlying engineering. It is thus difficult to conceive of more different conclusions, hence my finding that an “objective” approach is in fact just as subjective as any other.

Yes, in practice it seems sensible to consider a range of points of information in forming an initial opinion and I am sure there are many of us who might be labelled subjective who would likewise similarly reject such products. However, products that irrefutably lack any possible scientific basis to performance claims form only a small subset of those drawn into the objectivist subjectivist debate. And even then, there is a big difference between a category of product that cannot possibly work, and an otherwise good product, rooted in sound engineering, marred by an overenthusiastic marketing dept.

The Objectivist: Subjectivist divide is largely a fiction, for the simple reason that Objectivism itself is a theoretical construct to fuel internet argument, rather than a practical approach. I suspect that very few who claim to be Objectivist actually choose their audio equipment based on data gained from their own electronic measurements or correctly constructed double blind listening tests. Instead they put their belief in secondary sources they see as objective, just as others put their belief in other sources according to various perceived credentials. Not science but rather scientism. Moreover, “Objective” test data itself is filtered through the subjective approach of the author, before reaching the reader. For example, 2 well known objective testers evaluating the same amp with the same test equipment, and from what I can see, similar test results, yet one concludes “..I can't recommend the Pass Labs HAP-1. They need to get away from telling stories and wasting design and manufacturing skills this way” while the other determines: “Pass Labs' HPA-1 offers superb measured performance that reflects equally superb audio engineering”. so there are in fact competing “objectivities” and while the defence goes up that “objective” tests can be replicated, in practice most readers are not going to do so themselves, so in the end, we are all subjectivists. We just differ in terms of where we choose to invest our faith.

One might also say that if someone is confident in their knowledge and position, they don’t need to resort to offensive comments to make their point.

Funny how someone who misses the “old guard” posts the most offensive thing that’s been on this site for the last few years…if that’s an example of being “fun” and “interesting” I think we can do well without.

As our late Queen said “recollections may vary”. My memory is that they didn’t actually make much in the way of a positive contribution. At best, if someone asked “how do I do this” they might respond with a “you don’t want to do that” along with a large side order of put down and showboating. I can’t remember any of them actually helping another member out, starting a positive thread, or revealing much about their own system choices or enthusiasm for music. That’s why I thought of them as the “object to it ists”, here to criticise others and above all get a reaction, but not to contribute positively.

Banned members are comparatively rare on this site. A number departed of their own volition a few years back as part of the “great sulk” following the intro of an objectivist sub forum. A number of them must have taken considerable time out from being “respected scientists and engineers” in order to support their prodigious posting rate on this site. That posting rate dwindled once they fled to other more like-minded sites- almost like they were here just for the trolling and arguments…

Great news on your DAC. Perhaps asking too much, but It would be good if Sigma were able to share the parts and sources for Resonessence owners who might be looking to get a repair done outside of N America. My Mirus has not needed attention so far (fingers crossed) but is back in my system and sounding fabulous. Definitely worth trying to keep these units alive.