Jump to content

dc2bluelight

  • Posts

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, a test would be possible...but quite difficult. You'd need two complete systems, two identical "servers", routers, streamers. One with this thing, and one with a "standard" switch, then you'd ABX the outputs of the streaming servers...if you could ever get them synched. It's a mess, and no conducive to any practical "test". Better, you could measure some aspects of their claimed improvement, like "jitter reduction" and "re-clocking". That would be re-clocking of a self-clocked signal, though. The effects of jitter are pretty easy to dig for, it's probably the only thing you can actually test. However, Ethernet is, by definition, pretty darned noise-immune, even if using standard UTP Cat5. I just don't see what problem they think they are trying to solve. Yup, sure does. Didn't see that shot. Now, if I could get a copy of the manual I might be able to discern what they suggest for grounding. Lacking that, I think that little stud may go pretty much ignored, and at that point, most of the benefits of shielding the box and cables are moot. The fact that they go into huge detail as to what you'll hear with this thing tells me pretty much all I need to know. You'll pay up for it, get your audiophile net switch, plug it together with their overpriced cables, and you WILL hear a difference, because you've been told what you'll here... even if it's not really there. Every streaming player must, of necessity, include a buffer because data doesn't transfer over a net in a smooth constant rate stream, it flows in packets, and they won't decode into real audio until the real stream is reassembled in the playing device. That means there's already re-clocking, has to be. I'm still calling this an audiophile scam. And I'm afraid time won't tell.
  2. Total Blue Smoke. Many reasons. One is, it's a "shielded metal case" that is no doubt supposed to eliminate EMI, but the box has no ground connection. Duh. Then, they're specifically telling you what to expect, what you will hear. That's forced perception bias. And, there's no good way to ABX the thing. Pass.
  3. It's Chuck Ziska, he's in Florida, still servicing Crown decks, wanted mine for parts. I think he worked with John.
  4. Nice. The Crowns had a great look. And they were one of the few machines with really good high frequency response, you could squeeze almost 30KHz out if it at 15ips. Loved the glass guide idea too. Keeping them on-speed was the glitch. No real speed servo, and when the bearings wore in the sped up. The fix was to machine down the motor pulley. Otherwise, great deck. Fastest high wind speeds in the industry! I maintained a couple of those for 3 years, mid 1970s (1/2 track stereo R/P and a Play only), and bought two old decks recently from someone with junk in a storage locker (1/4 track 4 channel) which I resold to the one guy in the country who still fixes them. Nice Apt preamp too. I still have mine, though it's in pieces for a rehab (new relay and caps). Back on topic, the Apt is still useful for today's digital audio. The "mode" control is something I've always appreciated, and unique to the device. Really good for narrowing up those new digital releases of old ping-pong stereo masters, or widening the modern mixed-to-nearly-mono stuff. I'm anxious to get mine going and coupled to my digital rig.
  5. In the early 1980s I was associated with a university that developed a hardware interface with which to get 16 bit audio to and from a mini computer and hard drive. They ultimately used the system for directional hearing research and synthesis. Throughout the 1980s I was researching digital audio editing systems for a studio I worked for. In the early days you had the Sony DAE-1100 tape-based editor, and that was about it. I cut some 8 bit audio on a native editor built into the Mac OS 6 back then. A few years later the Studer Dyaxis system, Mac based (Mac Plus, if I recall) with a stack of 100mB SCSI drives, was the "good" computer based editor. It too minutes to render a 1/4 second crossfade. Then came ProTools, I think in the very early 1990s. Also Mac based, and faster, but still complex crossfades took under a minute to render. It's all been getting better since then.
  6. Probably not many hit their original performance, some may still be adequate, quite a few probably not. It's not so much the terrain as ground conductivity. With the plastic, depending on where it is in relation to the ground connection, you might not have a ground at all, but then, even old metallic water pipe may no longer provide an acceptable ground.
  7. Thanks for this George. I'd written my version, but didn't post it because I was coming off...well...snarky!
  8. Surges come from two general sources: inside the home and outside. Inside-generated surges (according to some surge-protector manufacturers at least) comprise most of the surges, like 90%. But they are generally short, relatively small in amplitude, and, they are nearly all differential, and are best dealt with by local protection at the equipment. Surges from the outside, unless you're in an industrial area, are largely common-mode, and lightning related. Those things are huge, and destructive, and need to be taken to ground at the point of entry to the building. Since the big concern in the surge-protection world is equipment destruction by a huge surge, the protection devices we need must deal with differential and common-mode, and depend on having a good ground to work with. Yes, that lets out the cheapie power strips you by at hardware stores. However, "insured" protectors are no guarantee either. Just ask anyone who's ever tried to make claim for damaged equipment. They have ways to wriggle out of those claims, and the guarantee is largely fictional. The other problem is having a good path to ground/earth at the equipment, which is usually not the case, and why people still have their gear destroyed with a surge protector in place. We should probably also mention, as you have implied already, that protection devices come in two flavors too: the self-sacrificing MOV kind, and the low-pass filter. Since a surge is mostly a high-speed transient, they can also be filtered off, which is also very effective, though quite expensive. Filter type protectors also usually include the 3 MOVs.
  9. Yes, I'm unfamiliar with the rules in other countries. However, it doesn't change there surge protection needs to be to be effective. So, in Au they don't permit "whole-house" surge protection at all?
  10. Proper surge protection places an MOV in parallel with the mains, then one from each leg to ground. Common-mode surges are some of the worst, and the parallel MOV doesn't even see them.
  11. No. In the US they are installed by electricians, or a homeowner can do it himself. Not sure about the rules down your way, but I don't see why it would be any differen Sorry, not correct. It's neither dangerous, nor does the utility care. It's installed on the customer's side of their service, the devices are designed to be installed at the breaker box, meant for the purpose, and can be installed easily without even turning all the power off. They simply connect to a two-pole breaker (turned off for installation) and ground. Here's a link to a product. I appreciate your mention of the quality of the mains earth/ground. People assume that they have a good ground connection, only to find out the hard way they don't. That rod hammered into the ground by the service entry may not be as good as we hope it is. But a lot of how surge protection works depends on a good ground.
  12. Interesting that Beethoven's hearing loss began at 26, and became so bad he had to use printed books to hold conversations, yet when it was at its worst is when he composed Missa Solemnis and the 9th Symphony, perhaps his biggest and most complex work. However, composition and evaluation of audio performance through listening aren't the same. It might be a bit harder for a deaf audio equipment reviewer to accomplish a comprehensive review based only on build quality. However, this isn't a black/white question, there are many types and degrees of hearing impairment, most of which still provide enough faculty to make valid observations. For example, detecting distortion doesn't require extended high frequency response. Evaluating speaker imaging doesn't even require exactly identical hearing in both ears. Listening is an acquired skill, not just an ability alone. I have to say, this "Logan's Run" mentality is getting a bit tiring.
  13. EMI filtering and varistors are two different devices, and handle two different issues. You may not need the EMI filter, but varistor surge protection isn't a bad idea. They need to be at the main breaker box to handle outside surges, but most surges occur inside homes, so local surge protectors are required too. The need for EMI filtering is actually pretty rare. There is no simple answer. Theoretically, they should not need to be grounded, but there are some cases when they have to be. The usual manifestation is hum. There's no easy test. Many people assume their power is horrid and filter. Most are doing that needlessly. The audibility question is debatable, and usually is. The evidence that power conditioning improves things generically is very fuzzy. You should actually read the cited references. There are far better and more verifiable ways to improve sound. I hate to say more, because the forum is generally unfriendly to my line of reasoning.
×
×
  • Create New...