Amir misses the point again: Looks for the music in the noise.

[plissken]

1 hour ago, Superdad said:

 

There is one data set being overlooked.  One which, while it does not directly and visually show the mechanics of the phenomenon, does demonstrate that it exists. I am speaking of course of the thousands of users of ours and similar products--and the ubiquitous and consistent reports of their efficacy.

 

But for some reason, the pseudo-scientists--rather than acknowledge the observed phenomenon and then collaborate to search for the measurements that correlate--would prefer to cling to non-revealing tests and deny possibilities beyond what they know. Bad science! 

 

Alex does your website have a single screenshot of any measurement of the output of a DAC before and after the Regen?

[manisandher]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Can you help me dis/prove this?

 

jkeny has been banned here, and coming in with a different username isn't allowed.

 

I'd rather not get involved in this, but scroll to the bottom here: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?18105-Audio-Science-Does-it-explain-everything-about-how-something-sounds/page26

 

Mani.

[mansr]

12 minutes ago, mmerrill99 said:

Fair enough, correct my misunderstanding!

No, I will not give you a university education for free.

[mmerrill99]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

No, I will not give you a university education for free.

Ok, not able to contradict any of my points - just handwaving !

[mansr]

6 minutes ago, plissken said:

Alex does your website have a single screenshot of any measurement of the output of a DAC before and after the Regen?

Rhetorical question of the day.

 

You and I both know Alex considers such measurements irrelevant to the functioning of the Regen.

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, manisandher said:

 

I'd rather not get involved in this, but scroll to the bottom here: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?18105-Audio-Science-Does-it-explain-everything-about-how-something-sounds/page26

 

Mani.

 

Thanks @manisandher

 

Bye @mmerrill99

[manisandher]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Thanks @manisandher

 

 

Can I just say that I'm not at all happy with this outcome. I just thought it was incredibly disingenuous of him not to state clearly in his signature that he's the manufacturer of USB equipment.

 

Chris, was there no other option but to ban him?

 

Mani.

[pkane2001]

1 minute ago, manisandher said:

I just thought it was incredibly disingenuous of him not to state clearly in his signature that he's the manufacturer of USB equipment.

 

I've asked him to admit this at least a couple of times in this very thread. My discussions with mmerrill99 would've been very different had I recognized him as jkeny earlier.

 

[plissken]

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

If you don't see a bias and agenda there, I don't know what to say. It's strange to see the headlines of his articles about Alex's product and Sonore products, where the large texts is THIS DOES NOTHING or THIS PRODUCT HAS ISSUES, then in small text in a comment way down the next page, you can read stuff like, oh I screwed up the test (microRendu) and oh I guess this does help with a DA (schiit).

 

I've seen front page news articles with a retraction printed later in a small text box some where else.

 

We will have to simply agree not to see eye to eye. Here is what I find myself asking: If Amir is out to get Alex then why publish absolutely irrefutable evidence of the product actually doing something positive? If I was Alex I would be asking to use Amir's measurement of the Modi 2 on their website and talking to Amir about the 60 Hz even/odd harmonics that are rife in the zoomed in plot.

 

5 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Reading his conclusions it's very obvious what he thinks. If he was really into objective analysis he wouldn't editorialize the results with adjectives like he does.

 

Again, where are the measurements of the Berkeley Audio Design products he sells, compared to $100 DACs? He isn't as altruistic as you may think. 

 

Go and ask him. He's right there saying that the output of a $79 DAC, with all sorts of I/O, has a noise distortion profile that is as good as $2000 pieces of gear. Berkeley and others not withstanding. If that isn't a clear indicator of lack of bias I don't know what to say to you to convince you otherwise.

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, manisandher said:

Chris, was there no other option but to ban him?

As annoying and disruptive as he's been, I'm happy to see him gone.

[plissken]

mmerrill was the first person to ever go on my ignore list. I won't miss him.

[The Computer Audiophile]

We have rules about not coming back after being banned. We also have rules about manufacturers identifying themselves. 

[k-man]

16 minutes ago, manisandher said:

Can I just say that I'm not at all happy with this outcome.

Mani, didn't you suspect he was phishing information about the Lush from Peter for his own manufacturing gain? 

[manisandher]

3 minutes ago, k-man said:

Mani, didn't you suspect he was phishing information about the Lush from Peter for his own manufacturing gain? 

 

Phishing for info, yes. But I really had no idea he was a manufacturer... until very recently.

 

Mani.

[k-man]

Sorry, I meant to imply I'm surprised by your sympathy towards JKeny's second ban. Had Peter been more liberal with his information we would quickly see his 'product' come out and hit Phasure commercially. It's bad enough to see less and less manufacturer's input on this site.

[Quadman]

It seems to me, and I am no engineer, that if one is trying to measure the effect of the Iso-regen on the signal coming out of a PC then why is the measurement being taken at the dac's analog outputs.  Wouldn't it make more sense to measure the test signals (what ever may be best) at the output of the isoregen before the dac and the output of a USB cable with no isoregen connected.  After all one is looking at what the isoregen does to the USB signal from the PC or what it does not do, why involve an entirely different set of electrical components to reach a conclusion.  I get it that in theory cleaner signal in should equal cleaner out, but there is so much we do not understand in measurements or what to actually measure.  Lets just isolate what we are trying to reach a conclusion on.  There are many drugs that in development work great in the lab but when introduced to living subjects things begin to happen that were totally unexpected.

 

I do not hear much of a sonic improvement with my isoregen and my dac the T+Adac8 DSD, it is very subtle but does not detract so it stays in.  Back when I got my Amber regen I was using a macbook air, AQ Jitterbug, wireworlds silver starlight USB and NAD M51 dac.  Inserting the regen in that chain was almost night and day sonically, and when I had to pull it out a few weeks later to go back to Alex (repair) I could not listen to my system until its return the sound was thin and un-involving.  Pretty sure you could never find a measurement that, but I know my system well and it was bad without.

[opus101]

2 hours ago, plissken said:

 

Chris, he DOESN'T have a BIAS against it.

 

Of course he has a bias against it. No other reason to claim on the 'review' that he has no bias. Its very basic psychology - he's only claiming that to deny his already existing bias. If he had no pre-existing bias there would be no claim of lack of bias.

[mansr]

58 minutes ago, Quadman said:

It seems to me, and I am no engineer, that if one is trying to measure the effect of the Iso-regen on the signal coming out of a PC then why is the measurement being taken at the dac's analog outputs.

Perhaps because it's the output from the DAC that you're actually listening to. If the output doesn't change, it doesn't matter what happens at the input.

[Speed Racer]

4 minutes ago, mansr said:

Perhaps because it's the output from the DAC that you're actually listening to. If the output doesn't change, it doesn't matter what happens at the input.

 

The whole point of a decrapifier is to improve the sound quality of the music. To me the only thing that matters is if what comes out of the DAC is better with the decrapifier in place. If it is not, what is the point??

[Quadman]

9 minutes ago, mansr said:

If the output doesn't change, it doesn't matter what happens at the input.

 

5 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

To me the only thing that matters is if what comes out of the DAC is better with the decrapifier in place. If it is not, what is the point??

 

I get the logic, but Uptone claims it cleans up and regenerates the signal from the PC, so to determine that one needs to measure at the output of the device (IR) and the wire itself without the device.  The dac does what it does.  What does the isoregen do to the signal thats what I want to know.   My ears can tell me if it sounds better or not in the analog domain, they can't tell me that in the digital domain.

[mansr]

11 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

The whole point of a decrapifier is to improve the sound quality of the music. To me the only thing that matters is if what comes out of the DAC is better with the decrapifier in place. If it is not, what is the point??

Exactly.

[plissken]

12 minutes ago, Quadman said:

 

 

I get the logic, but Uptone claims it cleans up and regenerates the signal from the PC, so to determine that one needs to measure at the output of the device (IR) and the wire itself without the device.  The dac does what it does.  What does the isoregen do to the signal thats what I want to know.   My ears can tell me if it sounds better or not in the analog domain, they can't tell me that in the digital domain.

 

What do you say to Benchmark taking a 100 foot cable and their DAC's output was rock stable while the signal going into it was saturated with errors?

[opus101]

7 minutes ago, Quadman said:

What does the isoregen do to the signal thats what I want to know.  

 

It should do nothing to the signal -- seeing as the signal is represented in a stream of numbers. But real-world DACs are not just sensitive to the numbers sent to them, they're also sensitive to common-mode noise on their digital inputs. I recall examining pictures of a Metrum DAC's (probably was the Octave) internal track routing and found that the grounding of the S/PDIF input was suboptimal so that common-mode noise on that digital input would likely affect its analog outputs.

[Superdad]

1 hour ago, Quadman said:

Wouldn't it make more sense to measure the test signals (what ever may be best) at the output of the isoregen before the dac and the output of a USB cable with no isoregen connected.

 

We did exactly that.  See the dramatic before and after eye-patterns I posted in the very first post of the Listering Impressions thread.

 

1 hour ago, Quadman said:

After all one is looking at what the isoregen does to the USB signal from the PC or what it does not do, why involve an entirely different set of electrical components to reach a conclusion.  I get it that in theory cleaner signal in should equal cleaner out, but there is so much we do not understand in measurements or what to actually measure.  Lets just isolate what we are trying to reach a conclusion on.

 

[Quadman]

Just now, plissken said:

What do you say to Benchmark taking a 100 foot cable and their DAC's output was rock stable

Not familiar with that but if the incoming signal had errors and the output was fine then the dac did some correction .

 

2 minutes ago, opus101 said:

It should do nothing to the signal

Doesn't Uptone claim it cleans up and regenerates the signal, that would be before the dac.  Look at the eye test Alex posted in the first post of Listening impressions of the IR, clearly a difference.  Granted a dac could still tell a 1 or 0 in the without but cleaner in generally equals cleaner out.