My Summary about Computer Audio Music Server

[20hertz]

You may want to have a close look at that CEC, especially the output. { LOL }

http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/REFERENCES/CEC/CEC TL-1X.html

[asdf1000]

Eeep, from that link:
 

"CEC sounds smooth and analog like NOT because of the belt thing, but because CEC engineers modified the SPDIF trace to be unrecognizable as square. They filtered it and reshaped it to be without the low square harmonic fundamental. So DACS read it but lack bass. This is the fake analog smoothness which was created to fool people into the belt bullshit story.  And NOBODY EVER discovered this."

 

[FredericV]

On 6/9/2018 at 2:41 PM, amir57bs said:

music server could not beat CEC TLx 3.0 and it is better to pay for CEC Transport.

 

Not sure if it's the same CEC, but one of my resellers listens to a 28k euro CEC and he finds our 432 EVO MASTER server better:
 

In fact in the Aries Cerat + 432 EVO MASTER system that won best of show 2017 in Munich from both Hifi Pig & AVShowrooms, the CEC was taken to the booth as backup but never played. In his home we compared some Bach CD on his CEC and also ripped it on the server. On this system, the difference in favor of the server was not small.

[amir57bs]

7 hours ago, tmtomh said:

 

It is clear that English is not your first/native language - but you write English perfectly well, and in my experience you have expressed your views very clearly.

 

So it's not that I (or anyone else) misunderstands you. No - it's that we disagree with you. I don't agree, for example, that a 100-watt solid state amplifier and 88dB efficiency speakers are incapable of producing micro-dynamics. And I don't agree with your blanket assertion that computer-based audio also is incapable of producing this.

 

And my understanding is that most of the other folks taking issue with your comments here would feel similarly.

 

Thank you

if you believe 88db efficiency speakers with 100w solid-state amplifiers are capable of producing micro-dynamics please let me know which speaker or amplifier is capable of that?

do you believe most 88db speakers are capable or just very few 88db speakers are capable?

 

I have heard many many many audio systems in Tehran , all expensive (over 200k) brands like kharma marten Wilson focal dynaudio TAD Gryphon krell Vitus ASR CJ AR  and  so but none of them sounded like tanoy red (old model) or audio note uk speaker.

when you hear low efficiency speakers with high power ss amplifiers you just have macro dynamics not micro dynamics.

for checking micro dynamics you can check these items:

- decay of sound when it goes to hide

- liveness and fullness of sound when you decrease the volume

- Volume resolution when you change the volume very very slow

- fuller sound similar to LP playback

 

micro dynamics in music inject energy and without it the sound has no soul.

listen to FM Acoustics or Vitus Audio , they are king of transparency resolution smoothness and pinnacle of every audiophile but where is the soul ? where is the emotion? me and some guys (may be 5% of audiophiles think like me)  do not like these sounds. it is boring to us.

 

listen to Audio Note Kondo Japan with Living Voice horn they are not in super resolution category but they give you true life true music true enjoyment. 

 

I just say Computer audio is not in the same direction we would like to be. I spend over 20k or 30k I do not remember but I had no gain when I compare it to CEC TL0 -X.

[amir57bs]

2 hours ago, 20hertz said:

You may want to have a close look at that CEC, especially the output. { LOL }

http://www.lampizator.eu/lampizator/REFERENCES/CEC/CEC TL-1X.html

 

please read about kondo transformers and their non linear measurement.

please check tube amplifier measurements in Stereophile . all tube amplifiers are not as linear as transistors and they have more distortion.

please read subjective vs objective debates in audio.

 

in real world we never heard good sound from good measurement components.

halcro is zero distortion but it sounds lifeless.

 

all CEC models are not my cup of tea but only reference Transport CEC TL0-X 3.0 is very very different .

you see it's measurement is not good but it's sound is wonderful.

 

[amir57bs]

1 hour ago, Em2016 said:

Eeep, from that link:
 

"CEC sounds smooth and analog like NOT because of the belt thing, but because CEC engineers modified the SPDIF trace to be unrecognizable as square. They filtered it and reshaped it to be without the low square harmonic fundamental. So DACS read it but lack bass. This is the fake analog smoothness which was created to fool people into the belt bullshit story.  And NOBODY EVER discovered this."

 

 

lampizator designer wrote it about other models not TL0-X .

the CEC TL0-X has very good bass.

no body exactly knows why it's sound is wonderful. CEC TL0-X is the only transport that give me best micro dynamics.

it is magic

[amir57bs]

44 minutes ago, FredericV said:

 

Not sure if it's the same CEC, but one of my resellers listens to a 28k euro CEC and he finds our 432 EVO MASTER server better:
 

In fact in the Aries Cerat + 432 EVO MASTER system that won best of show 2017 in Munich from both Hifi Pig & AVShowrooms, the CEC was taken to the booth as backup but never played. In his home we compared some Bach CD on his CEC and also ripped it on the server. On this system, the difference in favor of the server was not small.

 

I do not care about hifi awards or magazine stars. my CAD GC3 Ground control is highly recommended by roy Gregory (hifi plus reviewer) but GC3 is real crap in my system. it kills micro dynamics and it is very very bad.

I say micro dynamics of CEC is far better than other transports and you can hear it if you have a system capable of showing those micro dynamics. it means if your speakers filter the micro dynamics then you can not hear difference of CEC vs other transports.

do not forget reviewers awards is not about micro dynamics or emotion or life , reviewers like to hear better macro dynamics and more hyper resolutions. in my idea they are not trusted .

 

listen to CEC/Kondo/Living Voice in Munich and you will find what's my ideal sound.

I do not like magico room Gryphon room CAD room and those 5star winners.

[amir57bs]

those guys who think I am wrong please check this article :

http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/art_audio_hell.shtml

 

if you want to know which is right about performance of audio system you should check this method.

I compared two speakers:

1- gryphon trident speaker 3way 95,000$

2- Living Voice IBX-RW3 2way 12000$

 

I used comparison by contrast method and I heard CD vs Vinyl of same Album.

 

Gryphon sounds more similar when I play CD vs Vinyl.

Living Voice shows more contrast between two media.

 

it means Gryphon filter more information in sound.

95% audiophiles prefer sound of Gryphon because they think gryphon has more resolution more dynamics but me and 5% others prefer sound of living voice.

 

comparison by contrast could show you which audio system filter less information.

 

 

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, amir57bs said:

I say micro dynamics of CEC is far better than other transports and you can hear it if you have a system capable of showing those micro dynamics. it means if your speakers filter the micro dynamics then you can not hear difference of CEC vs other transports.

do not forget reviewers awards is not about micro dynamics or emotion or life , reviewers like to hear better macro dynamics and more hyper resolutions. in my idea they are not trusted .

 

it's quite the opposite, we heard more soundstage with our server compared to the CEC in Ultisone's demo room, which has far better acoustics than most rooms

this certainly qualifies as micro-detail - not macro-detail
 

 

yes the Aries Cerat speakers certainly can slam and feature very big dynamics, but they also have a lot of micro-detail

[amir57bs]

1 hour ago, FredericV said:

 

it's quite the opposite, we heard more soundstage with our server compared to the CEC in Ultisone's demo room, which has far better acoustics than most rooms

this certainly qualifies as micro-detail - not macro-detail
 

 

yes the Aries Cerat speakers certainly can slam and feature very big dynamics, but they also have a lot of micro-detail

 

micro detail is not micro dynamics.

let me know which CEC model was there?

let me know about loudspeaker spec?

[KingRex]

I creates a topic in another forum that directly addresses posters such as Amir.  It simply questioned should he insert his opinion if he never heard it.  Amir is wealthy. One day he will be posting how his PC server is so much better than his CD player.  Give him time to evolve.  If he has good ears and an open mind, he will one day hear the difference. 

 

He is also chasing a sound.  I have open baffle and just upgrades to a horn model.  I like the airy presentation myself.  I'm not as into the Boulder / Wilson sound myself.  Comparing my vinyl to server a couple days ago I still find it a toss up what I like.  The digital is much more full and tonally saturated.  Digital has better bass with harmonic bloom.  The vinyl is a bit more thin but has a nice naturalness around simple music focuses on a particular instrument such as a violin or saxophone.  Once the band and singer step back in, it does not have the body to step it all up.  

 

In short, my server sounds amazing compared to my $7k analog.  It's very musical and my go to over analog.  I like the rich density and natural tone more than the simple exacting of one instrument. 

 

I have also taken my amps direct to the Voxativ driver bypassing the crossover.  That was the most amazing and pure violin tone I ever heard.  However that was all it could do.  Maybe Amir is singularly focuses on one tone and instrument.  He found a setup that can do that one thing right, but mistakenly extrapolated it does it across all genera of music.  It happens.  It's part of the Honeymoon phase.  

[tmtomh]

9 hours ago, amir57bs said:

 

Thank you

if you believe 88db efficiency speakers with 100w solid-state amplifiers are capable of producing micro-dynamics please let me know which speaker or amplifier is capable of that?

do you believe most 88db speakers are capable or just very few 88db speakers are capable?

 

I have heard many many many audio systems in Tehran , all expensive (over 200k) brands like kharma marten Wilson focal dynaudio TAD Gryphon krell Vitus ASR CJ AR  and  so but none of them sounded like tanoy red (old model) or audio note uk speaker.

when you hear low efficiency speakers with high power ss amplifiers you just have macro dynamics not micro dynamics.

for checking micro dynamics you can check these items:

- decay of sound when it goes to hide

- liveness and fullness of sound when you decrease the volume

- Volume resolution when you change the volume very very slow

- fuller sound similar to LP playback

 

micro dynamics in music inject energy and without it the sound has no soul.

listen to FM Acoustics or Vitus Audio , they are king of transparency resolution smoothness and pinnacle of every audiophile but where is the soul ? where is the emotion? me and some guys (may be 5% of audiophiles think like me)  do not like these sounds. it is boring to us.

 

listen to Audio Note Kondo Japan with Living Voice horn they are not in super resolution category but they give you true life true music true enjoyment. 

 

I just say Computer audio is not in the same direction we would like to be. I spend over 20k or 30k I do not remember but I had no gain when I compare it to CEC TL0 -X.

 

Thanks for your reply. This is good, because we are making progress in getting more clearly and more directly to the reason we are disagreeing.

 

In the four items bolded above, my view is that you are mixing together different sonic characteristics. First off, there are plenty of high quality stereo components and setups, of all different designs, that excel when it comes to transient decay, reverb tails, and so on. And there are plenty of systems, of different designs, that maintain impactful, detailed "lively and full" sound at lower volumes. Similarly, volume resolution has much more to do with the design and style of the system's volume control and how a system's components match  up (or don't match up) when it comes to gain and impedance.

 

Finally. "fuller sound similar to LP playback" has nothing to do with micro-dynamics or with increased fidelity compared to digital. Among its many variable and potentially euphonic (distorted but pleasant) factors, vinyl playback is known for mid-bass warmth from resonance in the system, and for a "cohesive" (maybe "full") soundstage because of frequency-variable channel crosstalk from the cartridge. These two qualities do often produce a different sonic character from LP, and lots of people like that. But it's got nothing to do with micro-dynamics, and it's certainly not objectively better.

 

It seems clear from your comments that you prize what you call LP-style sound, and what you call (inaccurately in my view) micro-dynamics. From this latest comment, it also seems clear that you don't care as much about resolution and micro-detail. And this leads you - as it leads many folks in the audiophile press - to make the same old argument: Not only do measurements not tell the whole story, but also that measurements specifically are the opposite of good sound - equipment that measures well doesn't sound truly good.

As a personal preference of yours, I have no problem with that - you should enjoy what you enjoy. But when you try to explain and justify your personal preference with factual-sounding claims that are demonstrably untrue and muddled, then I will take issue with that.

 

[amir57bs]

53 minutes ago, KingRex said:

I creates a topic in another forum that directly addresses posters such as Amir.  It simply questioned should he insert his opinion if he never heard it.  Amir is wealthy. One day he will be posting how his PC server is so much better than his CD player.  Give him time to evolve.  If he has good ears and an open mind, he will one day hear the difference. 

 

He is also chasing a sound.  I have open baffle and just upgrades to a horn model.  I like the airy presentation myself.  I'm not as into the Boulder / Wilson sound myself.  Comparing my vinyl to server a couple days ago I still find it a toss up what I like.  The digital is much more full and tonally saturated.  Digital has better bass with harmonic bloom.  The vinyl is a bit more thin but has a nice naturalness around simple music focuses on a particular instrument such as a violin or saxophone.  Once the band and singer step back in, it does not have the body to step it all up.  

 

In short, my server sounds amazing compared to my $7k analog.  It's very musical and my go to over analog.  I like the rich density and natural tone more than the simple exacting of one instrument. 

 

I have also taken my amps direct to the Voxativ driver bypassing the crossover.  That was the most amazing and pure violin tone I ever heard.  However that was all it could do.  Maybe Amir is singularly focuses on one tone and instrument.  He found a setup that can do that one thing right, but mistakenly extrapolated it does it across all genera of music.  It happens.  It's part of the Honeymoon phase.  

 

I think i can not undrestand your english , my english reading is not good then i could not answer you , if it is possible to you please write it simple and short.

We could discuss about objective common grounds not pure subjective views.

please let me discuss about very clear idea: test by comparison by contrast .

the article is in audio note uk website.

 

You know All Audio systems filter music data and more transparent systems filter less. 

i think this idea is clear to all of us.

More transparent glasses let you see more accurate. It means if your audio system filter less then you hear more information.

 

If you want to Judge my view about PC audio you can compare PC audio Transport vs CEC TL0-X by this method (comparison by contrast method).

 

You will find CEC TL0-X give you more contrast when you hear some different records.

you can also change other parts of system like cables. For example you can change interconnect and see which system show you more contrast between two interconnects.

if CEC shows more difference between two cables then it means CEC filter less.

you should have a good loudspeaker for this test.

 

this method show you the real resolution is not what you think about resolution.

 

 

[amir57bs]

1 hour ago, tmtomh said:

 

Thanks for your reply. This is good, because we are making progress in getting more clearly and more directly to the reason we are disagreeing.

 

In the four items bolded above, my view is that you are mixing together different sonic characteristics. First off, there are plenty of high quality stereo components and setups, of all different designs, that excel when it comes to transient decay, reverb tails, and so on. And there are plenty of systems, of different designs, that maintain impactful, detailed "lively and full" sound at lower volumes. Similarly, volume resolution has much more to do with the design and style of the system's volume control and how a system's components match  up (or don't match up) when it comes to gain and impedance.

 

Finally. "fuller sound similar to LP playback" has nothing to do with micro-dynamics or with increased fidelity compared to digital. Among its many variable and potentially euphonic (distorted but pleasant) factors, vinyl playback is known for mid-bass warmth from resonance in the system, and for a "cohesive" (maybe "full") soundstage because of frequency-variable channel crosstalk from the cartridge. These two qualities do often produce a different sonic character from LP, and lots of people like that. But it's got nothing to do with micro-dynamics, and it's certainly not objectively better.

 

It seems clear from your comments that you prize what you call LP-style sound, and what you call (inaccurately in my view) micro-dynamics. From this latest comment, it also seems clear that you don't care as much about resolution and micro-detail. And this leads you - as it leads many folks in the audiophile press - to make the same old argument: Not only do measurements not tell the whole story, but also that measurements specifically are the opposite of good sound - equipment that measures well doesn't sound truly good.

As a personal preference of yours, I have no problem with that - you should enjoy what you enjoy. But when you try to explain and justify your personal preference with factual-sounding claims that are demonstrably untrue and muddled, then I will take issue with that.

 

 

I think all of my description about micro dynamics refer to one thing .

Micro dynamic means ability of system to response faster and more linear to micro vibraton in sound.

Right Decay in sound means better micro dynamics because system should process low level signal .

better sound in low level volume means system has right response to micro dynamics.

Volume resolution means your system has more sensitivity to changing volume and it means your system filter less micro dynamics and it has wider dynamic range.

if i refer to full sound of lp it has no relation to tone or pleasant distortion.

Check jim smith book , get better sound, it shows by diagram the LP is more linear at low level signal.

 

I can describe sound of every system when i hear it. I do not mix different characters of sound.

 

most audio systems do not response right to micro dynamics. 

Again and again i think the best way to check my ideas is checking Comparison by contrast method.

 

it will show you Kondo Audio note (thd 1%) filter less than halcro (THD 0.00001%) and PC audio filter more than CEC TL0-X.

 

i do not say PC audio will not beat CEC TL0-X but i am sure it is not easy.

In 2018 no PC audio could attack CEC TL0-X . I just say do not waste your money if you are perfectionist.

[FredericV]

15 hours ago, amir57bs said:

i do not say PC audio will not beat CEC TL0-X but i am sure it is not easy.

In 2018 no PC audio could attack CEC TL0-X . I just say do not waste your money if you are perfectionist.

 

It's possible. Our server can do it easily.
Take a plane to Brussels and take a taxi to Ultisone in Herent near Leuven.
 

He can update your map of the hifi world

[KingRex]

https://darko.audio/2017/07/kih-46-mqas-missing-link/

 

Frederic, Interesting read on your server and MQA.  Curious what your server really sounds like.  

[amir57bs]

They slow down to 432 hz by digital processing.

I never found any dsp (digital signal processing) sound good .

I prefer minimal design in DAC.

 

we have tested AMR DP-777 , it sounded best when we adjust it bit perfect I (no dsp no digital filter no analog filter).

Check time domain response of AMR in stereophile.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/abbingdon-music-research-dp-777-da-processor-measurements

 

The perfect time domain response is bit-perfect I .

i really do not like any digital processing.

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, amir57bs said:

They slow down to 432 hz by digital processing.

I never found any dsp (digital signal processing) sound good .

I prefer minimal design in DAC.

 

You can use bitperfect mode, or just upsample with 10 selectable filters (and leave the music tuning as-is), or combined with 432 Hz processing.

In Munich 2017 (Aries Cerat room) we just use upsampling, without the 432 Hz conversion, in Munich 2018 we used the archimago intermediate phase filter combined with 432 Hz. Our Belgian dealer Ultisone uses bitperfect mode and it easily beats his CEC. The same CEC was also in the Aries Cerat Munich 2017 room as backup, but it was not used for demo's.

 

[amir57bs]

7 hours ago, FredericV said:

 

You can use bitperfect mode, or just upsample with 10 selectable filters (and leave the music tuning as-is), or combined with 432 Hz processing.

In Munich 2017 (Aries Cerat room) we just use upsampling, without the 432 Hz conversion, in Munich 2018 we used the archimago intermediate phase filter combined with 432 Hz. Our Belgian dealer Ultisone uses bitperfect mode and it easily beats his CEC. The same CEC was also in the Aries Cerat Munich 2017 room as backup, but it was not used for demo's.

 

 

CEC has different models , which transport used by your dealer?

 

i will come to munich 2019 and if you have room i will visit you.

 

My macbook pro/Berkeley beat many transports but it could not beat CEC TL-0 .

other models of CEC are far from TL-0 model.

[jabbr]

7 hours ago, FredericV said:

 

You can use bitperfect mode, or just upsample with 10 selectable filters (and leave the music tuning as-is), or combined with 432 Hz processing.

In Munich 2017 (Aries Cerat room) we just use upsampling, without the 432 Hz conversion, in Munich 2018 we used the archimago intermediate phase filter combined with 432 Hz. Our Belgian dealer Ultisone uses bitperfect mode and it easily beats his CEC. The same CEC was also in the Aries Cerat Munich 2017 room as backup, but it was not used for demo's.

 

 

You sound like a marketing person/advertisement.

 

432 Hz conversion -- pretty good one!!!

 

You got any reason why this makes any difference at 24 Mhz upsampling -- not just your BS but like measurements, 'cause y'know sampling theory and all says this makes zero sense, and well ... sounds like a marketing gimmick. In any case if you were making recordings at 432 Hz, well perhaps we could talk, not that it would matter... this is digital sampling, right?

 

(no I don't want to hear it unless you've got some surprising and compelling explanation)

[FredericV]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

 

You sound like a marketing person/advertisement.

 

432 Hz conversion -- pretty good one!!!

 

You got any reason why this makes any difference at 24 Mhz upsampling -- not just your BS but like measurements, 'cause y'know sampling theory and all says this makes zero sense, and well ... sounds like a marketing gimmick. In any case if you were making recordings at 432 Hz, well perhaps we could talk, not that it would matter... this is digital sampling, right?

 

(no I don't want to hear it unless you've got some surprising and compelling explanation)

 

A study done by Maria Renold shows 90% prefers 432 Hz, tested on 2.000 persons:

http://432evo.be/documents/pdf/study.pdf
 

We did a smaller test (before even considering building a commercial product around 432 Hz) and came to 58/60 who preferred it over the standard A=440 Hz tuning. Important is NOT to use pitch shift, but rate/speed shift. Otherwise these results are impossible to obtain.

Making native recordings in 432 Hz is very difficult if not impossible with contemporary instruments (e.g. try modifying a sax for 432 Hz), and it can't solve the fact that the existing catalogs are in the A=440 Hz standard.

432 EVO actually helped a new Jazz band to create their first CD + hires album in 432 Hz, because it was impossible to tune the sax of the band leader into 432 Hz. Here's how we did that, with confirmation from the band that the 432 Hz version was better:

http://432evo.be/index.php/432-hz-en/tick-tock-by-jazzprofilactika

We are not forcing you to use this conversion feature, and we have customers who use it in bitperfect mode.

[jparvio]

This might be partially OT, but eventually touches the issue...

 

An interesting debate yet not without it´s problems. Not to take sides on (computer vs. transport) debate I somewhat understand Amir´s agenda. Having said that I can relate to the "modern sound" is worse than "old" -proposition.

 

Having heard a variation of systems I sometimes find myself wondering have we lost the way. I do respect those tour de tech force-products that try to (over)achieve. I am sure the few who can afford these multidollar monuments (big Wilsons, YG´s, Magico´s and so on) will be happy until the next generation or update is available. 

 

My motto is simple; if the sound does not touch You, it is not worth it. As we know, an interaction between room and speakers is the most important factor in creating aural wonders. Yet other speakers create the hard to describe "feeling factor" better than others. What I find intriguing is that these special moments are rarely achieved by the latest technological improvements (ie. better driver-, cone- etc. materials). Admittedly new is almost every time better by definition; resolution, neutrality, less distortion... But involvement, feeling, emotions are better served with something else (YMMV).

 

Once again this became evident a while ago when a friend of mine was looking for a system from ground up. After listening to many setups he faced this same questions as we all do; what is the (personal) goal and how to get there. His process is still ongoing but a milestone has already been found; big 15" paper basses, horn structure for tweeter and over 94dB sensitivity, tubes, r2r-dac... Well You get the point. 

 

I cannot wait until we get to dwell deeper into digital front end... Perhaps he ends up buying a turntable instead

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

[jabbr]

5 hours ago, FredericV said:

A study done by Maria Renold shows 90% prefers 432 Hz, tested on 2.000 persons:

http://432evo.be/documents/pdf/study.pdf
 

 

Look, that study has nothing to do with anything we are doing here — namely recordings of music. Nor do you describe what your processing is actually doing.

 

Are you actually slowing down the recording slightly?!!! That’s f$($)d up.

 

You seem to be promoting a commercial product here. 

 

Show me some real evidence that it does anything.at all. I’m highly skeptical. I don’t care what your customers prefer. Tell me how it works with proper technical terminology (duh! scales, that’s trivial)

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, jabbr said:

Are you actually slowing down the recording slightly?!!! That’s f$($)d up.

Yes and the quoted study does not deal with a  potential bias that slower, lower pitched might be prefered in general.

[KingRex]

I don't think he is changing the tempo, just detuning.  I know this is a gimmick with Blue's players.  

 

When I pulled up his server I was interested in his filters and how the server was eliminating ringing, as well as using the partial MQA unfold and completing the process.  

 

I gather my AO and my HQ player are both filtering the sound from my server.  I don't have any technical background.  I just k ow what sounds good.  While. bing pretty stunned by the performance of my server, of late it is falling a little short of my Vinyl in one area.  The vinyl is a little more clear and on simple passages of say a violin, it is almost as if the vibration of the record groove transmission through the needle is more able to recreate a true reproduction of the Vibration of a bowed string.  I am trying to clean up what ever haze I have and hopefully best my vinyl in that reproduction.  

 

Jparvio, is your friend using the Pure Audio Project Trio 15 with horn. I just upgraded from the Trio 10 with Voxativ to 15 with horn.  I get them in about a week.  Super excited.