Jump to content
IGNORED

Massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming?


Recommended Posts

Speaking of Tilray, one of their Board of Directors "completed the Cable Management program at Harvard Business School." Really!

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, lmitche said:

 

I prefer to believe @jabbr's version. ;) 

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Harvard...

The cable guy got his diploma there.

They even made a film about it. 

Lol quotes:

Edge of my seat..

Strong emotions..

 

I now hear colours...

The best thing ever, since i had liver fava beans and a nice chiantia 

 

Curriculum 

How to bullshit customers

Over charge existing customers.

The classic: An engineer is on route....

 

 

Link to comment
On 11/25/2018 at 12:13 AM, tapatrick said:

I just popped by here out of interest to see whats going on in the 'hope' that maybe those with audio engineering experience and interest may be able to shed some light on how £120 NUC endpoints running AL headless in ram sound superior to more expensive products (for those who have tried it).

 

Sadly doesn't seem like that what's happening here but I'm sure over time light will be shed on why the benefits are occurring and I'm also pretty sure we will all be interested to know. Then even better products can be produced.

 

It's all pretty simple, really - all one needs is some combination of circuitry that doesn't by some pathway cause the analogue area of the playback chain to be significantly degraded. This can be an exceedingly cheap and simple arrangement - all it has to do is behave itself, electrically. Those who need high performance devices to be, a) expensive, b) esoteric, c) highly complex, using the latest whiz bang technology; or a combination of those factors, will be unhappy with that sort of answer - they belong to the Add Goodness! school of audio thinking, and will never be fully happy ...

 

Luck on getting a combo of gear that does it right, and all's good - the parts of the system do what's necessary without causing undue interference elsewhere, and you can concentrate on getting the analogue bits working better. Why it happens to work correctly is like asking why a module of functionality in your car, say the braking system, is good enough - ummm, if it just works without making me aware of perhaps now and again that it isn't "perfect", then, I don't have to worry about it.

Link to comment

The braking system in my car is good enough because engineers created adequate amplification to produce plenty of brake torque, modulation, anti-dive, and thermal management for both equilibrial and transient conditions.

 

"ummm, if it just works" doesn't cut it - for brakes or for HiFi

Link to comment

In the vehicle field there is a long history of development, and enormous feedback from drivers who have either been paid by the car companies to do extreme testing, or who have complained to the dealer, etc, about the quality of the braking - there was evolution to the point where this was completely under control, from the point of ensuring adequate quality.

 

This hasn't happened in audio. If customers complain that how the source material is read and transferred to the remainder of the chain affects what they hear the "real" engineers take no notice of what they say ... it's all in your head, etc; every excuse is used, to avoid actually paying closer attention to what might be happening.

 

Which is why we have the craziness of exorbitantly priced, 'snake oil' solutions peddled by all and sundry - someone's gotta have the answer for me being able to get the sound I like! :P

Link to comment
On 12/1/2018 at 5:14 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

Really?  Considering the intervening anatomy, that is hard to understand.  Do you have a reference?

 

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2702/810e3bfde17fc044cd7775b49e9c9a77ee8f.pdf

 

Unfortunately from Oohashi.

 

Eye conductance of ultrasonics to inner ear. 

@Arpiben

@Ralf11

 

 

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
  • 3 months later...
On 11/16/2018 at 5:01 PM, diecaster said:

The purpose of these thread is to allow free and open discussion about some the ideas and solutions floated and used in the "A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming" thread. In that thread, you aren't allowed to make posts that question the validity of what is being done there. You aren't allowed to suggest that expectation bias may be the cause of the improvement being heard. You aren't even allowed to make observations that would cause people to think about why what they are doing makes or does not make sense. 

 

That thread has spent a lot of time and money on the idea that clocks are incredibly important as is low noise on Ethernet and USB connections and that quality USB was critical to improving sound quality. A recent idea is that lowering the latency of the server makes a difference in sound quality. An even newer idea is that using a NUC with AudioLinux in RAM as an endpoint (NAA and ?) is better than an SOtM ultra or an ultraRendu. When I read that, I posted this:

 

 

That got deleted because I had the gall to suggest that expectation bias might be at play and ask questions they can't possibly answer. I responded with this:

 

 

This post was deleted too.

 

So, let's assume for a moment that the observations are correct. Why would latency make a difference in sound quality? Why would a NUC with crappy clocks that makes a lot of noise on its USB ports running AudioLinux in RAM be a better endpoint than the SOtM Ultra with a super duper external clock and low noise purpose built motherboard with ultra quiet power and a fantastic USB implementation? Factor in that the DAC throttles the USB on the endpoint to keep its buffer from overfilling as their are no retransmissions in USB which should negate any latency advantages of the OS running in RAM.

 

Anyone care to discuss this?

 

 

Apparently, AL is not good anymore. The wow of this time is euphony. Best sound ever. etc etc etc

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...