Paul R

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About Paul R

  • Rank
    Ph.D. Level Member

Recent Profile Visitors

17,120 profile views
  1. Perhaps, but pretty obviously, you have some weird agenda to promote, whatever that might be. Macs and the OS that they run are designed and built by one company, with one unified vision. They simply work better because of that. If you want to see something comparable, have a look at the Microsoft Surface computers. Hardware and OS designed and built by one company, and to nobody's surprise, they work better because of that. You are welcome to your preference all you want, but no way does a $500 cheap laptop even come close to playing in the same league as a MacBook. Macs are simply better. Same is true of the $500 PC world vs a Mac Mini. -Paul
  2. They were overloading for a while, but are gone now. Really clean interface, and runs nicely. Will take a little getting used to, but I really like it. Especially love the email notifications are back. -Paul
  3. Nice! Can one still turn off the ads?
  4. No need - I know that Apple is not buying from your friend, but receives their music digitally. No RIPs involved. -Paul
  5. Of course, you *can* - just not legally. The reason though, is that Apple certifies every piece of hardware it sells to work flawlessly with MacOS. Disks and Flash memory just work. Keyboards connect and mice scribble all over the screen. Video resolution works. Network cards are never unknown. Wireless networks just work. And so on and so on. Microsoft does not certify hardware for Windows on any hardware save the Surface. (Ever wonder why a surface runs so well? There's your answer.) You pay a little bit of a premium for that, but you get to spend the time listening to music, not fiddling around with incompatible hardware, or translating chinese instructions to English only to find out it says "does not work with Windows 10!" By the way, you pay the same premium cost for the Surface you would for Apple equipment. More actually, in some cases. -Paul
  6. Time warp - it must be 01 April 2017.... (grin) -Paul
  7. Yep - me too. That is a well thought out sweet system. Think about adding multi-channel audio and/or video. -Paul
  8. My opinion - sending sound over HDMI sounds great. My experience with NUC and HDMI (using JRiver 22) - the darn NUC, Windows, JRMC, or some combination insists that music get transcoded to 48khz and sent over that channel. Mac Mini's will usually work, but honestly, not all that much better. It's just a royal PITA. Best answer to that, grab an Oppo 105, which can stream everything over HDMI, sounds great, and has the added advantage of playing multi-channel soundtracks back too. Great investment I think. -Paul
  9. We spent some time with the Mu-so over the weekend, and we definitely love it. Turned out there were a couple (potential) showstoppers with it for us though. We were looking at it to replace a Sono's PlayBar under the television and to provide higher quality music in the TV room. We purposely did not mount the playbar with the TV as we wanted to play with the sound. Instead, we sat the player under the TV on a couple of the Ikea "Kallas" shelving units. These serve as a nice space for any electronics (err... objects d'art ) that we (Karen) decides to put there, and actually look really good. The 65" television floats over most of one shelf. The absence of large speakers in the room means that we are pleased with the look of the room. But a Playbar, even with the additional sub plugged in behind a couch, just sounds too small and tinny in this space. It strains to fill the space enough to make TV dialog audible, and music just feels dead and uninviting though it.In this space - in our previous home, with very high sloped ceilings and a loft to resonate around in, it sounded great. There is also a 12' wall of bookcases on the other side of the room acting as acoustic treatments as well... That can kind of deaden most any sound! First, we looked at the Mu-so in an Apple store. This is not the best environment but we figured at the cost point, we could take a chance. Plus there is a 14 day return policy. The Apple store did not have the Naim app installed anywhere, and didn't have the Naim on a public network that would allow me to access it. Given that, it was impossible to test streaming any of our music to it. The Apple store guys were shocked we even asked, and told us no-one has ever asked about it before. They apparently sell about 15 of these per month, so I was even more surprised than they were. That wasn't a total showstopper though. Not being able to ensure we could turn off the front light was. That light was bright, and in a darkened room watching television, it would have been glaring. The manual said one could *dim* the light, but never gave specifics on exactly how dim. Secondly, the case was gorgeous, but we had thought it was black. The silver would have shown up like a spotlight on the black shelves under the black TV. That was actually "the" showstopper for us. We went with our #2 choice, which is a Bowers and Wilkens Panorama 2 Soundbar. Sound wise, there is not doubt the Naim was better, but in terms of a visible fit into the target environment, the B&W worked much better. Sound wise, the B&W lacks deep bass and has some soundstage limitations, but if you are in front of the device playing music, it sounds very good indeed. What bass is there is tangible, clean, and precise in our room. It is not muddled at all by whatever property it is that often makes the frequency of a bass signal difficult to hear. (100hz hump type of thing...) Amazingly, the B&W will take the DSD signal over HDMI from our BRP when we play SACD disks. It also properly decodes multi-channel audio from DVD-A and BluRay audio disks. Does it sound as good as the full system? Nope. But then, with a list price of $2,200, and a street price of $1200, who would expect it to? It doesn't have any streaming capability at all, so I hooked up a Sono's Connect to the optical input. That sounds very good, better than streaming Apple Music through the Apple TV. That 48hz conversion the ATV forces does something unpleasant to the music. And of course, with Sonos, we get Apple Music, our local library, internet radio, Spotify, and dozens of other services. No hi-res streaming, though we have hopes of encouraging the BRP to that. All in all, musically, we would have been happier with the Naim Mu-so - there is absolutely no doubt it sounds superior. But the esthetics were what caused us to rule it out. On the other hand, my office has a space that would be just perfect for one, and father's day is coming up soon... -Paul
  10. We do agree in the main, and probably mostly in detail too. i think $20 Ethernet cables are pricey, and usually suggest that if someone feels their ethernet cables are making a dramatic difference, something else is wrong in their network. I often recommend that these folks try using wireless networking, which may sound a little counter-intuitive, but often produces satisfying results for them. (shrug) Sometimes the armchair engineers drive me slightly bananas - as they latch onto something and defend it to death, come hell, high water, facts, observations, or even quantum tunneled cables. (grin) There are certainly a lot of things we do not know about audio, and I strongly expect the things that puzzle us or are mysterious today, will be found to have simple and clear explanations in the future. Probably driven by observations that describe things that just "should not be!" -Paul
  11. Okay - just a misjudgment on my part then. But no - you assume that most people making that claim are "unscientific" or just making a wild ass unsupported statement. This is simply not so - at least for the most part, Rather than what you have is a large group of very careful amateurs making careful, and often very controlled observations. And being unjustly discounted. There are folks on here with engineering degrees and creds that anyone should respect that report audible changes with reasons someone not paying attention will find incredible. (shrug) Those are pretty careful observations. Not notoriously unreliable testimony! -Paul
  12. You bet - there are audiophiles who are so in love with the hardware that they don't really care all that much about the music. And of course, that is perfectly okay. The equipment is fun to tinker with, play with, and otherwise obsess over, at least for some folks. There are people that cannot listen to music on a less worthy system - some to the point it almost physically painful for them to do so. Neither of those types of folks are the majority of course, but there are quite a number of them. They shouldn't be made to feel minimized or reduced because of that. It's their thing. There are also a few folks who view audiophiles as targets to be baited. You can usually identify them because of the strident tone and strong desire to be recognized as an authority. Most of the folks with truly authoritative options are very reserved and respectful of others. Easy peasy to tell the difference. But I feel you are possibly trying to wordsmith something here I didn't say. I am - quite definitely - a skeptical objectivist. Yet I can hear repeatable audible differences from changes that should have no effect. (shrug) The world won't end if I don't dig out the reasons for that, though obviously, all the easily discounted reasons have crossed my mind, and more than once, my test bench. That neither makes me crazy, insane, or anything else, except an audiophile who loves music. -Paul
  13. That's just untrue. At least in the most part. Check out what Scientific Observation means. Here's a hint, it definitely involves using the senses of the observer. It can also mean using instruments, but not always. In many cases, instruments are not even the *primary* method of recording observations. It is just flame bait when people claim otherwise. I suspect you may be a lawyer or someone else along similar lines, because "testimony" has a specific and very precise meaning in those fields, where most engineering fields define the same thing as an observation. Hard to argue with that, because of course, it is true. I just doesn't mean that observation are to be discarded or not to be trusted at all because someone with a mic and a digital analyzer claims they are. Everything is impossible until someone does it, you know. Whether you or I are convinced of the impossibility of something or not doesn't affect reality one little bit. -Paul
  14. I think you are absolutely correct in your thinking - however, the flip side of that is that music listening is a pleasurable experience for most of us, and therefor is judged on purely subjective terms. If something sounds different to one person or another, it really does sound different to that person, even if there are no measurable physical differences. It is really hard for people to accept that sometimes. Then you get into the nonsense accusations of "fooling myself" and so on. It is nonsense, speaking about the part of the hostile accusations, responses, and so forth and so on. Making this or that person a villain behind a mask of anonymous usernames. (shrug) Like I said, it is really hard for some people to accept. -Paul
  15. Oh dear - you may really get your whiskers in a twist with that one....