Jump to content

cjf

  • Content Count

    896
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About cjf

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. cjf

    All you can eat

    Oh...and tell the contractor to move that damn staircase on the outside of the building of the Bonus Room and you will be golden. That's at least 3'x6" of additional listening space depth assuming Long Wall usage 😀
  2. cjf

    All you can eat

    Based on the drawings I feel the only two locations you have for a system are on the very small side. Spot # 1 Living Room - Good Length, Poor width, Only one useful wall Long wall Spot # 2 Bonus Room - Good Length, Poor width, but better Long wall/door layout Living Room would probably give the best SQ results since you can take advantage of the extra air space/cubic feet provided by the open attached Kitchen area. But, I suspect your target is the Bonus Room since that is where the Beer will be 😀 So assuming Bonus Room, I would use the Long wall for speaker placement. I am referring to the usage of the area between the Bedroom door entry. A speaker on each side of that Bedroom door. As others have stated, will need some budgetary numbers to work with in terms of speakers to use including what your current equipment is to power these new speakers. Just my opinion
  3. OK, I'm beginning to become concerned at the lack of availability and choices in "Good" CD Ripping applications for the Ubuntu/Linux platforms. The one I've been using and have trusted up until recently have slowly died off with every new release of the Ubuntu OS. My previous favorite was "RubyRipper" but that now refuses to work on my Ubuntu 16.04 LTS box. At one point I thought "K3B" was decent too but I kicked that to the curb once I realized it wasn't consistently making exact rips. So because of the above issue I found myself in need of something new to Rip CD's. After much searching I decided to give "Audex" a try. Being skeptical of its abilities I decided to take one CD I was in need of ripping anyway and decided to make copies of it using two different methods in an attempt to confirm the accuracy of the RIP via AUDEX. Method #1 was just to simply RIP the CD via AUDEX to .WAV to a folder on my local machine Method #2 was to use a Caveman approach and browse to the mounted CDROM via the Ubuntu Desktop GUI and "CTRL/A ..CTRL/C" the CDROM contents and paste those files into a new folder on my local machine. After the above was completed I took a look at the file sizes of the two copy approaches via the terminal. To my dismay, I saw that the files sizes were not the same. I then proceeded to puke out a "sha1sum" of each file and as I suspected the hashes were different also. When I say different I mean comparing any one given file to its sibling file which was copied via the opposite method. After some additional waffling around I realized that the size difference between the two Copy approaches was off by exactly 70 Bytes for each and every file. The files having the largest Byte count were those that were obtained NOT using the Ripping software. (..ie browse,copy,paste). I am sure the consistent 70 Byte difference is telling on some level but I'm not sure what to make of it. I then proceeded to pull a Spectrogram of one sample file from each copy approach. Visually they appear the same to these old, failing eyes 🧐 AUDEX Rip Manual Copy/Paste So with all that said I suppose I will now need to listen to both versions to see if I hear any differences between them. BUT...while I am doing that, does anyone have any ideas on what may have happened to my 70 Bytes of Data in each file while using the Ripping software and what that Data may consist of? Thanks
  4. Sorry for the dumb question here but is it safe to assume you are trying to do this because you wish to keep/re-purpose this particular drive that is giving you problems? If you are not trying to reuse this drive then may we can discuss ways of permanent/physical destruction instead at which point you can then just drop it in the garbage 😐
  5. cjf

    Windows 10 Worth It?

    Like others, I too keep a few Windows boxes around (Win10) but only for certain pieces of software that live in the Windows realm exclusively. All the pieces of software I am referring to are luckily ones that I have no need to interact with on a daily basis. I can tell you it took quite a bit of work to get those WIN 10 boxes I do have to actually "somewhat" behave. The WIN 10 Update/Call Home processes are so intrusive with this version it borders on harassment. If your bored one day take a look into how determined Win10 is to try and report back to the "Mothership" after you block all ports outbound from that WIN 10 machine on your firewall. Observe the logs closely. Its almost comical at its level of determination to try and contact the "Mothership". Well, that is, its only comical until you realize where some of that data is trying to go 😯 I am married to Ubuntu/Linux 99% of the time.
  6. I would argue that a DAC not using some form of Galvanic/Optical isolation on its USB Input would not fall into the category of being a "Good" DAC in the first place. These would be the ones most often touted by their owners as having noticed a massive difference after inserting Dodad XYZ inline of the USB cable between Computer and DAC. I would say many folks using ETH based connectivity are first terminating that ETH connection into some kind of streamer/NAA..etc first (which does not have a DAC of its own) after which they then use AES or USB to connect to their DAC. This may give the false sense that ETH is cleaner because there is now some separation involved but that doesn't make ETH any less noisy. Depending on the level of commitment to ultimate SQ, some will not want to use a streamer/DAC/all-in-one box as those things have their own set of "noise" issues since they include a computer inside that fancy box anyway but now its on top of your DAC Chip which is worse then having it separated.
  7. Spoken just like one of those dealers previously mentioned. Are you a dealer? Do you have a product to sell? Any decent DAC could care less about the USB interface on the PC Side anyway. Besides that, there are only so many ways to create a USB Interface that is actually certifiable to meet the USB standard. The physical hardware used to create the USB interface itself is basically unchanged be it on the PC or on a $50K DAC. Same story goes for ETH based RJ45 Jacks. Maybe some have "Gold" pins on them but I bet a small rub with your fingernail would remove that "Gold" paint layer you see with almost no effort and then your back to a bog standard RJ45 jack.
  8. If you live in an area like myself who has had ZERO other choices but Commie Cast for the past 20yrs and thus had to put up with their arrogance and total lack of concern for anything customer related I would jump ship in a heartbeat if the option was there to do so. Even if it cost me more money! Being able to finally flip them the bird and prove that Karma is indeed a bitch would be worth every extra penny. The grass may not be any greener on the other side but that is a gamble I would gladly take 🤬
  9. Based on this screenshot I'm not seeing anything related to your NAD DAC. Was the DAC still plugged in via USB at the time this screenshot was taken? I'm curious what the "Primary Sound Driver" is pointing to. If your using Windows, go into your "Audio/Sound" menu via Control Panel and take a few screenshots of whats going on in there. Under most conditions I would agree that for basic listening purposes the Optical Output would be fine.....BUT...in this case I suspect using the Optical Output on your PC actually means your are feeding your music bits....THRU...the crappy onboard sound card first, before the signal gets sent to your NAD DAC. Be sure to unplug the optical cable when using USB Out to ensure nothing is being pushed thru your onboard sound card
  10. One final thought... I'm surprised your not hearing a big difference between the Optical vrs USB connection method. This make me wonder if all your Windows Audio settings are correctly configured. Have you by chance visited the NAD website and downloaded the USB Audio driver they provide? https://nadelectronics.com/product/m51-direct-digital-dac/ It mentions this note: "In order to stream your computer audio via M51, ensure that the Sound or Audio Device settings of your computer is set to "NAD Audio 2.0 Output". I suspect that without this driver Windows may attempt to apply its own mixer settings and volume control to the audio stream. You will certainly want to make sure this NAD Output is also chosen within the FooBar App as well.
  11. Thanks for the additional details. So at first glance I see one potential issue. Of course I'm only going by the pictures and the system description provided so maybe I'm wrong but here goes. I'm specifically looking at the method being used to connect your PC to the DAC. As far as I am aware, the only way you could use an Optical Cable to connect from PC to DAC would be if you were first sending the audio signal THRU the onboard Sound Card first. This is a problem IMO. There are far too many ways for that signal to be altered when fed THRU a sound card first. I would recommend as step one, find a good USB 2.0 Certified cable and run that between the DAC and one of the unused USB Ports on the PC. If using Windows, you may need to install a driver first if you wish to stream beyond 24/96. Next phases would be removal of that Green AC Cord on the PC and replacing it with a BOG Standard 3 Prong AC Cable. You mentioned some noise in the system. That would have to be tackled as well. Go back to basics on the power cords as a first step to see if the noise goes away.
  12. cjf

    Do you prefer A or B?

    I've listened to both files and my conclusion is that I can't hear any differences at all between the two of them. Because of this, I am unable to vote since this scenario is not a voting choice.
  13. So before diving into what may or may not need to be changed with your current setup please explain exactly the chain of connectivity and playback you use today? I see you mention FooBar2000 as the playback software. Where are the music files stored? How are you connecting the above PC to the NAD DAC? Is it all your gear in the same room next to each other? Tell us about the room itself. What are the dimensions? Where are the speakers, your listening chair located in regards to the room boundaries? At a high level, I see nothing wrong with your current choice of gear, including the computer itself. Can you better describe what your main complaint is with the existing system?
  14. I'm not sure about others experience but from what I've seen many of these Brick/Mortar Local dealers are just so out of touch with anything related to computer audio or anything beyond what they have in store. I've no doubt that this plays a big role in these local shops being all but extinct and why they are fighting to keep the lights on. The reality is, and this is my opinion, most of the streamers are geared for those who are not computer savvy in any way. These folks want to buy something, take it home, open the box, plug it in and be done with it. Nothing wrong with that mind you. I say its probably the best option for most folks who are not computer nerds but make no mistake, folks who know how to build or are willing to try to build there own Computer setup most likely will end up with a far better product in the end It is annoying to hear these dealers talk down on anything not confined within the walls of their store. Its one of the main reasons why I'll only purchase online or from remote dealers who have shown an awareness of their surroundings and competition and thus go out of their way to be on top of the latest and greatest gear.
  15. cjf

    Political Humor

    O'Boy I predict this dung will attract all he left leaning flies and it wont end well. But with that said, I've got my popcorn ready to watch the train wreck anyway 💩
×