|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.146.1.159
In Reply to: RE: Assuming your post is sincere, posted by Jon L on April 17, 2015 at 23:23:31
How about acknowledging those of us who tried JPlay and heard no difference? And I don't mean trifling differences, but non-existent differences. So far as I can tell JPlay makes no difference to the sound of my PC audio playback.
Here's an idea: how about taking the JPlay claims you cite at http://www.audiostream.com/content/jplay-responds-open-letter and subjecting them to the most feeble minded amounts of skepticism you can imagine. Are you really unable to find any holes in their arguments?
JE
Follow Ups:
I'm still patiently waiting for you to share with us the computer setup and system you used to arrive at your conclusions.
Steve,
It is obvious that he is using a system that cannot discern any difference. He is utilizing,(if the story is true that he actually did install and listen) a general desktop computer. Standard power supply, hard drives, internal soundcard not what one would consider an audiophile system.
As you know because you also been doing this for a long time, each time you improve something in your system you lift a veil, improve resolution. By doing so it allows you to go further, and actually appreciate changes that you've made. If you have a very low end noisy RF generating system, any improvements will be swamped by the noise and you will not be able to hear any difference.
He is never going to understand or accept this. His original quest when sent by Jim was to denigrate Jplay, and continues to be so. There is no real honest conversation. This is the Internet, which is similar to the Wild West. What Jim has done is a real lowlife thing, and it could not take place in the real world. To say another product is a hoax would get you in court but on the net it is a free-for-all and open to dishonesty. Honest people do not stoop so low but dishonest manufacturers like
JRiver will put up such a page.. They felt threatened because Jplay began receiving good reviews, and they thought it affect their sales. As at the end of the day it's all about the money.
JRiver cares nothing about sound, originally J River was a database, accounting software. They give zero credence to sound quality, they just don't understand.
They go along and keep selling the software while laughing at audiophiles. They are a mid-fi company with a low fi sense of morality.
They actually do not deserve anyone's money, and eventually it looks like a product like Roon may put them out of business. Roon is actually a interesting piece of software and deserve some investigation. Hopefully they will allow integration with other output applications. If so one could use Roon as the library and a good sounding application for the output. This might be the best of both worlds, and the end of J River.
Maybe JRiver can go back to writing accounting software, maybe they should've stayed writing accounting software and we would not have this argument.
Audiophiles should build audiophile equipment, and create audiophile software. If one is not really interested in the field the only reason that they actually do this is to make money. It shows a great lack of integrity for a company such as J River to have a public webpage denigrating another company. In industry even adversarial companies work together. If you look at the Internet all the providers who are at war with each other for a customer base also work together to support the Internet backbone. Without this cooperation there would be no infrastructure. A Time Warner customer goes online and his packets are handed off to Verizon, who maybe hands them off to Comcast etc.
No other audiophile manufacture except for JRiver has ever come forward with such crap. The fact that some people think this is acceptable shows their lack of integrity also. This is the Internet as we know it and maybe one day will change to a place of civility, but at the moment it is a free for all and people will take advantage of this.
JRiver has been reported many times already to IC3 which is the site for Internet crime complaints. Hopefully more people will report them and the FBI will investigate them. Maybe then they will realize what they're doing is wrong. If their bottom line gets affected they will change their tune. In the meantime it's best to ignore the trolls.
Regards
Bob
lots of venom but nothing of substance.
Another forum TROLL!!!
You and I are both after the best sound; the best audiophile experience. We resent people who tell us how to listen and what we are hearing.
We are smart enough to figure out what is a hoax or what is the real deal.
JE is just not our kind of guy.
Thanks Bob
How about acknowledging those of us who tried JPlay and heard no difference? And I don't mean trifling differences, but non-existent differences.I acknowledge that some people have tried JPlay but could hear no differences compared to their normal setup. Will that do?
So far as I can tell JPlay makes no difference to the sound of my PC audio playback.
That report (which, of course, I acknowledge) undermines your insistence that claims made by an absurdly antagonistic business rival that JPlay distorts the sound must be answered.
Assuming, of course, that there is some argument to be made to support the supposition that JPlay is not a hoax.Either the product changes the sound (and, for better or worse, you can hear it) or you can't hear whatever it is that it does. Or doesn't.If your Hear-No-Evil report is to be believed, should you not, in light of your experience, be dismissing the notion that the program adds distortion, not endorsing it? What am I missing?
(BTW that A-Open mobo-with-a-tube is a socket 478 board. IOW it's as old as the hills. It seems that audio enthusiasts didn't buy the mobos-with-tubes thing. Really, there's no pleasing them.)
D
Edits: 04/18/15
"That report (which, of course, I acknowledge) undermines your insistence that claims made by an absurdly antagonistic business rival that JPlay distorts the sound must be answered."
Got a cite that supports your claim?
"Either the product changes the sound (and, for better or worse, you can hear it) or you can't hear whatever it is that it does. Or doesn't.
If your Hear-No-Evil report is to be believed, should you not, in light of your experience, be dismissing the notion that the program adds distortion, not endorsing it? What am I missing?"
Again, I'm not at all sure what point you are trying to make here.
How about we try the old "the dog that didn't bark" analogy. Let us pretend that there really is some software that would improve the sound from a PC or a Mac or a Linux box. Do you really think that Microsoft, or Apple, or RedHat would not try to snap up such software by throwing big bucks at it? Doesn't the fact that none of the big players in this field could care less about JPplay give you grounds for pause?
JE
I'm defending the null hypothesis: that is, my position is that these silly propositions, be they programs that are supposed to modify my PC or physical doohickeys that "transduce" nothing, actually do nothing. If I was making affirmative claims, in other words saying these things actually do something substantive, then it would be incumbent upon me to cite data to support my position.
So far as I can tell, those people who are making affirmative claims can only cite anecdotal evidence to support their positions. No one has demonstrated that these things, be they software or gadgetry, actually do anything at all, much less that they "improve" the sound of a stereo.
Demonstrate that your proposition has an effect, any effect, and I'll be willing to listen to what you have to say. And no, anecdotal claims are not a demonstration of anything besides the possible gullibility of the claimant. However, I'm guessing even this feeble standard of proof will be derided by the true believers who in effect have nothing else to fall back upon but their own subjective experience.
Folks, science doesn't happen only inside your heads. It's patent and available to all. It is tangible and reproducible. It has no need for childish claims.
JE
OK, let's get back to basic logic here
Er, that's what I was trying to do in light of your contradictory argument. You respond by changing the subject.
Folks, science doesn't happen only inside your heads. It's patent and available to all. It is tangible and reproducible. It has no need for childish claims
With respect, you can patronise as much as you like but your knowledge of psychology is almost as barren as your grasp of logic. You wouldn't know a "null hypothesis" if it ran you over - the null hypothesis that "these things" do nothing substantive would be advanced by someone setting out to design an experiment to prove that they did. That's why, so help me, it's called a null hypothesis. Outwith the experimental context, the term is all but meaningless (see above).
I've had enough of this childish prattle. I'm out of here.
D
Yes Dave, I've also had enough. Mr. Science demands proof that JPlay works, but won't share with us his JPlay settings, computer with OS, and system.
Edits: 04/18/15
I normally leave these type of postings alone,as I only use JRiver as my
music file processing center.
Calling Microsoft & Apple "big players in this field" was just too funny
to pass up ! Since when did these "big players" take an interest in the "field" of serious Audio reproduction ?
Might it have been the same time that Audio Research started releasing their line of PCs ? I must have missed that one !
You intrigue me. Who are these computer operating system OEMs that are bigger than Microsoft, Apple or the various flavors of Linux?
JE
Who said anything about bigger operating "systems" ?I was just relaying my feelings about the "OS" that you mentioned. I think the problem with PC Audio in general is that there seems to be a misguided view that "Software" alone raises Audio reproduction levels appreciably enough.
It may in fact do that if your talking in terms of PC Audio,but you still
have to address the "PC level" of Audio performance coming from a non "Audio" piece of equipment !There's a reason that some "Dedicated" Audio equipment performs at a higher level than other 'Like' equipment. It's called "Function following
Form"I look at my Computer as a great "Audio Tool" that gives the music I listen to more flexibility than I've ever had before (regardless of the
less then stellar production values that are quite often assigned to good recordings). For myself it's nothing more or less.
Edits: 04/19/15
"You intrigue me. Who are these computer operating system OEMs that are bigger than Microsoft, Apple or the various flavors of Linux?"
You have zero idea what he was even talking about!!! LOL
You don't even know that AUDIO RESEARCH is a manufacture of audio equipment. Who is Bill Johnson? How about Jim Winey? How do they know each other? Ever have a conversation with either one? This is what is so insulting!!! You have never heard an SP3, SP6, D76, D150... etc... What is a Tympani IIIA? You don't have the slightest idea what they are. What is a 12AX7? 6DJ8? 6550? MOSFET? do you have any? You actually have zero interest in audio!
Yes, all of the wonderful toys of my early audio days. I had an SP3a1 and an SP6 and many more AR preamps and amps. I had the Tympani speakers. I had big subwoofers with those babies. And a box full of 12AX7 and 6DJ8 tubes.
Brings back great memories. :) One of the most amazing systems I ever heard was the full Tympani system tri-amped with D76As in the back room of Lyric Hi-Fi.
When SteveA mentions "Audio Research" The troll continues on about big computer companies. As you said why in the world would any large company be interested in a handful of audiophiles? The entire concept is stupid! Mass market lo-fi/mid-fi is the norm, and will continue to be the norm.
I biamped the Tympani and a pair of large RH Labs sub woofers connected to the 3rd stereo amps. I remember having a Luxman 3-way tubed crossover.
Stuff was far more affordable in those days.
Well with inflation, still not cheap in today's $$. That had to be a great system! :)
I still have an Audio Research EC4 crossover somewhere in the closet, and a pair of Janis subs packed away. :)
In Lyric Mike Kay had them with the Tympani bass panels and he also had a custom transmission line coffin sub woofer using KEF B139s. Very nice stuff. I also liked the big Fulton system.
The good ole days indeed!
Actually, though I've never met Bill Johnson, I have had some of his gear in some of my systems over the years. I know who AR is also, and I don't mean the speaker company. I have actually spoken with Jim Winey in person and again have owned some of his speakers.
Bob_C, with you I don't even know where to begin. You keep assuming things for which there are no foundations. I post a system in my profile, and you think that it is the only system I own or have ever owned. I recommend a product, and you get it into your nut that I must be an employee of and posting under the personal direction of the owner of the company that makes the product. It makes me weary just thinking of all the windmills you must tilt at in the course of one of your days.
Have you had your blood pressure checked recently?
JE
Your affiliation with JRiver is already known.
SteveA is talking audio companies and you are asking about "large computer companies"... Just stop wasting honest peoples time...
So you own or have owned various equipment??? Does it, did it all sound the same???
Good question, and while I will not attempt to answer it, I will note that:
"In 2000, Microsoft purchased Pacific Microsonics and continues to incorporate HDCD technology into its PC offerings."
What ever happened to this acquisition? Always enjoyed Prof. Johnson's Reference Recordings but that may just be personal preference.
Link below:
Huh!!! ... I stand corrected (I suppose !)
Being an Audiophile several times longer than I've become involved in "Computer Audio" I still think there are better ways to play your Computer
Audio files than using a PC as a player . If the PCs only dedicated function is to play music files .I'm interested in it as a player,but then
it becomes a DFP.
Heh,heh,heh,...I guess I'm still a bit "Old School". I think it's great that Microsoft took the initiative,but I still need the dedicated Hardware to take full advantage of the Software advances !
The glass still remains only "Half Full" until there's a departure from
"Universal" machines ! PCs are only a great "tool" for myself !
"Microsoft discontinued the official HDCD website in 2005."
Oh well....
Hey, thanks a lot for not warning me I was opening a "Wiki" page. I'll
now have to take at least a dozen cold showers just to get rid of the feeling I went there ?
Maybe I'll feel better after I overdose on some PBS programming & the entirety of my Beethoven Piano Sonatas !
(I would have felt better if you'd sent me to "Ripley's"; Much higher credibility for my taste even if they did have the right info this time!)(I think it's a tossup between "Wiki" & about 90% of what I see on YouTube having much relevance to me)
Have a Great Day !
Got a cite that supports your claim?
I didn't make a claim so, no, I haven't got any "cites".
Again, I'm not at all sure what point you are trying to make here.
My point is that your argument is circular. One the one hand, you say you can't hear a difference between Jplay and your default setup (which is perfectly reasonable) but, on the other, you put the onus on those who dismiss JRiver's claim that JPlay distorts the sound to prove their point (without, incidentally, asking for JRiver to prove its).
If you are correctly reporting your judgement that Jplay doesn't alter the sound then you cannot in all honesty imply support to someone else's claim that it distorts (alters) it. How would you know and, assuming you're right (i.e. that your judgement is objectively correct rather than the result of perceptual variance), how would anyone else know?
I'm sorry if that's hard to grasp but, if you're discussing perceptual nuance, a bit of logical nuance comes in handy.
Doesn't the fact that none of the big players in this field could care less about JPlay give you grounds for pause?
None whatsoever. There's money to be made in all sorts of niche markets that MS and Apple are not involved in. Nobody in graphics arts, for example, uses MS or Apple applications - they buy products developed by companies with pertinent expertise. Neither Apple nor Microsoft has any.
The best known of these is, of course, Adobe (Photoshop, InDesign, PostScript, font technologies etc) but there are many, many others. The market is orders of magnitude larger than the consumer/audiophile one.
"My point is that your argument is circular. One the one hand, you say you can't hear a difference between Jplay and your default setup (which is perfectly reasonable) but, on the other, you put the onus on those who dismiss JRiver's claim that JPlay distorts the sound to prove their point (without, incidentally, asking for JRiver to prove its)."It seems to me you are putting words into JRiver's mouth and then attacking me for not knowing what you are talking about. JRiver's site says:
"JRiver recommends that you uninstall Jplay. It adds a layer of sound processing that can degrade sound quality, performance, and stability."
Note the word "can" in that quote. It means that sound degradation is a possibility, not a certainty. That's a far cry from saying "JPlay distorts the sound," your words and not JRiver's. Why you are so upset about something JRiver did not say, and why you think I'm putting the burden on others to disprove something I don't think was ever said is beyond me.
Now, if there is another quote that I'm unaware of, then I'll be happy to read it if you provide a link to it.
JE
Edit: Added link to JRiver's "Jplay is a Hoax" web page.
Edits: 04/18/15
. . . you are putting words into JRiver's mouth and then attacking me for not knowing what you are talking about.
Yes, of course I've read the JRiver note. It didn't take long. In the context of your belittling tone and given that "can distort" is an untestable proposition, it was not a significant misquote but I'll happily change "distorts" in my post to read "can distort".
That done, my points stand, your argument is still circular, you still seem not to know what a "null hypothesis" is, we still (as Mercman notes) don't know the conditions under which you tested JPlay and you have again changed the subject.
D
but I am not here looking to pick a fight.
With that said, you're now complaining about picking at nits?!? What on earth have our recent exchanges been if not picking at nits?
If you are not arguing about the language on the page I linked to, then just what is it you are arguing about?
Again, I'm not trying to pick a fight. Help me out here. Please explain, so that even a cretin like me can follow, how my argument is circular. In fact, please tell me what you think my argument is. At this point I am completely bewildered about what it is you are talking about.
With all respect.
JE
Yep, if JPlay does in fact 'distort' the sound and at the same time Jaundiced Ear can't hear a difference then we must conclude that JPlay was not set up properly during his evaluation or his system or his hearing is not resolving enough to distinguish the 'distortion'.
Why would companies like Microsoft bother with audiophile software that only sells in the hundreds? Are you serious?
Microsoft doesn't even support USB Audio Class 2.
"Why would companies like Microsoft bother with audiophile software that only sells in the hundreds? Are you serious?"
Why would Microsoft ignore a fundamental improvement in the way PCs work? Assuming, of course, that something real is actually happening.
JE
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: