Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.
Return to Computer Audio Asylum
Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded
JPLAY Responds
66.37.246.2 |
||
Posted on June 14, 2013 at 10:43:05 | ||
Posts: 12
Joined: August 9, 2012 |
If I knew how to edit a post,, posted on June 14, 2013 at 15:29:12 | |
I'd edit my post above to delete "simple minded" and instead use "credulous." Sorry about that! |
RE: JPLAY Responds, posted on June 14, 2013 at 18:07:44 | |
Posts: 820
Joined: January 18, 2002 |
I am perplexed by this statement: "We at JPLAY believe the old rule 'simpler is better' should not be ignored for computer audio—to the contrary: We believe that the less work a computer has to do the better it will serve as a digital audio transport." From what I see, the Kernel Streaming "engine" seems to be doing a good amount of "work" when the computer is set to their recommendations with "DirectLink" "buffer" size. "Simple" would be using a decent buffer and just let the hardware negotiate rather than using the CPU to do all the timing, especially with modern asynch DACs IMO. Also, this: "Sure, we don’t have all the 'technical measurements' we would like: The simple fact is, while there are plenty of DAC measurements regarding jitter, when it comes to using a computer as a digital transport, there simply aren’t any! Nobody has quite figured out how to measure ‘computer jitter’ (or 'computer noise'), which others propose is the "real" cause of the sonic differences in software and/or hardware." Firstly, not only do they not have "all the technical measurements we would like", admittedly they simply don't appear to have "any" to support the assertion that their theory is true. Assuming for a moment JPLAY did make a difference, how then would they even know that *timing* was to blame rather than say a Windows/ASIO/WASAPI/DirectSound bug they've circumvented? This also leads to a very inconvenient situation where one has to ask by what means they engineered the audio engine - not just ONE, but as it stands FOUR choices! ------- Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog. |
RE: JPLAY Responds, posted on June 14, 2013 at 21:05:36 | |
Posts: 820
Joined: January 18, 2002 |
Yeah... That's real helpful... ------- Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog. |
"Big picture"? RE: JPLAY Responds, posted on June 14, 2013 at 22:33:50 | |
Posts: 820
Joined: January 18, 2002 |
Bob... No, you don't have to be Stephen H. THE BOX IS ALL THERE IS (what other "big picture" is there? a "ghost in the box"?). Consider how modern computers actually work - how the asynchronous instruction & data bus functions between CPU and RAM - each working off their own multipliers, how the Southbridge chip connects up to the bus (motherboard USB usually is hosted off this), how the USB data packets are constructed and transferred, how most modern USB DACs have their own internal buffer management and handshaking with the host machine, etc. I don't think you need to be Stephen H. to realize that the Windows/Mac software that you install as a download (we're not talking firmware or low level embedded software folks) can only do so much and the really low level stuff like on the order of picosecond jitter is in the *hardware itself*. I have yet to see evidence otherwise despite claims like the one JPLAY posted. I would very much like to see the kind of hardware/software and interface where the player software has a proven effect on the pico/nanosecond jitter and not just creating buffer under-runs and audio drop-outs. ------- Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog. |
There may not be teapots in space, posted on June 14, 2013 at 23:30:09 | |
Posts: 13158
Location: Kent Joined: June 1, 2002 |
how do you know this; there may be? |
what should be inaudible, posted on June 15, 2013 at 02:05:06 | |
Posts: 13158
Location: Kent Joined: June 1, 2002 |
This is a 'Conviction' statement that precludes discussion. I wouldn't bother. |
RE: No teapots, but there are asteroids and comets., posted on June 15, 2013 at 02:36:13 | |
Sorry, this went right over my head. Care to elaborate? |
RE: No teapots, but there are asteroids and comets., posted on June 15, 2013 at 03:43:27 | |
Oh Noes! The suspense is killing me! What horrors await me? |
personal claims , posted on June 15, 2013 at 04:35:34 | |
Posts: 13158
Location: Kent Joined: June 1, 2002 |
yours, wild and off the mark |
RE: personal claims , posted on June 15, 2013 at 05:03:39 | |
yours, non-responsive and content free. C'mon. You're better than that. |
RE: No teapots, but there are asteroids and comets., posted on June 15, 2013 at 08:04:09 | |
Posts: 2667
Location: NY Joined: July 31, 2000 |
"She is the "brains" behind my operation." And the looks! :) |
RE: You are stuck thinking inside the box, posted on June 15, 2013 at 08:44:10 | |
Posts: 820
Joined: January 18, 2002 |
Well Tony, I appreciate what you're saying about thinking "outside" when it comes to LIFE. But this is about computer science, and specifically JPLAY and their rationale. "Scientific materialism" is not my "religion". But as it pertains to JPLAY and audio evaluation, I see no reason to invoke Quantum Mechanics when Newtonian physics can easily suffice. ------- Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog. |
So, posted on June 16, 2013 at 08:52:24 | |
Posts: 13158
Location: Kent Joined: June 1, 2002 |
timing and time sequencing do come into it |