|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
198.71.122.251
In Reply to: RE: Those 9 things... posted by fmak on July 03, 2017 at 08:57:34
Sure fmak,
Maybe there is a difference, maybe there isn't. I would just like to see if someone can demonstrate objectively what improvement *any* of these USB optimizations will have on a good modern asynchronous USB DAC.
Does it affect XMOS microcontrollers? How about the inexpensive Microchip devices? CMedia?
There are so many "possible" effects but as yet, there is no fact-based objective demonstration at all that this whole "industry" of USB add-ons make a whiff of difference... Much less a reviewer chaining 9 of them together somehow should be used with the product; all the while potentially making the USB transmission *worse* just as much as they could improve something.
-------
Archimago's Musings: A 'more objective' audiophile blog.
Follow Ups:
as is in the case of community noise and noise and vibration rating and classification. There is no rigid objective means of determination, just guidelines and empirical data.
Objective measurements in audio are useful only for screening purposes and gear that measures well may not sound good. Those who cannot discern differences are just groups of individuals who cannot detect subtle or very subtle changes in temporal and special renditions of musical performances.
One so called 'objective' and well known criterion is the Fletcher and Munson loudness contours which were obtained by playing sine waves at different frequencies to audiences. Common sense tells us that no one would willingly listen to sine waves in musical reproduction.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: