 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.175.99.83
In Reply to: RE: The USB cable is on the DAC's INPUT.... posted by Ivan303 on April 17, 2019 at 19:25:12
"Are you really saying that you would expect 'noise' on a DAC's USB input to show up after digital to analog conversion as measurable 'noise' on the DAC's analog output?"Well yes, or no, based on many factors. Noise amplitude, frequency spectrum. Internal DAC PCB layout. Analog circuit design factors. Power supply bypassing effectiveness. Internal shielding. Grounding scheme.
All these things. But I do think this is mostly a theoretical problem. I personally think a lot of this conducted noise and jitter FUD is made up to sell expensive USB and SPDIF cables.
Edits: 04/17/19 04/17/19Follow Ups:
"Analog circuit design factors. Power supply bypassing effectiveness. Internal shielding. Grounding scheme."
While all of the above could be expected to be responsible for measurable noise on the analog output of a DAC, I seriously doubt that the above would cause noise on the USB input of the DAC to be decoded into noise on the audio output.
That said, many who have tried a device as simple as Intona USB Isolator (USD 239) hear an improvement in sound quality.
OTOH devices like the 'jitterbug' don't seem to do much for many of those same people (including me).
The original Uptone Regen, designed by John Swenson who knows a thing or two about digital, turns out to be a mixed bag. If you have a problem with your DAC's input circuitry, this might help. If not, not so much. Personally I do get a BIT of improvement in SQ with the standard Regen but nothing earth shattering.
John explains what he is doing and why in the link below: You can disregard it if you please, but I've known John for close to 20 years having met him at one of the early VSAC meetings in the Pacific Northwest back in my DIY tube amp building days.
Add isolation, better clocks, more PS regulation, etc. with the IsoRegen and one MIGHT hear significant improvement in SQ. Not noise reduction, just BETTER sound.
Granted, I'm using a noisy Mac Mini as my source but so are many others and most if not all 'digital players' have SOME sort of computer inside.
And now that I have the IsoRegen attached to the USB input to my DAC I'm pretty much immune to USB cable swaps.
Bottom line, IMNSHO, digital cables CAN make a difference, but maybe not much. If you have a noisy source, USB isolation might be a cure and maybe an exotic USB cable can act as a 'filter' (HORRORS) and make things appear to be better.
One thing on CAN do is to purchase a 50 ft. Monoprice or AMAZON's BEST USB cable and see if you hear a difference!
If you can, it's THE CABLE!
I am an accredited design EE. What I outlined if not only possible but real issues I and my peers have run into over the past 30 years in equipment design. Specifically, broadcast equipment which is consumer audio and video gear on steroids.Also what is John Swensons's background? I have never seen any bio or professional accreditation listed in his numerous audio blogs? Is he a true electrical engineer? Some of what he states about electrical theory makes me very suspicious.
And while we are at it. Do you have any electrical engineering background? because what you are talking about is some pretty complex stuff when you get down to the details.
Edits: 04/18/19
who worked his way up the job ladder to a position as an biomedical engineer, medical device R&D manager, and finally President and CEO of a medical device R&D company in Utah, from which I retired some years ago.But I was fortunate to have a lot of REALLY smart EE/BME/PhD's working for me, which more than made up for my own limitations.
If there is anything my long career has taught me, it's that one really doesn't need a high level degree to sense when someone is waving thier high level degree about in an effort to impress.
It saved the companies I managed over the years a whole lot of money!
Edits: 04/18/19 04/18/19
So you were a biomedical engineer making patient attached products?
How did these products you say you designed pass electrical safety requirements.
How did you signoff lacking a PE license?
I said: "biomedical engineer, medical device R&D manager, and finally President and CEO of a medical device R&D company in Utah, from which I retired some years ago."
You asked: "So you were a biomedical engineer making patient attached products?"
You also asked: "How did these products you say you designed pass electrical safety requirements."
I didn't claim to 'make' or 'design' anything. Where do I say that I did?
One stereo or another makes a recording sound better?
Ivan303 is a million times better judge of the performance of any complete system, or any one individual component than you are. This is so because Ivan303 has built up so much more knowledge in conducting comparative listening evaluations with all levels of equipment.
Ivan303 does not need to be an electrical engineer to evaluate performance. Ivan303 is not a manurfacturer he is an end user. Either he hears a difference or he does not. If not, - he doesn't buy it.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
To answer your question - nothing!
But he is also making and challenging alternate engineering claims. For that he is not qualified.
If he hears a difference then he hears a difference. But let's not get into why he thinks there is a difference, at least not on an engineering level.
You wrote:
"But he is also making and challenging alternate engineering claims"
That is 100% untrue
He is actually using, employing ideas and techniques that come right out of the computer industry and products developed and used by the computer industry.
Galvanic isolation
USB optimization (and extension)
Power supply optimization and "hardening"
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Galvonic isolation"? You mean a transformer? Sorry, these were invented in the 1800s and first used in electronics as signal couplers in the early 1900s."USB Optimization"? I guess we can call that a computer industry offering. But what exactly does it mean?
"Power supply optimization"? So again since the first electronic systems in the 1900s, we have not done any optimization of power supply technology until John Swenson came along?
No, I'm talking about the jitter and noise FUD he claims his magic boxes will fix. The problem simply does not exist at he levels he claims. And he offers no scientific proof that it does. Which by the way is easy to do if he really has a claim here.
Edits: 04/19/19 04/19/19
I am not talking about "concepts," - yes, - some of which have been around for awhile longer than networking....
I am tallking about specific computer industry products, and networking protection and isolation as systems of protection in areas like hospitals....
These digital file players are computers or mini-computers and networking products and some of these devices that John and (many others) are inspired by the computing/networking industry.
This is my counter point to yours that these concepts are somehow "audio only products" designed by outliers who are outside countervailing engineering principles.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Yes there are industrila USB and network isolation devices. But they are sold as engineered products with specs to match. They are also void of grandiose cliams.
We get none of that from the audiphile vendors. No evidence of performance.
If these products are so good, why not show some measured proof.
Yes, - they are different classes of products, - but the point was that these are not outlier esoterica...
And you are again wrong, - there are no unreasonable and outlandish claims by audiophiles manufacturers here, - as a matter of fact these products have very little to no hyperbole and are making no claims, - especially compared to naysayers' crazy speculations like yours, - who make the unreasonable claim that they cannot work.
Lastly, - the products performance has TONS of evidence. And that performance is proved to the satisfaction of those, (unlike yourself who make outrageous and unproven claims), that the products are effifactious, = both ISO REGEN and the computer products that inspire them. The Intona was not designed for audio use, but plenty of people have found it very effective in the USB chain and made quite a difference in improving playback.
So are you saying that when someone uses an USB isolater (like the Intona), and then someone uses the same thing made by Audioquest or iFI that the audiophile manufacturer's product is snake-oil when the computer industry one isn't?
I am not sure what you mean by "measured proof" but the world in which they are used is a subjective goal, and it's not always predictable what other devices the purchaser will be using with thiese. So if a DAC, (and some do), have elements of an isoRegen built into the DAC, - obviously that will affect the performance.
THese products are produced to help a system produce good sound, - they are not produced for an objective goal like gigabit data bandwidth that have a required spec.
There is no burden of proof, - especially on the manufacturer, nor is there a claim or guarantee of any objective measure, - because the SQ of amps, speakers, and sources is in no way objective and there is no "certainty" or "right and wrong"
John also designs the Sonore line of digital file players and was and is a very significant developer and enhancer of the Squeezebox project and community after it was abandoned by Logitech.
I think that you should try dialing back your disrespectful and insulting attitude that assigns an undue and unreasonable amount of malice toward manufacturers who are audio enthisasts and have proven to the satisfaction of many, (and not just on these boards), that their products are highly effective in enhancing their recordings, and listening experiences.
I am saddened that you are unwilling to open your mind and do some listening instead of regurgitating the speculations of angry, anti-audiophiles who constantly criticize things that they know nothing about.
What experiences have you had? What is your stereo system? What speakers do you own? What is your amplifier? Do you own a CD player? Have you every used a computer to play back any digital files?
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
My system!Dolby Atmos. Main LCR speakers triamped. All digital path to the DACs.
File playback - how about 70TB on three NAS RAIDs.
All digital audio is via DIY or pro products. Those Lucid DACs are studio units.
All analog audio is balanced.
Edits: 04/20/19 04/20/19
It's too bad that television audio on cable is such poor quality. I like to watch movies on the TV monitor. Whenever I can, I play the youtube version of the audio track while I watch the video on the TV, after I sync-up the two. Usually for music performances. Now this is decent audio. DTS on some streamed movies is very good, but not available on cable.
I personally stay away from so-called "pro audio" playback gear because it's always been a disappointment.
Steve N.
You said: "But he is also making and challenging alternate engineering claims. For that he is not qualified."
Who's doing all of this?
Hopefully not me.
Is questioning how 'noise' or timing issues on a USB input to a DAC is likely to manifest itself as easily measured 'noise' on the analog output of said DAC equates to 'making and challenging alternate engineering claims' the I guess I'm guilty as charged.
Sorry I offended you EE ego. :-)
to knowledge....
The most important knowledge is comparative listening experiences.
John Swenson, - (in this field), - is one of the greatest of engineers as he is both an audiophile who has piled up many experiences; and in his designs, - he ensures that his work: as a (former) Intel processing chip designer; jibes with his comparative experiences as an audiophile. His scientifically sound investigations through a wide range of tests, (including many thorough and intrusive measurements), as well as comparative listening experiences insure that his conclusions are sound and based on a huge body of evidence.
Some of his measuring tools that he's in the process of finishing up, are incredibly sophisticated, and are going to provide some great evidence on such things as USB signal integrity, high frequency noise leakage, etc. These measurements will be good corroboration points reflecting on what we are hearing.
These subjective elements that make up what we call "good sound" are determined by our comparative experiences with recordings vs live instrumentation: - this is what "proves" to us what good performance is and what good components and cables are. Any sort of engineering credentials, (especially with cheap junk), or measurements offer little help here, - indeed they often get in the way. Whether or not a particular measurement of only one component of several is "good" yields little to no prediction of how an overall system performs in any given location.
Indeed, - it is pure speculation. And, what is required is ALSO a wide range of comparative listening test(s) to see if the measurement(s) jibe with the sound. The goal is not to have a great measuring component, - but a great SYSTEM listening experience. (As we see all the time that a great measuring component doesn't help improve the overall SQ).
Finally, - this isn't a cult-of-personality. Because someone has a particular "degree" or "credential" in one area or field is no guarantee of knowledge in another area. Often it is a detriment. Electrical engineering knowledge, is not SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION. As we've seen with many naysayers here who are making rather foolish pronouncements on the basis of such things as cursory measurements of things like cable resistance; we see such has no bearing on the testing that matters.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
nt
Come on, chip design requires not only electrical engineering but fairly extensive chemistry and physics as well. Those who posses those qualification typically have technical papers published and bios with all relevant qualifications listed for verification.I don't buy it. I think John is a test technician at perhaps a chip company but his designs are basically hobbyist projects for sale. And like most garage audio product vendors there is plenty of hogwash to fool the non technical types out of their money.
And if his audio products are so good, show me professional customers such as mastering facilities that use them? There is no professional application of any of these digital audiophile "magic fix" boxes. I know, I work in the industry!
It's funny too that your so called naysayers are the people who are employed and paid to practice this technology. But weekend audiophiles with no technical background know better?
Edits: 04/18/19 04/18/19 04/18/19
I am sure no one GAF about what your mad, & so called "technical credentials " are in an unrelated field.
Performance is NEVER judged on a test bench
Having neither heard or measured any of the level of the products that are under discussion here, your posts are both cowardly & gross speculations. You contribute nothing here by repeating the lack of thorough investigations of other naysayers, way outside any foundation of good reasoning.
these are high performance home audio products that are not designed for any pro application, but to recreate a complete & accurate representation of a released recording: not to analyze one in process. I know as i am a songwriter & former professional recording producer. I can tell you for sure that Tannoy Pro monitors vs Tannoy home audio speakers (for example)
sound very different, & have different design goals & purposes.
I don't buy that you're a professional EE . I think that you're perhaps a low level radio studio gopher intern who takes lunch orders & goes out on hourly Starbucks runs
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Where is the documented evidence of John's claims? Where is the test data that shows all the noise and the effects on the analog signal. Why doesn't he show how his products actually improve the noise floor?He sure talks about it but shows us nothing? It's all about what he hears and convinces audio snobs to hear as well.Sorry, but the scientific world works on repeatable evidence and peer review. We have none of that with any of these products. Sure some may publish jitter plots with no scaling information or relation to the signal of interest. But the audiophiless eat it up as hard scientific evidence.
Well let's take these claims into a true test lab setup and see. What I am or not is not the question here. I'm not selling anything. It's not about if I am a qualified EE or not. The point is we see no hard evidence that John's products actually work as claimed.
Edits: 04/18/19 04/18/19
And what "claims" do you think that John is making?
Are you denying that John is a former Intel employee?
What products do you think that I'm talking about?
Some of the products that John was instrumental in designing have PROVEN to the satisfaction to those that have tested them to improve the listening experience. That's all that's needed. These products are not for you, and likely, - John or Alex wouldn't want someone like you to own their products. Of course, - you wouldn't know.
Electrical Engineering and design is not science, or rather not scientific investigations. And although the principles of conductivity and electrical circuit designs require adherence to "laws" of physics, - they are not scientifiic investigations.
People who conduct listening tests are 10 times more knowledgable than naysayers who can't even tell you what parts are inside the boxes that they are ignorantly criticizing.
these products do definitely work on repeatable evidence and performance consistently and peer review....
You are making the claim that these products do not work as designed, - and you offer no evidence to back up your claim. You refuse to even test to the BEST method of analysis which is listening to it. But you also refuse to conduct any measurements (as cursory and unrepresentative of performance as most measurements are), on any of the equipment in question. So I call your post out as cowardace and gross ignorance.
it is clear from your posts that you do not in any way understand scientific investigation, what constitutes evidence, or any idea about what these products are, and how they perform.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Electrical Engineering and design is not science, or rather not scientific investigations"
So the design of an electronic audio product is not of a scientific nature? The act of performing an electrical test on a piece of audio gear is not a scientific process?
Not only is that absurd, but even a properly conducted listening test is in fact a scientific process. That means adhering to DBT protocol.
Did John work for Intel? I can't confirm or deny what I have not seen stated? Where does he claim that? I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt here are many people work for Intel. But what exactly did he do at Intel? There is nothing in the bio HE posted on the above articles that states any formal background in electrical engineering or electronics. You think a company like Intel doesn't require that of their engineering staff? Perhaps not for technicians but surely for their design engineers.
And it's not that his products don't work. That's my fault or not being more specific. I'm sure they do "work" in that they pass a digital audio stream faithfully. And I see no reason why his isolation products wouldn't reduce electrical noise on the signal or bit stream.
What "does not work" is the claim that these products improve the recovered sound. Sure in theory you could have enough noise on the bit stream to couple into the analog section of a DAC. But when you consider the magnitude of the average electrical noise level on a USB interface versus the S/N of the analog circuits and post amplification, coupled with speaker sensitivity, it's simply not audible.
Yes, I know you and others claim to hear it. And I believe you honestly do. But have you heard of expectation bias, placebo effect? Would you be willing to participate in a properly conducted DBT?
Or are you one of those audiophiles that say DBT doesn't work. That the very idea of a test destroys the delicate mode, upsets the sensitive listener, and therefore nullifies the differences.
Please!
That is inherently a subjective goal.
Look, - if we can't agree that the PURPOSE of a component is too enhance the experience of listening to a recording, - then there's not much point in continuing.
whether or not a Fender Rhodes sounds like a Fender Rhodes through any given system is a subjective statement and certainly can be debated, but cannot be "proven." Especially by any measurement or series of measurements on any given DAC, amp, speakers etc.
The goal is better sound, - not less jitter. A DAC that has a lower jitter level on the DAC chips may sound much worse than other DACs because the power supply sucks, or it just doesn't have synergy with the other components in the system.
Measurements on any one piece of gear DO NOT CORREALATE with overall system performance. We judge PERFORMANCE subjectively.
If I measure the width of my amplifier and it comes out to 19 inches, - is that science? Every time i take out a ruler to cut may carpet, - am I being scientific? If you want to call measuring jitter part of a scientific process that is fine, - I can agree to that. But at the same time, you must recognize that you can have GOOD science and BAD science. And also recognize that some measurements have no bearing on the final result or goal, some measurements have LESS VALUE than others, and certainly you can have poor tests that have no bearing on the final result or conclusion.
Right now, John Swenson is developing tools that ARE BETTER. He is ADVANCING SCIENCE by designing tests that are MORE REFLECTIVE of the PERFORMANCE of the device, - which may HELP get us closer to making our conclusions more accurate.
If you yourself wanted to understand these truths better: you could go out and listen to many different types of equipment in different combinations, then you would be performing scientific investigations yourself, and you necesssarily would come to the understanding that measurements (especially the cursory ones that you currently support) have no correlation with performance. You will come to the same conclusions that almost everyone here, who performs these tests, - that different components and cables effect the overall sound of a system differently.
In this thread, I have repeated myself several times. That is not good. It is likely I, (and several others who have said something similar), are not going move you from (reading your posts) your position that is contrary to the 99%).
So good luck, and I do wish that you would open up your mind a bit, do some research and science, and investigate and listen to more equipment. Most of us find it a lot of fun, - even though we may never buy anything, or think that the equipment is "right" for us, - many of us still find it great fun to listen to many of the vast array of gear out there.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Don't confuse an open mind with an empty mind subject to input from charlatans.Many years ago. I chose to learn how this gear works. How to design and build it. How to quantify it's performance.
What qualifies you to dictate what is scientific practice. I see nothing listed in you back ground that shows any scientific education or experience.
You are defining science to be what you want it to represent, not what the established scientific community has defined for 1000 years so far.
You think that random uncontrolled listening tests full of external influences are scientific. Hardly. Listening tests certainly be a scientific and to have any real value that have to be. That's not what you seem to be doing. You read consumer blog and press articles that lack any accreditation and form your opinions of gear from that. Yes, you do ultimately listen, but you go into that armed with the idea the gear is something special based on what you read. It's called BIAS.
How abut a DBT where we switch between a USB isolator in and out or between two different USB cables and tally the results using the rules of statistics and probability. Do you have a problem with a test like that and if so why?
Because that is the true scientific test, not a wine and cheese event sponsored by the local audiophile shop intorducing a new vendor.
Edits: 04/19/19 04/19/19 04/19/19
It might help your gross lack of understanding of what the scientific method is, and how we come to reach conclusions through a process of hypothesizing, varied testing with controls, and the gathering of evidence. Additionally, understanding this, may help you to also understand that science is dynamic, always changing, and conclusions and results change over time with better and more thorough testing.
Namely that science is fluid and you can have GOOD science and bad science.
By the way, this is all being performed by the people that you are so criticizing, (with zero data and evidence on your part: read: WILD speculations). John is developing measuring tools to analyze high frequency current leakage and noise that feeds into the digital file player as well as back into the AC mains.
"What qualifies you to dictate"
I am not dictating anything, and no one needs to have qualifications to correct you on the definition of what science and the scientific method is. If you'd like, - you can go ahead and look it up here and post it, - but a practitioner of science and the scientific method is decidedly something that the typical electronics engineer doesn't normally do in their work. An EE who is a designer may or may not.... But certainly even a practitioner of science has no right to re-define an established definition that is universally accepted and excludes everything that is not science.
"You are defining science to be what you"
That is a lie. The scientific community doesn't define science, it practices it. Again, - the scientific community as individuals in practice may or may not conduct good science. As we've seen with in the USA especially, - there's a lot of bad science being conducted.
Why don't YOU DO SOME SCIENCE yourself and test the product instead of speculating.
From your posts, you are so incredibly closed minded. YOU are making claims about products that YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT!! This is simply ignorance. I challenge you to back up your CLAIMS with scientific evidence.
You have never heard this product, you have never held this product in your hand, you've never opened up the case, - you have ZERO experience with this product and yet, - you're making claims about it's efficacy.
You're calling the designer a charlaton and making a claim that these products don't work. So I ask you, - in many ways the isoRegen is similar to the Intona USB isolator designed for the computing industry. It also has an added power supply on the output stage to send 5v of "cleaner" DC power wherein the Intona does not. Anyway, - are you also calling the Intona ineffective in it's application(s) outside the audio industry?
Of course I would have no problems with a DBT on the isoRegen.
And please, - stop it with your childish sarcasm re: wine and cheese and the local audio shop bull...... This kind of ridiculous hyperbole only undermines your arguments.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You claim to be a musician.So again what is your technical or scientific background?
Just because some audiophile rag states a technical claim you believe it?
Yep, keep drinking the Koolaid!
Edits: 04/20/19
""So again what is your technical or scientific background?""
Is there one needed? Is it not possible to follow the scientific method without technical degrees? Is a speculation from a chemical scientist more valuable here than an experienced evidence gathering listener who has engaged comparative analysis and research?
Your wild claim that none of these products can possibly work is based on what evidence? Are you just blindly following other mad speculators?
""Just because some audiophile rag states a technical claim you believe it?""
Do you have a quote from an audiophile "rag" that you'd like post? Do you have any evidence of someone making a "technical claim." Just because some EE in an unrelated area shouts some crazy speculating remarks about audiophile products in general, - (absent of any EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER), you're going to believe them?
Anytime your "so called" scientists render an opinion about anything, - they are somehow more reliable and trustworthy over anybody else, - even if they have no evidence, have not researched, and have done no testing?
Yes, - you need help understanding the difference between science, and then speculative opinions: heresay from a few naysayers.
Underlying any scientific investigation is curiosity: you should be asking yourself, - "why does almost everyone who uses these products, assert that they are effective? What tests can I run that would either prove or disprove their effectiveness? What is inside these boxes, and how do they work?
You stand with the religious zealots, who are shouting "the sun revolves around the earth," forming opinions about so much you are unwilling to investigate. This is zealotry and cult-of-personality charlatanism.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Your wild claim that none of these products can possibly work is based on what evidence?"It's called an education and many years of experience in electrical engineering. Specifically professional audio and video systems. Most of the claims made by these audiophile accessory vendors are in conflict with well proven established theory and practice.
They can fool the non technical types but not the knowledgeable. Tell me why is the EE community as a whole always against these products. Just look on any open forum and see who the naysayers are. The only so called "engineers" who support these disputed ideas are those who make and sell the products.
And then where is the technical evidence these products do work? I'm not interested in placebo or expectation biased reports. If John is such a great engineer, why can't he show us some calibrated measurements of the improvements at the end of the chain where it counts?
Edits: 04/22/19 04/22/19
""It's called an education and many years of experience in electrical engineering.""
And you think that that constitutes EVIDENCE??
You're even more bamboozled than i thought....
""Most of the claims made by these audiophile accessory vendors are in conflict with well proven established theory and practice.""
That is a lie, and I have demonstrated such in previous post. As I stated previously, - these products are highly inspired by, and are almost the SAME THING as long established and proven products in computer networking and the computing industries.
So why did you repeat this again, after i already demonstrated that you are wrong? Why do you continue to assert the same thing, - without offering any counter argument to that point? AHHHH, - because you're religious zealot, a tool of a naysaying pseudo-scientists who also preach and don't follow any principles of good investigation.....
""They can fool the non technical types but not the knowledgeable. Tell me why is the EE community as a whole always against these products""
No one is fooling anyone. The EE community is not "against" these products, - they're used everyday, and enjoy a great following. You should investigate the Intona, EMO Networking isolators, Linear power supplies...
""The only so called "engineers" who support these disputed ideas are those who make and sell the products.""
The only people who dispute these ideas are a few religious zealots who are not researching the products, - and certainly don't understand them.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
All you do is claim they work. You further claim others agree. This is not evidence but rather an opinion.
And you are twisting around what I am saying. I am not saying isolation devices are not valid products. I am not saying linear power supplies are not of a benefit in sensitive analog devices.
What I am saying is the application of these products by Uptone Audio and Empirical Audio are taking a legitimate engineering problem way out of context to sell unnecessary products.
Show me proof of improvement on a typical home HiFi system. That means a measured improvement in what ever the product is claimed to improve. Noise, distortion, whatever.
Anectodotal evidence is evidence......
Murderers go to jail... yes, - piled up anectodotal evidence.
I have compared an isoRegen with it in place, and with it out. I have compared it with 3 different sources. I have listened to and compared to 4 different of John's sources, both in my systems and in others.
There you go, - see above.....
""What I am saying is the application of these products by Uptone Audio and Empirical Audio are taking a legitimate engineering problem way out of context to sell unnecessary products""
What is the engineering "problem?" please be specific. Your statement makes the "claim" that these products are unnecessary. How do you know? How have you applied these products in this context? I am glad that you have finally admitted that these "types" of products applied elsewhere, - (like the medical industry), - are very effective. So, - if they are effective in the medical industry, - why not experiment further with them and TRY them in another area?
This is what HUNDREDS of audiophiles have found. They have bought these cheap little USB boxes that have been very effective in Galvanic Isolation in the medical industry, - deploying them in their USB chain has improved the overall sound in their system.
""Show me proof of improvement on a typical home HiFi system.""
Nope, - you show me proof. You are the one making the claim. Intona, for example, is making the claim that these provide galvanic isolation in the USB chain.
""typical home HiFi system"
That depends on what you mean by typical hi-fi system. Most of the posters here are talking about a high-performance hi-fi system. I don't call that typical. I call a Sony/NHT floor standers, a typical hi-fi system, - where no one would ever buy an Intona or a isoRegen as they cost more than their CD player.......
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Intona, for example, is making the claim that these provide galvanic isolation in the USB chain."And they do. That is an accurate claim.
Now what about the claim that it improves audio reproduction. How exactly does it do that. What is the attribute it is improving on. What is the particular distortion it is reducing? Than can all be measured and quantified. But they, the audio specific vendors, all fail to show it. Why?
Edits: 04/22/19 04/22/19
""And they do. That is an accurate claim.""
Whew.... that took like 20 posts.....
""Now what about the claim that it improves audio reproduction."
That's not the claim: what you wrote above is untrue.
"What is the particular distortion it is reducing?"
See above, - it is not reducing any.
""Than can all be measured and quantified"
Yes, - it is, and it does, - after all, - (now get this), it is an USB signal.
""But they, the audio specific vendors, all fail to show it.""
Also, - untrue. They demonstrate it clearly.
Thank you for playing....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
I pointed out way back these the engineering terms used by these audio vendors are legitimate. It didn't take 20 posts. But it remains fact there is no published test data that proves effectiveness in audio reproduction.
That fact that you "hear it" is proof to you but no one else. That's why we measure any technology by science and mathematics.
If Uptone or Empirical audio could show evidence of audio improvement don't you think they would? What is the downside to that. The fcat is they can't because it's not there.
"But it remains fact there is no published test data that proves effectiveness in audio reproduction."
But there is in the medical industry....
And that is the same claim made, - that it provides galvanic isolation.
And it may POSSIBLY work in audio reproduction....
It is not universalizable. Like the great Ayre company does, this isolation is provided in the DAC itself, - so the effectiveness of the Intona may be mitigated due to that fact. Also, - of course, - low performance audio reproduction will not benefit as well.
""That's why we measure any technology by science and mathematics.""
First, - these devices are measured, - the noise level is measured and reduced. Second, - just because that is the case, - whether that noise reduction makes it's way into the sound that comes out of the speakers is not certain. Do we really need to go over why?
And again, - we take this back to the point of making measurements: in that the measurements we have now do NOT ACCURATELY reflect the efficacy of the product, - that's why we use other tools to judge!!!
""If Uptone or Empirical audio could show evidence of audio improvement don't you think they would?""
It's up to the listener to properly apply: see above. The evidence has been demonstrated by the comparative listening done by the testers.
Uptone or Intona or Audioquest don't know what their devices are going to be used with. The recognize that there will be a difference if their devices are used with MacMini's or Sonore's ultraRendu. They will behave differently, - and they will behave much differently with a MacMini and a Meitner than they with a MacMini and Sony piece-of-junk.
"" What is the downside to that. The fcat is they can't because it's not there.""
Again, they have, they've gone through extensive testing. And with many of their products, - before they ship, they are well tested and used.
As I said they do publish their measurements. These are easily found on the interwebs. But again, these things don't keep planes in the air. They are made to possibly improve the listening experience, - and they're so ridiculously cheap, - and of such great value, - try it, - then sell it if you're not running a noisy computer.
In any case, - John's is developing a much more comprehensive set of measuring tools that will be MORE REFLECTIVE of performance. Those will be out soon. And then you will be presented with more evidence that you will close your mind too and stomp around shout about angrily.....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"But there is in the medical industry....
And that is the same claim made, - that it provides galvanic isolation.
And it may POSSIBLY work in audio reproduction...."
Galvanic isolation again? Do you know why that is done in the medical industry? It has nothing to do with signal integrity. It's for safety! Study UL60601-1.
Again you are just regurgitating what you read in audiophile magazines.
Talk about appeal to authority! How about appealing to the right authority! Not some consumer audio magazine!
LOL
Your post is just hilarious in its level of ignorance...
""It's for safety! Study UL60601-1.""
of course it is, as are the ENO RJ-45 isolators in networking....
"" It has nothing to do with signal integrity.""
Of course not!! And i never said it did.
""Again you are just regurgitating what you read in audiophile magazines. ""
Why would you assume that my statements about the Intona would come from audio magazines that I do not have or read?
HOW many times do I need to spell it out for you??? I AM TESTING THE PRODUCTS, I HAVE DIRECT EXPERIENCE and anecdotal evidence of their efficacy
""Talk about appeal to authority""
LOL, - how is testing for myself appealing to authority? Explain it to me please? If you'd like, - I can help you with logic, deductive statements, reason, formulating arguments...
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
A home audiophile?
The best to judge the effectiveness of the equipment.....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
z
You? Obviously not.....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You are making a fool of your self. Just look at my video. Do you run an active crossover system? Try that for starters.
I am not going to watch your video.....
""You are making a fool of your self""
nothing compared to just about all the posts you've made here.
I was asking about your system cause I didn't know what it was made up of, - because, - again, - you're making judgements about something that you know nothing about.
You can see all of the details in my system easily by clicking on the A.
I hope that things get better for you, carrying all this vitriol must get pretty heavy after a fashion...
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
+10 enough close-minded vitriol.
Bi-wired right? I see dual cables going to that speaker! I don't see multiple power amps so that rules out true active biamping?What's with the old utility pole insulators under the speaker cables? Art statement? That's fine. But I hope you don't think they provide any technical benefit! If so please explain how a wood floor against a fractional amp output impedance has any significant capacitance effects. At that low of an impedance even a steel conduit that length would have negligible effects.
Edits: 04/22/19
Then don't watch it. That doesn't change the facts presented within which are still on public display.
And I sincerely doubt anybody watching that would consider the author a fool except perhaps another fool.
the man said it best with the following.
"Perhaps more than any other discipline, audio engineering involves not only purely objective characterization but also subjective interpretations. It is the listening experience, that personal and most private sensation, which is the intended result of our labors in audio engineering. No technical measurement, however glorified with mathematics, can escape that fact."
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
"But when you consider the magnitude of the average electrical noise level on a USB interface versus the S/N of the analog circuits and post amplification, coupled with speaker sensitivity, it's simply not audible."
Now I gotta ask: Are you serious? Do you REALLY know how this stuff works?
Do you really believe that 'electrical noise' on the USB input just somehow passes right through the USB > I2S converter, through the DAC and out through the analog circuitry of the DAC to the amp and the speakers, completely unaltered in level and in character and at the same very low level as it appeared on the USB input?
I hope not. :-(
"it's simply not audible".I though I made it clear I don't believe that! I am saying in theory it could happen to the point of audibility.
And above you admitted you are not an electrical engineer. So why are you arguing with the theory?
Yes, noise on input signals, even power signals CAN show up on the device output signal. Do you have any idea of how RFI manifests it's self? Isn't that one of the things Mr. Swenson is claiming?
What you don't understand is that the RFI doesn't "pass through" the conversion circuitry. It "broadcasts" all over the circuit board and through power and high impedance ground wiring. That's were shielding and careful low level analog circuit design comes in
But in reality, in a consumer audio product, they generally don't and therefore why do we need these silly isolation boxes?
Edits: 04/18/19 04/18/19 04/18/19
"Perhaps more than any other discipline, audio engineering involves not only purely objective characterization but also subjective interpretations. It is the listening experience, that personal and most private sensation, which is the intended result of our labors in audio engineering. No technical measurement, however glorified with mathematics, can escape that fact."
Richard C. Heyser
You are in way over your head if you want to advance your premise.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
You just don't seem to understand what he is actually saying.He is saying that science and engineering are certainly involved in the design of audio gear. There really is no other way.
But that a listening session is also part of the test suite. And if the listening test fails, then the engineering really doesn't matter.
Well yeah! But I have always found that by following the rules and laws of electrical engineering, audio gear doesn't sound bad. The math works.
And I propose that if the listening test fails across a diverse set of subjects, necessary to remove any bias, then I think we will find that the engineering is in fact in error.
Edits: 04/19/19
Hah hah ha......
Like as if it's such a great complex mystery. And, Electrical Engineers are just so amazing....
Many designers of top grade gear, design as they go, not knowing where they'll end up with the final sound. There are a wide variety of variations that can cause significant differences in final performance.
These "laws" as you call them are so rudimentary that yes, - obviously, - any EE or gear designer is going to follow them are, (an amp for example), - will not work.
""He is saying that science and engineering are certainly involved in the design of audio gear. There really is no other way.""
Of course this is true.
""But if the listening test fails."
Like if there's no sound produced? Or the amp/speakers blow up? ha ha...
Tell us, - how can a listening test fail? It's almost as if there's somehow a "right" and a "wrong" here. Tell me, - are deploying tubes in an input stage of a hybrid amplifier "bad" engineering in your mind?
LOL....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You are confusing technical performance with personal taste. Nobody can define what sounds good to another persons's ears. I don't see where any objectivist ever said that in an audio discussion.
Edits: 04/22/19
You are confusing the speculations of engineers with evidence....
""You are confusing technical performance with personal taste. Nobody can define what sounds good to another persons's ears.""
To a large degree, everything is idiosyncratic. And, both technical performance and personal taste can and do merge into the same thing. But there are people, (who have every legitimate right) to buy a system that "sweetens the violins:" (for example). But people's personal tastes also change over time.
In many ways measured technical performance of SS amps better tube amps, - but those tube amps may actually sound more accurate and therefore perform better.
Both Sony amps and Lamm amps are well engineered. But you'd have to put some pretty shitty speakers connected to Lamms to have them perform at the same crappy level as the Sony.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
er, no... that is NOT what Heyser said...The listening experience is the final arbiter IS what he said.
Perhaps you need more listening experience {I do not know}
For me, music is not some dry communique.
"Well yeah! But I have always found that by following the rules and laws of electrical engineering, audio gear doesn't sound bad"
Vanishingly low distortion during the 70's and 80's produced some of the most God awful dreck but measured outstanding. You fail to understand that here and now in 2019 we still don't know WHAT to measure in order to explain why measurements do NOT always correlate to good sound
I have owned hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment over the years... far beyond most hi-fi enthusiasts and the amps I build for myself are head and shoulders above 98 percent of what is out there.Perhaps, you do not grasp that everyone hears differently.
Richard C. Heyser surely knew that.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
Edits: 04/19/19 04/20/19
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
One of the worst sounding, actually two of the worst sounding digital cables that are supposedly "no-nonsense" pro audio cables I've ever experienced are the Canare DA202 and DA206 AES/EBU digital cables terminated with either gold or silver Neutrik pro audio XLR connectors. While it's safe to assume that the cables measured within spec as determined by pro audio standards, it's obvious that there are unmeasurable issues involved in how a cable actually sounds when placed within an audiophile system, and how it performs on paper and perhaps perceived as placed in a typical pro audio system.
This is not to claim that all pro audio cables are poor performers when placed within a typical audiophile system, since I'm currently working with two other very good sounding pro audio cables and pro audio XLR connectors that sound notably superior to the Canare/Neutrik builds for an audiophile application. That said, if cables don't make a difference, and pro audio cables of any make/model and type are more than sufficient, then it's curious as to why are there such divergent sonic signatures and performance levels involved in what is considered objective standards, which are said be unquestionable as to the veracity of pro audio cables being as good as it gets.
I think I did say exactly that!"And if the listening test fails, then the engineering really doesn't matter." [Gusser]
And I never said everyone hears the same! Who ever did?
But you need to consider we don't hear only with our ears. We hear with our brains. And that brain is highly subject to other influences. This is well proven.
Placebo effect, expectation bias is very real. That's why we have DBT. Now some claim DBT is not perfect either and perhaps it's not. But it's certainly more reliable than listening tests where all the parameters are fully disclosed before hand.
You build tube amps. Tube amps are simple circuits and very wide tolerance. Now can you build a state of the art DC coupled SS amp just from part data sheets. No schematic to follow, just data sheets. Try to do that without resorting to math and EE principles!
As for the 70s and 80s, what about the SS amps of the 60s? And we still have bad audio products today. Point is every decade had good and bad audio components. I still use Haflers of the early 80s. These were good amps. Not everything back then was junk.
Edits: 04/19/19 04/19/19 04/19/19
Time to get off your high horse and stop accusing intelligent audiophiles with the typical insult of delusional perception of differences due to cabling when evaluating their carefully configured audio systems, gusser. Like the majority of cable naysayers, you choose by an act of personal will rather than intensive personal experimentation to find-out what audiophiles are actually hearing instead of such scurrilous downplaying of what is an adventurous discovery for multitudes of listeners over the course of many decades now. How dare you accuse me of being a foolish listener, or somehow a potentially lesser evaluator for not knowing what I actually experience when listening to an audio system.
I've come to loose any objective respect I once had towards you as a professional in broadcasting, and now see you more as a petty condescender who cares more about ridiculing others as a self-centered supremacist rather than that of a truth seeker. I wish I could see you as simply someone with a different opinion than others, but your perspective has far more to do with social judgment of individual persons and their capacity to evaluate cables rather than that of insightful criticism. Perhaps you'd like those who enjoy better audio via audiophile cables to wake-up and stop being hypnotized by cables that you consider to be pure snake oil, but I'm far more experienced than that kind of backasswards notion.
"Now can you build a state of the art DC coupled SS amp just from part data sheets. No schematic to follow, just data sheets"Precisely where you fall short. This approach being a modified version of Monday morning armchair quarterback. Empirical approaches remain superior to direct coupled circuits with a constant eye toward lower distortion being your lightning rod. The link below will show you am well aware of some gentlemen whom ARE aware of the SS shortcomings. Interesting to me that some of that best sounding SS were just crude renditions of time worn tube topologies sans direct coupling. Still, you and others refuse to accept we STILL do not know what to measure. I remain amused by those whom tout SS and all it's superior manifestation and ignore that compression drivers {in speakers}remain TODAY with distortion levels 10 times lower than cone and dome speakers. Logical progression... many whom like horn speakers also have an affinity for panel speakers... again that superior distortion characteristic of panel and horn speakers make them kindred.
If you are so adamant about cutting edge superior sound, am sure you use either panel or horn speakers recognizing their superior distortion characteristics across the board {which ARE incontrovertible}.
Or perhaps you just listen differently.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
Edits: 04/20/19
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
It's not about SS amp distortion in the thousands of percent. And I am quite aware of speaker distortion. Funny as you use that to support your argument yet seem to ignore that fact when it comes to USB cables sounding different.Let's see speaker distortion is enough to make ultra low distortion amps unnecessary yet the micro distortions that could possibly result from cable induced jitter or noise coupling do matter?
As for my point. You seem to be discounting formal electrical engineering in the design of audio gear. Just slap some parts together and if it sounds good, that's proof engineering principles need not be adhered to? Yes, you can do that to some extent on a tube amp. But try to build a DC SS amp that way. You are going to waste a fortune in blown transistors! To design a DC SS power amps requires the application of formal electrical engineering principles. There is far too much circuit interaction involved to "wing it". You need to do the analysis and math.
Hence anybody saying electrical engineering is not part of audio component design is absurd!
Edits: 04/20/19
Obviously you did not read the link, I know not if is over you head but is cogent to the topic. Different geometric windings effect sound transmission and in turn affect our enjoyment. You side stepped the glaring fact of drivers having far more influence on sound than the electronics involved. The irony is you are arguing a case you don't even believe. One has to spend far more on SS to even approach the resolution of tube gear (done right). If YOU cannot hear what am talking about then perhaps your cones and domes are providing too much euphoric distortion... In other words you might not be able to hear the difference.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
"You side stepped the glaring fact of drivers having far more influence on sound than the electronics involved"
And FWEIW, I happen to agree!
My point was one cannot design a modern SS amp without the use of electrical engineering principles.
The initial argument above was that electronics is not important as long as it sounds good. How about reliability to start with?
which often are so stupidly rudimentary that it's simply not a factor....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
My point was one cannot design a modern SS amp without the use of electrical engineering principles" er, that was a given save for matters not whether Solid scrape or hollow state. Well, reliability thus far is, of the 11 amps I have built in the last 10 years not one has went south whatsoever, I find tube gear more reliable than SS but that is not fair as no one is building kit with a such brute force as mine. When You build for yourself one is not constrained by profit margins. Here is the last one I built as a thought experiment {can I build a P/P tube amp that sounds as good as Single ended Triode ... directly heated? the answer was; No.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
I said nothing of your engineering capabilities. Obviously you have those skills.
I was referring to the other poster who chooses to diss engineering as a scientific practice.
"I was referring to the other poster who chooses to diss engineering as a scientific practice."
I was referring to a few EEs like yourself whose unresearched and un-educated opinion outside of any sort of investigation is not as good as ACTUAL testing.
Just like if you said that it's impossible for raw fish to taste good because "I am an electrical engineer." Your credentials or training doesn't matter re: sushi. You have to TRY it!
Your OPINIONS and SPECULATIONS on what is an effective product design in the audio industry have no value to anyone but yourself.
Your opinions to judge the EFFICACY of a product have no correlation with your experience and credentials as an electrical engineer.
The BEST judge of the efficacy of the these products is ONLY the (comparative) experience as a LISTENER to these products.
If you say that these products are poorly designed from an electrical engineering perspective, - then you should point out specifically how and where, (in detail), - this is true.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"I was referring to a few EEs like yourself....""I don't buy that you're a professional EE . I think that you're perhaps a low level radio studio gopher intern who takes lunch orders & goes out on hourly Starbucks runs"
What about you? Interesting you challenge all my recent posts except for the one where you challenged me to outline my system.
I disclosed my true identity in that post, where I work, other accomplishments. Again you have given us nothing but talk. We know nothing about you nor do we have any ability to find out! Yeah it's easy to throw insults around when you hide behind a moniker.
Let the evidence speak for it's self.
Edits: 04/22/19
Neither you or nor anyone else has an "authority" because of your credentials.
Your authority or expertise comes from not who you are but from your testing and results...
I have much more experience than you, and therefore my claims, (as well as the other testers of the products).
Your credentials as an EE do not matter as much as you (comparative) listening to the product.
Anyone's engineering knowledge, experience, or training is IN A DIFFERENT AREA than judging the efficacy of the product.
Anyways, - as you admit, - these products are very effective. So, - I guess that's about all I can hope for here.....
And, - it's looking like John's tools are almost done, - so we'll see what happens when you get those measurements. But, - I'd also be willing to bet that you'll not stop with the insults and referring to John as "so-called" engineer.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Who said I had any authority here?I am asking for proof of John Swensons claims of audible improvement. If that is insulting, then he certainly has something to hide.
Where are the published credentials? Show us! I showed you mine if you bother to do the research.
Again who are you? You claim more experience than me in this hobby. Show it! I have. What about you? When was the last time you swept your listening room? What acoustic treatments do you employ? You're all about how it sounds. What is your listening environment? At least I'm not speculating on that as you did with me.
Edits: 04/22/19 04/22/19
""Who said I had any authority here?"'
Either you, or the other naysayers that you're citing as authority figures.
"Where are the published credentials?"
From whom and why? Why are you on about published credentials? What's more important a person's opinion or demonstrable science? Why do you trust a preacher over hard test results?
Why would electronic engineer designs toy barking dogs (who does no testing) carry a higher opinion than a comparative listener WHO IS ACTUALLY TESTING the products in their house? Or, - in the medical industry where the devices are actually deployed????
""I have.""
No you haven't. Please, - publish your listening results of the iso-regen in your system with a DBT or any testing whatsover. Also, - you have not demonstrated at all where you've compared the Intona galvanic isolator with the isoRegen or Audioquest jitterbug.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You keep dodging your foolish post above where you asked if if even own a CD player. Clearly I am in a better position to evaluate any audio or video product than you could hope for.What is your listening environment? Is it calibrated? Mine is and I can show you the sweeps.
Barring that I have access to pro facilities with very deep pockets.
You are the one defending John Swenson's credentials based on I don't know what. I asked for some documentation to back up and you can't provide it?
To say I am not capable of evaluating these products is absurd. Anybody else here can see that based on the evidence I posted.
Edits: 04/22/19 04/22/19
""You keep dodging your foolish post above where you asked if if even own a CD player""
You keep dodging your foolish post that these products suck, - even though you know nothing about them, haven't seen, haven't tested them, and are insulting the people that make them, (saying that they are bad engineers), and the people who have thoroughly tested and used the items and are now enjoying a much better listening experience because of them.
""Clearly I am in a better position to evaluate any audio or video product than you could hope for."
LOL, - that is probably the biggest bit of ridiculousness you've posted here.
""You are the one defending John Swenson's credentials based on I don't know what.""
Coming down to your level, - for the sake of demonstrating that CREDENTIALS DON'T MATTER. It's John's work that matters.
""I asked for some documentation to back up and you can't provide it?"
on what? why? Again, - you are making a claim, - I am repeating and corroborating the claims of others. You were also making a claim about the Intona, - until i showed you that you are so ignorant of these products that you didn't know about them.
""You are the one defending John Swenson's credentials based on I don't know what.""
That is not true. I am defending his work, - because it is good. He makes great products. I am sorry that you are too closed minded to try any, - you might like sushi, - if you'd just try it.
""Barring that I have access to pro facilities with very deep pockets.""
So what? Why waste time writing that valueless sentence....???
""To say I am not capable of evaluating these products is absurd.""
That is a lie. I would never say that. I said that you are unwilling to evaluate them, - and remaining in ignorance is (sadly) far worse. But it doesn't end there, not only are you espousing and staying in ignorance, - but you out of that ignorance, you are unjustly insulting the people who design, manufacture, and deploy these highly effective, and excellent products....
""Anybody else here can see that based on the evidence I posted""
You have not posted ONE TINY BIT OF EVIDENCE!!!
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
More babbling on!You challenged me to my capabilities and qualifications to evaluate these products.
I produced that. Now you act as if it doesn't exist. You think you are the only person here that can read these posts?
As far as you have shown us you are an armature audiophile. You have no formal background in this technology and no ability to do anything more than a personal listening test.
And you continue to babble on here hiding behind a forum moniker. I have disclosed mt full background for anybody the research and verify.
I think it's pretty cowardly to continue these attacks hiding behind a shield as you do.
Edits: 04/22/19
More babbling on!
I know, - I think that we'd all be grateful if you quit.....
"You challenged me to my capabilities and qualifications to evaluate these products."
No, - I challenged the fact that you are stubbornly, outside reason, and outside science: completely UNWILLING to evaluate them. And there are ZERO qualifications for an effective evaluation of the products.
""As far as you have shown us you are an armature audiophile""
What is an armature audiophile? That's a new one....
"" 2a : a piece of soft iron or steel that connects the poles of a magnet or of adjacent magnets
b : a usually rotating part of an electric machine (such as a generator or motor) which consists essentially of coils of wire around a metal core and in which electric current is induced or in which the input current interacts with a magnetic field to produce torque
c : the movable part of an electromagnetic device (such as a loudspeaker)
d : a framework used by a sculptor to support a figure""
""I have disclosed mt full background for anybody the research and verify."
Why would anyone bother? As I've repeated too many times, your background (especially in another area) doesn't mean that you have anything at all to to contribute to the efficacy of the products in question, - especially because you are conducting no tests, - and just repeating the claims of others who are at least testing...
""I think it's pretty cowardly to continue these attacks hiding behind a shield as you do.""
Says the ignorant naysayer who is making claims about products, insulting the designers, the users of the products: and is completely unwilling to test, research, or investigate the products in any way whatsoover.
Now that is the ultimate cowardice.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
"Why would anyone bother? As I've repeated too many times, your background (especially in another area) doesn't mean that you have anything at all to to contribute to the efficacy of the products in question, - especially because you are conducting no tests, - and just repeating the claims of others who are at least testing..."
So the design of broadcast and mastering facilities as well as design of specific hardware for that industry does not qualify one to judge home audio equipment?
What do you play or watch on your great home system? Where does it come from? You think these large facilities don't have issues with electrical noise problems.
If that wasn't enough I practice this as a hobby as well as everyone else here. I have provided a link to my home system. That should be quite clear I understand this technology as it relates to consumer use but on a much larger scale. My system utilizes 22 channels of AES audio. That means 11 AES lines. And they have to be distributed through active splitters to the many audio computer systems I use for real time measurement. Yet you think I don't know about what is required for a simply USB transport to DAC link. Remember I built the Atmos processor using MiniDSP cards. All interconnected via I2S.
You were the one who challenged me to disclose my home system obviously in the hopes of belittling it. Well I did and among with that a plethora of my background with more than enough information for anyone to check out.
What have you shown us here. What about your system? Show us some accomplishments in this hobby sector you have produced?
So the design of broadcast and mastering facilities as well as design of specific hardware for that industry does not qualify one to judge home audio equipment?
Absolutely CORRECT, - now you're getting it. The performance goals of home audio gear are entirely different....
"What do you play or watch on your great home system?"
I never said that I have a great system, - but others have. I have over 40,000 songs. I listen to a lot of different things. Digital Files vary in recording quality, - just like everything/everybody else. I also have about 1600 CDs and 60 or so high-rez discs in SACD/DVD-A. But I'm not sure why you're asking.
""You were the one who challenged me to disclose my home system obviously in the hopes of belittling it.""
Wrong!! I was curious as to what it was, as it could be a system where the products that you're making claims would, or would not be effective. Obviously, - if you do not have a computer (or digital file playback device), - it would be particularly damning if you were asserting that the USB device was ineffective, - when you don't even do computer file playback in your system.
""You think these large facilities don't have issues with electrical noise problems.""
??? what kind of crazy stuff are you saying with the above?
""I have provided a link to my home system.""
Was that a youtube video? Can't you just list it? It's not in your bio here....At one point, - this used to be an audiophile website....
""Show us some accomplishments in this hobby sector you have produced?""
As above, my system, my "accomplishments" are not what is at issue. I am not unreasonably judging any products that I've tested, heard, compared, etc. I claim to have knowledge of something that i don't know about, - unlike yourself.....
1. You are making a claim about something that you haven't heard, have no experience with: solely on the basis of a set of cult-of-personality based on training and experience in another, - unrelated field of study. And this is not only about listening experiences, - (the best test to take you out of ignorance), - but you're even refusing to investigate the internal components and parts that make up the devices, and even gather ANY evidence including measurements. After all you could get specific and cite the fact that LPS-1.2 now has LT3045 regulator chokes, and you can cite some experience that you've had with LT3045 chokes, - as to their contribution.
These products are NOT DESIGNED for the audio/video/industrial BROADCAST Industry. They are not designed for the recording mastering industry, they are not designed for recording studios.
2. Everyone here sees that as ignorance. But worse, - you're insulting the designers of these products, as though they were somehow charlatans, - on the basis of your ignorance and lack of research.
This isn't about me. I am just one of the hundreds of people who have found these products to be very effective. I am sure that my testing and research is better than some, but worse than others. But I have a ton more experience with THE ACTUAL devices than yours.
By the way, - I would say the exact same thing to Ed Meitner or Vladimer Lamm, or Albert Von Schweikert if they tried to assert some ridiculous, - and "trust me I'm a broadcast engineer" "authoritarian" statements about these COMPUTING + AUDIO devices.
yes, - these devices are designed for BOTH computer audio and home audio.
So, let me ask you, - do the very fine Tannoy studio monitors sound the same as Tannoy home audio monitors?
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You think that consumer audio is some special area. Wrong, it's a direct sub set of broadcast and mastering. Avonics would be an example which you suggest but not consumer audio.
You are fixated on the fact that I have not evaluated a specific product, that I know nothing of the underlying technology. That to spite the fact the products designer discloses his theory behind the design in detail. And competent EE can summarize from that what he is trying to sell.
Now you ask me if I have used a certain voltage regulator chip obviously because you read that in John's blog. I have used countless regulator typologies over the years from discrete to SMPS designs. What is this fixation on a single chip? It probably sounds impressive to you but to me it's just another of the literally thousands of regulator chips any EE can chose from these days. Just look at the Digikey or Newark webpage and type in "regulator IC"
What's wrong with a YouTube video, an award video BTW? It goes into much more detail than some equipment list. I have extensive with digital audio. That should be obvious.
I do this stuff professionally. And on a much larger scale than these garage audio trinket vendors. Furthermore I extend that scale to my home system as well.
You can keep your head in the sand but not too many people are going to see this your way in light in my disclosures here. Claiming I know little about digital audio is just barking in the wind.
And you are still hiding behind a moniker. What's the problem? What are you afraid of disclosing?
THIS IS NOT CONSUMER AUDIO, - how many times does it have to be written?
""Wrong, it's a direct sub set of broadcast and mastering.""
HAHAHAHAHAAH.....that was beyond asinine!!
High performance audio playback has one goal and purpose, - to faithfully reproduce a recorded work.
""What is this fixation on a single chip? "
You call me citing an example of the lt3045 as a fixation?"
It is not, - and I used it as an example to show that you're criticizing something that you haven't heard.
You haven't even ever said that you don't need to hear it to know what it does to your system or sounds like, - thank goodness for that....
""I do this stuff professionally.""
You've already said that you do NOT listen and compare high-end audio products professionally,- because you are a professional in AN UNRELATED FIELD, - you ASSUME that you can JUDGE SOMETHING without knowing anything at all about it???
Now that is the height of pompous cluelessness....
""And on a much larger scale than these garage audio trinket vendors""
Even more unrelated to the subject at hand....
""You can keep your head in the sand but not too many people are going to see this your way in light in my disclosures here""
Care to take a poll? (oh that's right, you don't do evidence).
""And you are still hiding behind a moniker. What's the problem? What are you afraid of disclosing?""
not about me, how many times does it have to be said. I don't make claims about things that I don't know about..... I don't see any "name" behind gusser....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Once again i have fully disclosed my background here in that video.
I have nothing to hide.
Until you do the same, you have no credibility. Just another forum ghost.
it seems that no one has any credibility.
From your posts, - self examination seems to be your strongest trait....
:-) :-) :-)
Cheers,
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
Again disclose your background. Otherwise you have no credibility to question mine which I have disclosed. It's just that simple!
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
