XXHighEnd - The Ultra HighEnd Audio Player
March 29, 2024, 07:05:00 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: August 6, 2017 : Phasure Webshop open ! Go to the Shop
Search current board structure only !!  
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 ... 55
256  Ultimate Audio Playback / Orelino / Orelo MKII Loudspeakers / Re: Orelino / Orelo MKII Fletcher-Munson Curves on: March 25, 2014, 08:02:34 am
And have you looked at the curves for the bass part. About 34 db higher at 16.5 hz compared to 1000 hz. That will be tough for your amp...
Leo

Hi Leo,

The BD design eq is within the horizontal 5dB line spacing of Peter's graphs. I see no eq below 600 Hz.... The only tough one would be the high, since that is a 'gain' and we need (imho) to avoid clipping.

Regards,  coen
257  Ultimate Audio Playback / Orelino / Orelo MKII Loudspeakers / Re: Orelino / Orelo MKII Fletcher-Munson Curves on: March 24, 2014, 08:19:45 pm
Impressive!

Am I the only one thinking of three new buttons in XXHigh end?

 Happy Happy Happy

regards,
Coen
258  Ultimate Audio Playback / Playback Tweaks and Source related subjects / Re: EMI susceptibility of audio and USB clocks on: March 12, 2014, 04:46:30 pm
Hi Nick,

Interesting progress!

We have a saying here: "when you have two clocks you never really know what the hour is...". My take on this phenomenon would still be a 'master USB clock' solution. This will always imply a fixed and identical base frequency yet the clock distribution is likely to introduce different phase noise at the different ends. I'm too distracted to look deeper into this subject, yet it may hold even more potential. At least it lacks the synching of the clocks and the clock source may be decoupled from the source and destination noise sources.

I would not be surprised at all that you will find absolute and relative wandering of the clock frequencies audible.

keep us posted,

regards, Coen
259  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: SQ of WAV vs M4A on: February 11, 2014, 12:37:12 am
Now that checksum will tell you if they are completely identical. If you're only one sample off (even one byte) than the checksum will not be the same. This is the difficulty, you cannot know how your rip is comparable to the presumably unripped ' cloud'  version. They have to be from the same source AND have the same start and end samples. So no padding or truncing allowed...otherwise you'll end up with an unequal checksum even if the music is 100% the same.

I'd say only the CD ripping process gives reproducible results unless there is some smart checksum that is able to match the actual music data with a reference regardless of padding/truncation.

On a more DIY track you could align the two datasets on peak values in a (hex) file or music editor (pick a channel and search for nice extremes) than you can observe if the dataseries before and after the peak are exactly the same. Of course with the absolute sample magnitude. If not: they will not be equal enough to sound the same!

regards, Coen
260  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: SQ of WAV vs M4A on: February 10, 2014, 03:58:02 pm
Quote
Otherwise checksums cannot be the same (accurate rip)

But that was about Joachim's own rip of the CD version. Not sure how to check against AccurateRip with a download.
And then *still* it doesn't tell much because 10 versions of an album can exist and they will (normally) all be in the AccurateRip database ...

Peter

check!

That would be the most surprising: itunes store and CD from the same source!

regards, Coen
261  Ultimate Audio Playback / XXHighEnd Support / Re: SQ of WAV vs M4A on: February 10, 2014, 03:25:39 pm
Hello,

the tracks are bought from iTunes and they claim to use AAC-LC.
I was very astonished that the newer recordings at iTunes are nearly identical in their graphs (WAV) with the CD rippings  since the beginning of 2013.

There should be a difference, but it seems .......... .

http://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/bf/amm/produkte/audiocodec/audiocodecs/aaclc.html

best

Joachim

from Peter's link:

Quote
Apple Lossless files are stored in the MPEG 4 container and have a .m4a extension. The MPEG 4 container is also used for Advanced Audio Compression (AAC), a lossy compression (currently all tracks purchased from iTunes Music Store (iTMS) are AAC).

Have a .m4a file but do not know if it contains Apple Lossless or AAC? dBpoweramp Music Converter is able to show the contents (Apple Lossless or AAC) of an m4a file, by simply holding the mouse over.

Maybe they do lossless in the Apple Store after all...
Otherwise checksums cannot be the same (accurate rip)

regards, Coen
262  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ of 1.186, best ever! (Again) on: February 10, 2014, 11:12:13 am
Peter,

If I look correctly at the picture you didn't apply the XT tweaks settings (based on the values between brackets)...
I presume you have archived best SQ with them activated...

regards, Coen
263  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ of 1.186, best ever! (Again) on: February 08, 2014, 11:38:37 am
Hi Peter,

Thanks for sharing you thoughts and insights. I've not considered speaker tuning in this way myself. Anyway maybe I did some changes crucial to my peception of the music through the different OSses. The speaker filter setup in use has not changed since my xp days, though I've experimented a lot inbetween. Foremost I removed some damping material and changed the remaining with stuff that suited me better. This could have been beneficial for w7 only. Someday I will look into how to realise your f-m approach in my setup and have seagulls floating onbthe ceiling!

Regards, Coen
264  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ of 1.186, best ever! (Again) on: February 05, 2014, 03:06:20 pm
Peter,

Thanks for the elaboration.

I've grown to believe in a "sound character" of components and software, that is that no matter what you tune you can never tune it completely into something else. Eventually you will always hear a certain fingerprint of it on the sound.

To illustrate this with an example, I've used a simple lab supply on various locations in my audio setup and I've always been hearing a consistent "darkening" of the sound. For this the supply has to be in use in the chain, just being on unconnected will not change anything.

So we might have tuned our speakers for Win7, but I am reluctant to accept this as the root for a win7 preference. I've conducted many experiments with my speakers filters and they've always been in a certain margin, affecting only a limited set of SQ parameters (foremost on the tonal balance and spaciousness). Especially I've found the almost subliminal listening ease of win7 not a quality that I can change with speakerparts.

Off course if anyone has an experiment that can or will prove me wrong I will conduct it!

regards, Coen
265  Ultimate Audio Playback / Your thoughts about the Sound Quality / Re: SQ of 1.186, best ever! (Again) on: February 05, 2014, 11:21:34 am
Peter,

I am glad you put up the description of the difference between W7 and W8. I think this very much describes the annoyances that I have been hearing in W8 and the naturalness I experience in W7 (...since the beginning). This despite the quite different systems we listen to!

Still some of us report splendid sound from W8 which may tell that there could be something we overlooked.

regards, Coen
266  Ultimate Audio Playback / Playback Tweaks and Source related subjects / Re: Further Isolation of the Silverstone PCIe - USB Card on: February 05, 2014, 08:54:26 am
Hi Anthony,

Glad this worked out great. As a bonus your setup is a lot safer too!

You made me curious: today I wil have an adapter on e-order as local stores cannot supply.

regards, Coen
267  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: Now I get it on: February 04, 2014, 09:27:33 pm
Redbook eh?

I'd say you need both for the best experience.

regards, Coen
268  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: Questions on Phasure NOS1 measurements thread on: February 04, 2014, 08:39:40 pm
Coen, I'm just pointing out that Peter has stated a slew rate of 650V/µs for the NOS1 in other threads. I'm trying to understand how that equates with the measured 90ns for 2V rise time.

Mani.

Ok, thanks, I missed that! Anyway my calculation isn't really correct, but that doesn't really matter.

Regards, Coen
269  Ultimate Audio Playback / Phasure NOS1 DAC / Re: Questions on Phasure NOS1 measurements thread on: February 04, 2014, 04:59:31 pm
Well, this 90nS would imply a bandwidth of 11MHz@full scale....after 1 meter of coax...

No audio amp or ear is able to follow that.

I do not worry.

Slew rate becomes increasingly important when you need higher output voltage (like big power amps) and/or bandwidth (like with video).

regards, Coen
270  Ultimate Audio Playback / Playback Tweaks and Source related subjects / Re: Further Isolation of the Silverstone PCIe - USB Card on: February 03, 2014, 10:35:45 pm
Hi Coen,

Quote
removing the connection of the black wire from the USB receptacle at the power supply's end

Do you mean the black wire (or blue in my NOS1) that runs from the USB female socket shield in NOS1 to PE (via a screw to the case in the right leg power supply)?

If so yes I did remove that and again made no difference.

Paul

Yes, as the only means of 'isolating' the USB. YMMV with these kind of tweaks. It all depends on (too) many other factors.

regards, Coen
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 ... 55
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.108 seconds with 12 queries.