|
Post by garbulky on Aug 2, 2013 12:39:22 GMT -5
I figured it was due to my newbie switching. Also, mac os does have a similarity to windows which I guess lead to some false expectations on my part. It nevertheless left a sour taste in my mouth. Now compare that to using the iphone/ipod touch which was an absolute dream when I tried it. Absolutely 100% intuitive imo. Whatever I wanted I was able to get to with zero effort on my part. Just a dream interface really at least for a non power user. The windoze device statement was really directed mainly at the apple id requirement for their mountain lion software which stalled us from doing anything because nobody had told her this was something that was important enough to remember. Also the toughness of migrating songs and software across different apple id's. I assumed the other frustrations could be gotten over with learning. Now with windows 8 and their new "store" I guess that's no longer true. Hello DRM! BTW, thanks for the local mac user groop meeting. I will definitely let that lady know because she went to the apple store and got zero instruction on how to do her regular tasks and is struggling. I bet that user group meeting with people that actually know their macs (unlike me) would be a great avenue for her.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Aug 2, 2013 13:01:21 GMT -5
The local user group can be accessed at www.brmug.orgThe bunch there is mostly power users and the gang leader is the supercomputing chairman from LSU. The August meeting will be about music & recording - You should come! Thursday, August 15th - 6:30 pm - Goodwood Library - Meeting Room 2. Cheers - Boom
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 14, 2013 22:28:20 GMT -5
News. Turns out my XDA-1 was actually causing distortion. This was the reason I couldn't get it to function on my headphone amplifier without distorting badly on the headphone amp etc. Anyway, story summarized: The first repair replaced two transistors that stopped the audible clipping but comparing it with a functioning XDA-1 it was clear that it simply did not sound correct. The audio was strained and simply not upto the quality that I know initimately of the working XDA-1 I had. There was distortion happening just not as clearly audible as before. Granted it can only be heard on a resolving system but that's sort of the point right? After letting them know, they immediately shipped me a replacement unit. Which I was happy about as I was about to lose faith in the company after the failed repair. And...Emotiva you made the right decision. The thing to remember about customer service is that bad reputations are hard to fix but treat a customer right and they will tell their friends about you. They will remain LOYAL to you. Which I happen to do quite regularly and I'm 100% sure it will bring them at least three to four times the amount of money that I've spent on their gear as this is likely not my last emo product and I know quite a few people that are going to buy Emotiva in the future thanks to me. And well, the magic to the audio is back. And I'm enjoying myself with a smile on the face. It's still just a few days so I sure hope this one doesn't mess up but for now things are well in audio land. I may get an XPA-2 to try out soon. Also hope to see and hear some maggies soon!! P.S.: Anybody know where I can get a high res version of four tops - it's the same old song? Or at least just the single song in CD quality wav or FLAC (not itunes).
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 19, 2013 22:13:01 GMT -5
Updates: A good friend of mine loaned me an XPA-2. On plugging it up with a passive pre-amp, I found a tilt in the frequency range with lower bass diminished and treble and midrange bumped up slightly. I suspected my passive pre-amp had to do with the FR tilt. However I also noted that the XPA-2 was exceptionally fast at reproducing notes. So guess what?! I now have on loan from the same good friend, a USP-1! I will update soon in emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/32383/garbulkys-xpa-2-audition
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 9, 2013 12:27:41 GMT -5
Listening impressions time! Fun. - Some nights album CD One of my favorite songs some nights and tonight we are young really had me tapping my feet on youtube and the radio. So I got the CD hoping for something of better quality. Well the CD unfortunately revealed a mixing process designed to sound really good on cheaper equipment like my ear buds and lower bit rate copies like youtube and radio. The way they mixed the tape prevented from me turning up the songs during the bass and drums to be able to hear the Nate Ruess's voice clearly. The result was a muted affair overall. A good example of this was the We are young track. At the beginning his voice is very clear and the softer drums are put at a more realistic volume carrying some pretty good impact. But the moment the bass kicks in. His voice gets muddy and I'm struggling to lower the volumes to avoid bringing the house down. There is also some treble scratchiness which I find hard to describe but the best way I could say was lack of resolution/clarity in the treble . I wrote this up was simply listening to the lead singer wail it, it's obvious his voice is special and capable of some really nice dynamics - all completely lost on the track the moment the drums and loud bass kick in. Was Janelle Monae on this track? I couldn't tell from the mixing. What should have been this: Became this "you hired who to mix our album?" A really nice song made poor for decent systems. I would be interested an HDtrack of this which is mastered differently as it's got some really great songs imo. Meanwhile onto a more positive note. Wynton Marsalis Live at the house of tribes. Finally recording quality. Now this is more like an album done right. There is a bit of a boominess to the record but I feel it communicates room ambience nicely and was probably what it sounded like. "You don't know what love is" is starts of song with his trumpet appearing to project powerfully from the upper left just slightly behind the speaker and then take a hold of the room and really project it out to the room during the peaks. A very nice tone to the instrument. At 2:50 of the same song, he hits some low notes with a very nice full tone and the peaks of it has that nice bite to the trumpet. Emotional and very enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 15, 2013 0:39:33 GMT -5
As my glorious time with the XPA-2 and USP-1 draws to a close, I hooked up my UPA-2. It's still got it There is a puzzling channel imbalance however that wasn't there with the XPA-2. I always assumed it was because one speaker was near a side wall but it wasn't there with the XPA-2. hmmmm
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 15, 2013 6:32:30 GMT -5
1. Switch speaker leads on the amplifier from right channel to left. Does the louder channel change sides? Yes = the problem is upstream. No = the problem is with a speaker.
2. If step 1 didn't fix the issue, put the speaker leads back to original positions. Now switch the amplifier input leads from right channel to left. Did the louder channel change sides? Yes = the problem is upstream. No = the problem is the amplifier.
3. If step 2 didn't fix the issue, continue swapping channels one component at a time until you isolate the issue.
My gut feeling is that it may be your passive preamp. It was built with Radio Shag quality parts and is now 40 years old. The resistive traces in the pot may need cleaning, or they may have been a bit mismatched from the store. In inexpensive stereo pots channel mismatches are not uncommon. A better quality (Alps) replacement can be had from RS for for about $5, unless I'm mistaken. If they don't have one, Parts-Express.com would. You buy the part & I'll show you how to solder it in.
Another option might be to wait for the "Control Freak" passive from Emotiva. A third option (and the one I recommend) is to save your money until you can go for a preamplifier. There are some GREAT oldies available on eBay for cheap or I'll keep an eye out at yard sales for a $5 one. If you're LUCKY, you might find a nice old Dynaco PAS tube preamp.
I picked up a Klipsch Heresy for $50 yesterday, so the bargains are out there.
Boom-Into-Darkness (with apologies to Star Trek)
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 15, 2013 11:07:48 GMT -5
1. Switch speaker leads on the amplifier from right channel to left. Does the louder channel change sides? Yes = the problem is upstream. No = the problem is with a speaker. 2. If step 1 didn't fix the issue, put the speaker leads back to original positions. Now switch the amplifier input leads from right channel to left. Did the louder channel change sides? Yes = the problem is upstream. No = the problem is the amplifier. 3. If step 2 didn't fix the issue, continue swapping channels one component at a time until you isolate the issue. My gut feeling is that it may be your passive preamp. It was built with Radio Shag quality parts and is now 40 years old. The resistive traces in the pot may need cleaning, or they may have been a bit mismatched from the store. In inexpensive stereo pots channel mismatches are not uncommon. A better quality (Alps) replacement can be had from RS for for about $5, unless I'm mistaken. If they don't have one, Parts-Express.com would. You buy the part & I'll show you how to solder it in. Another option might be to wait for the "Control Freak" passive from Emotiva. A third option (and the one I recommend) is to save your money until you can go for a preamplifier. There are some GREAT oldies available on eBay for cheap or I'll keep an eye out at yard sales for a $5 one. If you're LUCKY, you might find a nice old Dynaco PAS tube preamp. I picked up a Klipsch Heresy for $50 yesterday, so the bargains are out there. Boom-Into-Darkness (with apologies to Star Trek) Hi there! I enjoyed your visit. It was actually the USP-1 I tried. I did do both 1 and two. I think it's either speaker related (unlikey I think) or placement/toe in related. Anyway. I found and plugged in the passive pre-amp back in the system after you left. Ahhh, I got to say that passive pre-amp route has something so pure to it. But interestingly you mentioned that the bass was a little much before. I figured what you meant that. There was TONS of bass now. I felt that the USP-1 was a bit more mid-range centrric. On the passive pre- the bass is a little too loose and a little too much sort of like a lower mid/upper bass boost. Similar to using attenuators but not quite. But it does have impact. The dynamics aren't quite as sharp and instruments not quite as localizable as with the USP-1 in the mix. Like I mentioned it's pretty special unit With the passive pre-amp voices have this lack of an electronic sound that I like. A very pure sweet sound. But neutral it's not quite - mainly due to the that low mid/upper bass boost. But is it lively! I have to turn down the sound. Surprisingly I tried it with the XPA-2 and it didn't sound very good. The XPA-2 definitely sounded better with the USP-1 in the mix. I think the XPA-2 needed some real current to drive it well. I am interested in seeing how that ALPS pre-amp would integrate with the current pre-amp/box. Would that be tough to do? My diy skills are slightly above boiling water but not by much...
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 15, 2013 11:12:43 GMT -5
The APLS pot would replace the volume control in your current passive attenuator. Unsolder the old one, solder in the new. I can do it with you while you learn. If you can boil water, you can melt solder.
Boom-Resin-Core
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 15, 2013 23:12:34 GMT -5
The APLS pot would replace the volume control in your current passive attenuator. Unsolder the old one, solder in the new. I can do it with you while you learn. If you can boil water, you can melt solder. Boom-Resin-Core Thanks Glenn. Do you have any guidelines on what resistance value I should get. Something I've been contemplating is that amazing sound I get from the passive pre has to be due to a high impedance rolling off the sound subtly. This may not be neutral but it is so darn nice. I'm worried about messing that up a good thing, you know? Im looking at RS but can't find the $5 alps potentiometer, do you have the link?
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 16, 2013 0:39:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 16, 2013 23:35:19 GMT -5
Today I made a trip to our resident B'zilla's house and he was joined by another LA forum member. (Name withheld as I haven't asked his permission yet). We got to hear and demo a bunch of stuff! The XPA-2 vs UPA-1 monoblocks! Polk LSI9's!!! Those are some nice speakers. Very clear. A similar sound signature to my axioms but it does a few things better. Even got to A/B/ things like braided cable vs 8 guage cables.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 18, 2013 1:03:20 GMT -5
The Couch AKA the cheap man's acoustic panel That's what I discovered when I changed couches, what a difference it makes to the soundstage. Unfrtunately my "upgrade" in comfort is a downgrade in audio enjoyment. The old couch was very wide and I think it helped give wrap around effect to the soundstage. The new one is a ....<sigh> loveseat. I hope to improve with experiments in couch acoustic placement!
|
|
Flunk
Sensei
Just got a new job.....
Posts: 171
|
Post by Flunk on Sept 18, 2013 3:33:39 GMT -5
The Couch AKA the cheap man's acoustic panel We should ask for damping factor on the furniture we buy in the future.
|
|
|
Post by ocezam on Sept 18, 2013 8:36:20 GMT -5
The Couch AKA the cheap man's acoustic panel Hilarious! ...
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 21, 2013 7:22:22 GMT -5
Jitter musings. Foobar can upsample CD audio to 24 bit. Jitter is a timing error. What happens if the 16 bit stream is upsampled to 24 bit before transporting to the DAC. Will you get less of a timing error as there are more bits and therefore the likelihood of jitter errors is reduced simply by throwing more bits for the same file. Or is it actually the opposite?
In case this is confusing, I was thinking it would be something like drawing a painting by throwing paint at the wall. I would get six tries to throw the paint to create the painting. But if I threw 300 smaller blobs, the likelihood of me painting a more recognizable picture is possible even though I would still have the same likelihood of missing. I.e. it takes more bits to make the picture. Even though the likelihood of each bit being wrong is increased, the likelihood is so small that simply increasing the number will get you a more overall accurate jitter reduction.
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 21, 2013 10:27:51 GMT -5
The jitter, as I understand it, is the equivalent of having a belt with teeth on it that keeps moving just slightly faster and then slower. The cog being driven must adjust to each change in speed. Occasionally, the cog jumps a tooth.
This was maybe a poor analogy, but the jitter (again per my understanding) can occasionally trigger the error correction circuitry. The more the error correction must engage, the less likely to have the original waveform (since the error correction is, in effect, guessing at what should have been in the missed bit).
More bits (and I'm really guessing here) would increase the frequency of the bit arrival, and give the "receiver" less time to compensate for any jitter. The error correction may trigger no more or less than with a lower frequency bitstream, since the increased frequency may not actually change the amount (or frequency) of the jitter. On the other hand, in a "worst case scenario," it might.
My reply is based on what I (vaguely) remember from reading. I'm sure KeithL or DYohn might be able to give a far more cogent (and accurate) reply?
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 21, 2013 10:28:56 GMT -5
The Couch AKA the cheap man's acoustic panel Hilarious! ... If couch is insufficiently padded, add mother-in-law.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,920
|
Post by hemster on Sept 21, 2013 10:45:24 GMT -5
If couch is insufficiently padded, add mother-in-law. That would risk adding some serious interference, noise pollution and crosstalk!
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 26, 2013 7:46:44 GMT -5
New experiment for XDA-1. Experiments with WASAPI vs regular using short samples. The XDA-1 upconverts audio to (assumed 24/192Khz) at the DAC chip itslf to process. My question....would there be a quality benefit to upsample my CD's 24/192 before transporting to the DAC. The goal being seeing whether there is a quality difference between the upconversion at the DAC vs the upconversion done at a different section of the audio stream. A few caveats. The conversion is done in a two step process. Foobar in WASAPI mode first upconvets the signal from 16 bit to 24 bit (assumed) 44.1 Then my asus xonar essence sets the output signal to 192 Khz. So there's actually two conversions. Audition track: Beatles every little thing she does. 1:00 for about 20 seconds. 2009 stereo remaster. There are two accent drums one slightly different than the other and the latter has a different decay and that's what I concentrated on. XDA-1 at 80. Passive pre-amp turned down to make volume listenable. So direct sound: no wasapi mode @ 16/44.1 vs WASAPI 44.1 Hard to tell a difference. Felt like WASAPI mode was slightly clearer/less warm (less smeared?) WASAPI mode 44.1 vs dither 16/44.1 Dither sounded slightly clearer. Hard to tell a difference. 24/44.1 vs 24/192: Okay here it is....hard to tell a difference using really short samples in nearly any output mode. So conclusion: I didn't hear any difference. Certainly couldn't pass a blind test. Also note: my ears are slightly blocked. Not too bad, but enough for me to notice. Now the "feeling". I felt there was a difference. A very slight difference. A teeny tiny one. But I had no idea what it was. Sort of like a space between the noise. Also some past history, over time, I experienced more enjoyment with WASAPI mode. It simply felt less loose but when asked to pinpoint why, I couldn't at all. Not even an inkling. Another thing to note: The beatles release some REALLY poor recordings in terms of recording quality. Not all, but gosh there is so much audible distortion....
|
|