|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 8, 2022 22:06:00 GMT -5
We had feeders from two regional power companies. The intent was that if one of the two went down, the switchgear would swap us to the other feeder without interruption.
But we also had all the following running simultaneously on site:
The world’s second-largest acetylene plant
A huge air separation unit
Two methanol plants running different technologies
An ammonia plant
A urea plant
A formaldehyde plant
Two vinyl chloride monomer plants running different technologies
A polyvinyl chloride plant
A R&D lab
And ship, barge, truck, and rail loading 24-7
I don’t know what our total wattage draw was, but they never could get those power switches to prevent power outages.
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 8, 2022 22:06:36 GMT -5
I have not read through all the AI comments, but I will say I have been very doubtful we'd ever see true "AI". But, I've been doing a bit of work in the space, and while it's far from ideal in current state - it's far better than I could ever have imagined.
I am also confident it will continue to get better.
In a recent project, I led a global team and we were able to develop a model using AI-related mathematics that predicted results with <3% error of known results. I was doubtful we could do that, but we did - with public domain algorithms applied to our problem. That's pretty good.
I've also used variations on another project, and...impressive results.
I personally think AI gets a bad rap because so many claim to use AI, but they use poor implementations and get...well, poor...results.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 8, 2022 22:27:18 GMT -5
They’re SO cheap at their close out price, I’m almost tempted to buy some T-zero speakers…
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 9, 2022 0:50:59 GMT -5
We had feeders from two regional power companies. The intent was that if one of the two went down, the switchgear would swap us to the other feeder without interruption. But we also had all the following running simultaneously on site: The world’s second-largest acetylene plant A huge air separation unit Two methanol plants running different technologies An ammonia plant A urea plant A formaldehyde plant Two vinyl chloride monomer plants running different technologies A polyvinyl chloride plant A R&D lab And ship, barge, truck, and rail loading 24-7 I don’t know what our total wattage draw was, but they never could get those power switches to prevent power outages. 10 years ago or so? Power bill for where I worked was 6 digits. Monthly. This for what amounted to 2x fabs (semiconductor manufacture) of about 1 acre (about 45,000 sq feet) EACH. Lower level was pumps and plumbing and 'facilitation. Overhead was almost all air handler.....Temp and humidity control even when it was nearly 100f outdoors....... I'd have to think for a while but we had maybe 10 implanters and 25 or so banks of furnaces with 4 tubes EACH. Idle temp was like 700c or 800c ALL the time..... That's how you get to over 100 Grand a month for electricity! A power outage could take a day or longer to recover and result in 10s of thousands in Scrap..... |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 9, 2022 0:56:42 GMT -5
I have not read through all the AI comments, but I will say I have been very doubtful we'd ever see true "AI". But, I've been doing a bit of work in the space, and while it's far from ideal in current state - it's far better than I could ever have imagined. I am also confident it will continue to get better. In a recent project, I led a global team and we were able to develop a model using AI-related mathematics that predicted results with <3% error of known results. I was doubtful we could do that, but we did - with public domain algorithms applied to our problem. That's pretty good. I've also used variations on another project, and...impressive results. I personally think AI gets a bad rap because so many claim to use AI, but they use poor implementations and get...well, poor...results. Mark Who knows the future? Not ME, for sure! Something 'new' might come along. Quantum Computing? I don't even know what that is supposed to BE, but it sure sounds neat. What I read is long on BS and short on specifics. As I was taught? When you least expect it......expect it. So just when most have given up on having a meaningful chat with a computer, somebody will announce. It won't be when or where or from who, but it'll happen.... |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 9, 2022 16:31:19 GMT -5
Well, my audio amigo SWEARS that USB cable differences are audible. I haven't gone over yet to hear, but I'm skeptical. Nevertheless, on his insistence, I gambled $35 on an Audioquest 0.75m USB cable via Amazon. I'll be disappointed if the discard printer cable in my spare digital cables box sounds as good... That said, there's no scientific reason WHY any USB cable (provided it's working right) should be different from any other. Bits is bits. Will report back. Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 9, 2022 17:05:52 GMT -5
I'm just curious
I see the surround speaker the E2+ for 330$ the pair.
I wonder........buy 2 pair and mount them back-to-back and wire either IN or OUT of phase to produce a bipole OR a dipole speaker.
I see tweeter phase switch? and being front ported?
Match with a decent sub for full range sound.
I personally am a fan of that type of tweeter, since the old days when RadioShack used one and I think Infiniti long before that.
Was considered a little fragile at the time.
Just another out of the box idea. But who knows?
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 9, 2022 18:59:14 GMT -5
Well, my audio amigo SWEARS that USB cable differences are audible. I haven't gone over yet to hear, but I'm skeptical. Nevertheless, on his insistence, I gambled $35 on an Audioquest 0.75m USB cable via Amazon. I'll be disappointed if the discard printer cable in my spare digital cables box sounds as good... That said, there's no scientific reason WHY any USB cable (provided it's working right) should be different from any other. Bits is bits. Will report back. Boomzilla IMO your audio amigo is correct. Your logic and assumptions are correct, just your notion that theres no difference is wrong. 🤷♂️ I tried a few (>4) and came to my own conclusion. I wasn’t going to spend Audioquest Diamond dollars though. I do believe in diminishing returns. 🎶🎶🎶🎶🎶🎶 |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 9, 2022 20:33:19 GMT -5
Audio amigo claims that the cheap Audioquest USB connectors sound better than their expensive ones! I'll know soon...
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 9, 2022 22:34:40 GMT -5
And now for something completely different - I’m pretty sure that the TOSLINK optical outlet on my Mac mini sounds better (by a clearly audible amount) than the USB output. In theory, it should be the opposite from what I’ve read. What’s happening here?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 10, 2022 0:10:19 GMT -5
And now for something completely different - I’m pretty sure that the TOSLINK optical outlet on my Mac mini sounds better (by a clearly audible amount) than the USB output. In theory, it should be the opposite from what I’ve read. What’s happening here? What do you think it could be? |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,093
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 10, 2022 7:36:39 GMT -5
I totally agree. I didn't ever think I'd have a phone that could navigate me to anywhere I wanted - and re-route me in case of a live event (wreck on the highway) to avoid a major delay. But, here we are and I use that feature all the time! I have not read through all the AI comments, but I will say I have been very doubtful we'd ever see true "AI". But, I've been doing a bit of work in the space, and while it's far from ideal in current state - it's far better than I could ever have imagined. I am also confident it will continue to get better. In a recent project, I led a global team and we were able to develop a model using AI-related mathematics that predicted results with <3% error of known results. I was doubtful we could do that, but we did - with public domain algorithms applied to our problem. That's pretty good. I've also used variations on another project, and...impressive results. I personally think AI gets a bad rap because so many claim to use AI, but they use poor implementations and get...well, poor...results. Mark Who knows the future? Not ME, for sure! Something 'new' might come along. Quantum Computing? I don't even know what that is supposed to BE, but it sure sounds neat. What I read is long on BS and short on specifics. As I was taught? When you least expect it......expect it. So just when most have given up on having a meaningful chat with a computer, somebody will announce. It won't be when or where or from who, but it'll happen.... |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 10, 2022 8:13:00 GMT -5
What do you think it could be? I suspect a deficiency somewhere in the USB system. The Mac mini source is set to exclusive and 44.1 output. The DAC is set to asynchronous. Ideas? |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 10, 2022 9:34:09 GMT -5
Here are a few considerations... (let's start by assuming that the software is working correctly and so the NUMBERS are the same). Let's also assume that you're not hearing noise issues (no little chittering noises on the quiet spots.) Pretty well all modern DACs have asynchronous USB connections - and so should be immune to the amounts of jitter that would produce audible differences. However most DACs do not re-clock their Toslink inputs - and Toslink is notorious for having at least significant jitter (whether audible or not). Here's something to try for a start... Your DC-1 has SWITCHABLE RECLOCKING (that's what an ASRC does). If you switch it between "asynchronous" and "synchronous" you are switching the "overall re-clocking of everything" on and off.
("asynchronous" = ASRC on = re-clocking on ; "synchronous" = ASRC off = re-clocking off.) An ASYNCH USB INPUT basically always clocks the input signal at the DAC - so that "re-clocking" on the USB input is always on either way.
If there's a lot of jitter on the Toslink output of your computer you should hear a difference when you switch the re-clocking that affects that input (the ASRC) on and off. Because the asynch USB input has relatively low jitter to begin with it shouldn't make more than a tiny difference with the USB input. (In reality there is sometimes a really tiny difference with USB... but really REALLY tiny... possibly because a second stage of re-clocking still provides a tiny improvement.)
Here's something else to consider (especially for folks who like tube gear and such... ahem.) The audible result of jitter - if there is enough to be audible - is often described by some folks as "a slight softening and blurring of the sound". It's usually NOT discordant or harsh sounding (which you might assume from the name). Therefore it's not impossible that the Toslink connection does have more jitter - and you just plain prefer the way it sounds.
And now for something completely different - I’m pretty sure that the TOSLINK optical outlet on my Mac mini sounds better (by a clearly audible amount) than the USB output. In theory, it should be the opposite from what I’ve read. What’s happening here? What do you think it could be? |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 10, 2022 10:06:09 GMT -5
Let's be explicit - the TOSLINK input (previously auditioned at 48kHz Mac mini output and with the DAC set to asynchronous) had more depth to the soundstage. Not a little bit more, but rather like a door had been opened into the original recording venue.
Since then, I've reset the Mac mini to run at 44.1kHz and enabled the "exclusive mode" along with the USB output. The DAC is still set to async.
TROUBLESHOOTING PLAN:
1. Reset the computer to 48kHz output (should sound worse, but I won't know until I try it). Does this help the USB sound? No -
2. Swap the DAC input back to the TOSLINK connection. Magic still there? Now I know it's possible, so the trick now is to beat the USB into submission.
3. Set the Mac mini to run at 88.2kHz (doubling of the source frequency) - USB sound better now? Not =
4. Try setting the DAC input to "synchronous." Let the Mac mini do the clocking and see if that helps. No?
5. Try another USB cable. Doesn't work? Tell USB to KMA and just use the awesome sounding TOSLINK connection.
Other ideas?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 10, 2022 10:19:31 GMT -5
Try turning the Mac on and off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 10, 2022 10:24:56 GMT -5
Try turning the Mac on and off. Great mines - dey tink alike - Already done it. No difference. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 10, 2022 13:59:39 GMT -5
I can tell you that, in the DC-1, the signal from the USB input goes through the same place as the signal from the Toslink input... All of the circuitry it goes through after the USB interface itself is the same. The signals are not treated any differently.
And the USB circuitry doesn't do much beyond controlling the clock to eliminate jitter from the source (the cable and the computer).
Since you say that setting the DC-1 to "synchronous" doesn't make any difference... That sort of rules out the idea that what you're hearing is higher jitter from the Toslink connection. The only conclusion I can see from that is that the Apple is doing something BAD to the data it's sending out of its USB connection. (Like changing it.) With Windows, if you neglect to use WASAPI mode, the operating system WILL reclock the audio... And, in the past, the Windows mixer, which does that re-clocking, was notorious for "not sounding very good". However this should NOT be a problem if you use WASAPI (on Windows) or something that is "bit-perfect" on Apple.
You also mentioned something below that I find confusing. When a file is played bit-perfectly it will ALWAYS play at its native sample rate. (Which is the sample rate the DC-1 will display.)
So it should NOT matter "what sample rate you set the computer to" because that setting SHOULD be totally ignored. (So, in your "1.", setting the computer to 48k should make no difference at all anywhere if the computer is really being bit-perfect.)
If you see the output sample rate change when you change that setting THEN THE COMPUTER IS *NOT* BEING BIT-PERFECT. (And that would mean that something isn't quite right with the software.) It's possible that your computer is "being bit-perfect for USB and not for Toslink" - although I can't imagine why.
Have you tried a NON-APPLE computer to confirm that's not the problem?
Let's be explicit - the TOSLINK input (previously auditioned at 48kHz Mac mini output and with the DAC set to asynchronous) had more depth to the soundstage. Not a little bit more, but rather like a door had been opened into the original recording venue. Since then, I've reset the Mac mini to run at 44.1kHz and enabled the "exclusive mode" along with the USB output. The DAC is still set to async. TROUBLESHOOTING PLAN: 1. Reset the computer to 48kHz output (should sound worse, but I won't know until I try it). Does this help the USB sound? No - 2. Swap the DAC input back to the TOSLINK connection. Magic still there? Now I know it's possible, so the trick now is to beat the USB into submission. 3. Set the Mac mini to run at 88.2kHz (doubling of the source frequency) - USB sound better now? Not = 4. Try setting the DAC input to "synchronous." Let the Mac mini do the clocking and see if that helps. No? 5. Try another USB cable. Doesn't work? Tell USB to KMA and just use the awesome sounding TOSLINK connection. Other ideas? |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 10, 2022 14:19:52 GMT -5
MOST modern DACs have asynchronous USB inputs. With an asynch USB connection the DAC controls the clock. This means that, as long as the DAC is properly designed, the jitter will be VERY low. What jitter there is will be from the internal clock in the DAC - and most modern ones are ridiculously good.
(And the amount of jitter in the source, or that gets added by the cable, shouldn't matter.)
HOWEVER, many older DACs, and a few modern boutique designs, still lack an asynchronous USB input... And, for those, the cable could introduce extra jitter, or cause it to occur in the input circuitry, which could be audible.
Many older DACs used isochronous synchronous inputs... or phase-lock-loop stabilizers... which ARE quite sensitive to jitter and noise.
And some modern boutique designs still do (for "religious reasons").
Likewise, it's possible that, ON A SPECIFIC MODEL OF DAC, the USB input could be overly fussy for some other reason. And, if so, then it's possible for the cable to make some sort of difference. Other than that I rather suspect that your buddy may be imagining it. And we know that audio claims right at the top of the list of "things often prone to confirmation bias".
(Perhaps you should offer to do a single-blind test with him and see if he really can tell the difference... offer to buy him dinner if he gets 8 out of 10 right.  )
Do note that some pre-USB-2.0 printer cables really are bad enough to cause problems... So there is a limit here Well, my audio amigo SWEARS that USB cable differences are audible. I haven't gone over yet to hear, but I'm skeptical. Nevertheless, on his insistence, I gambled $35 on an Audioquest 0.75m USB cable via Amazon. I'll be disappointed if the discard printer cable in my spare digital cables box sounds as good... That said, there's no scientific reason WHY any USB cable (provided it's working right) should be different from any other. Bits is bits. Will report back. Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jun 10, 2022 15:47:34 GMT -5
Could the Mac mini have a discombobulated USB output? It's certainly possible. Is it worth pulling out my Windows laptop, loading the driver, and comparing? Not to me. If minor twiddling doesn't bring the USB performance up to the level of TOSLINK, I'll just use optical.
I will say that the Mac mini's USB buss has a lot going on... The incoming bits from the external USB HDD are on one of the sockets, another of the sockets is connected to a DVD-RW, a third socket is connected to a wireless mouse, and a fourth USB port is connected to something else. The DAC is on the fifth port. This traffic should not overwhelm the USB buss, but I do notice that sometimes the mouse becomes balky in its movements.
|
|
)