|
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 8, 2018 19:28:44 GMT -5
vortecjr , so it does incorporate a word clock as well? If so Can you opt to use the DAC or Rendu word clock?
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,095
|
Post by klinemj on Nov 8, 2018 22:55:16 GMT -5
I don’t think this is about the power of suggestion. We have a lot of customers and just as much honest feedback as you can get. Having heard a micro, ultra, and signature Rendu, I can fully attest to each sounding better than my prior options. It is far more than power of suggestion. And, the old Sears "good/better/best" model appears in force...meaning, I can hear differences across the lineup. Whatever you are doing, keep it up. Great stuff...really. Some folks like to talk about "why it should not sound better" but have never heard it. That's an invalid opinion, IMHO. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 6:21:49 GMT -5
vortecjr , so it does incorporate a word clock as well? If so Can you opt to use the DAC or Rendu word clock? No. Maybe needed with pro gear in a recording studio. These units stream USB Audio and not SPDIF where you might want that. |
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 7:26:30 GMT -5
I don’t think this is about the power of suggestion. We have a lot of customers and just as much honest feedback as you can get. Having heard a micro, ultra, and signature Rendu, I can fully attest to each sounding better than my prior options. It is far more than power of suggestion. And, the old Sears "good/better/best" model appears in force...meaning, I can hear differences across the lineup. Whatever you are doing, keep it up. Great stuff...really. Some folks like to talk about "why it should not sound better" but have never heard it. That's an invalid opinion, IMHO. Mark People are split three ways on this in what is know as a bell shaped curve. The left side made up of few hard core none believers say there is no affect from endpoints. The right side made up of hard core believers who say endpoints greatly affect things. Then there is the middle who like what they hear and enjoy the music. Thanks for your feedback. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 9, 2018 13:27:21 GMT -5
No... but, then, I don't do network/server access at home... so I really don't have much use for one.
I have my audio system in one room - and I play everything from a direct-connected hard drive. At the moment, I have a Raspberry Pi reading the files form the disc, and sending them via asynch USB to an XMC-1. I already know that the Raspberry Pi (running Volumio) can deliver a bit-perfect data stream... And, as far as I can tell, the XMC-1 isn't especially sensitive to jitter or power noise... So there's nothing there to potentially improve in any significant way.
I also have a quite high end USB-to-S/PDIF converter that delivers lower jitter than any of these little boxes everyone is discussing... It's made by a company called Audiophilleo... has galvanic isolation, delivers a bit-perfect S/PDIF output, and has an actual confirmed output jitter spec of 2.6 picoseconds (RMS). (That is measured at the output... not at the clock chip, which most manufacturers do, and which is totally misleading... and is about 10x better than the typical spec on the S/PDIF interface itself.)
I bought it some time ago... "just to put the jitter question to rest"... it cost around $600 as I recall.
Since, for all practical purposes, it delivers "perfect data, with perfect timing, and galvanic isolation", if anything else were to sound noticeably different, the only possible reason would be because of some FLAW in the other device.)
I would love to recommend it based on its amazingly good technical performance and reasonable price.... but I don't notice much if any actual difference when I use it with my XMC-1 or my DC-1.
However, since there's no way anything else that sells for less than several thousand dollars can actually offer better performance, I don't bother comparing other little boxes to it.
(The Audiophilleo is basically a higher performance, and much more expensive, functional equivalent of the Schiit Eitr.)
I don't usually keep it connected because, as I said, it really doesn't seem to make much if any audible difference.
However, I've pretty well given up on the possibility of anything else offering "audibly better performance".
I have a great deal of respect for the person you quoted. He basically said that..... - with an asynch USB input the clock is controlled by the DAC (or other sink device) - their board provides electrical isolation, which could affect noise reaching the DAC from upstream, which could affect the way some DACs sound - but, beyond that, he's not making any claims about how it will actually affect the sound If you read between the lines he basically says that "they're trying to figure out how it could make things sound different"....
To me, this earns him lots of points for honesty.... And it certainly doesn't rule out the possibility that their device sometimes produces an actual measurable or audible improvement.
However, it also suggests that even they suspect that some of what's going on is simply due to the suggestibility of their customers. I'm reminded of current TV commercials for a particular powerful drug being sold as a treatment for migraine headaches. It was found that, in patients who had fifteen or more headache days a month, the drug reduced that number by six or seven. This sounds great, until you find out that patients who received a harmless placebo had five or six fewer headaches a month. In other words, the power of suggestion worked almost as well as the powerful and potentially dangerous drug.
The drug is expensive, and has potential nasty side effects; the placebo is free and harmless. In other words, the power of suggestion worked almost as well as the powerful and potentially dangerous drug.
(It does make me wonder what people would hear in an actual double-blind listening test.) And...for all you nay say about them, you still have not heard one yet...have you? Mark |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 9, 2018 14:17:40 GMT -5
I don't think I agree with your division there. Personally, I would say that the endpoint is the one and only critical part. However, to me, the endpoint is where the digital data gets converted back into analog audio - which would be the DAC. To me, all of the boxes and wires before that are "just part of the network" - and "either the network does its job or not". Before we had asynch USB inputs, the USB inputs on most DACs were actually quite sensitive to the quality of the USB signal feeding them. This was a serious problem because, since USB is a packet-based protocol, it is inherently high in jitter and noise. (Back then, DACs worked very hard to eliminate most of the issues, and to derive a clean clock, by filtering and regenerating the incoming USB clock.) However, with the advent of asynchronous USB, that problem has been mostly eliminated, because a properly functioning asynch USB input controls its own clock. The upstream clock, whether good or bad, is simply discarded and replaced, so its original quality doesn't matter.
What I've said is how it should all theoretically work; if it doesn't work that way, then something is not doing its job properly. (Network functionality is not a continuum; in order to improve something there, you need to identify something that is NOT doing its job properly, and then fix it.)
Having heard a micro, ultra, and signature Rendu, I can fully attest to each sounding better than my prior options. It is far more than power of suggestion. And, the old Sears "good/better/best" model appears in force...meaning, I can hear differences across the lineup. Whatever you are doing, keep it up. Great stuff...really. Some folks like to talk about "why it should not sound better" but have never heard it. That's an invalid opinion, IMHO. Mark People are split three ways on this in what is know as a bell shaped curve. The left side made up of few hard core none believers say there is no affect from endpoints. The right side made up of hard core believers who say endpoints greatly affect things. Then there is the middle who like what they hear and enjoy the music. Thanks for your feedback. |
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 9, 2018 14:18:34 GMT -5
... as far as I can tell, the XMC-1 isn't especially sensitive to jitter or power noise... ... , I've asked before but don't remember hearing a response: do you know what's been done on the RMC-1, RMC-2 (AKA RMC-1L), and XMC-2 for USB galvanic isolation, and general jitter immunity? I'm guessing that if a lot of work has gone into that, then there'll be very little to gain by using fancy/expensive external Ethernet-to-USB Roon Bridges like the SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo. Hhmmm, interesting. But doesn't Optical S/PDIF (AKA Toslink) limit you to 96kHz/24bit PCM? Which is a fabulous bit rate and I seriously doubt that anyone will be able to hear anything better, but still, I have a lot of stuff that's higher resolution including a bunch of DSDs that my stupid partner in crime keeps buying. Casey P.S. I think that I've mentioned that the XMOS Firmware build environment supports Native DSD up to DSD128 (AKA DSD x2) by default and DSD256 (AKA DSD x4) with some small build changes ( XMOS PDF document). The only thing required on the Linux side for this when transmitting DSD to such an XMOS receiver is the proper USB Verdor and Device IDs in sound/usb/quirks.c:snd_usb_interface_dsd_format_quirks(). |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 9, 2018 14:36:18 GMT -5
The reality is that a lot of that work falls under "following design best practices".
As far as I know, neither the XMC-1 nor the RMC-1 has much in the way of galvanic isolation - and not on the USB input. Both the XMC-1 and the RMC-1 have an ASRC (between their DSP stages) that re-clocks the signal. And, of course, both have asynch USB inputs, which operate from their own local clock, totally independent of the source data clock, anyway. (The ASRC is really pretty much redundant with the asynch input for USB - but helps for HDMI and S/PDIF inputs.)
From my experience, galvanic isolation, in terms of usefulness, is very much like an AC line filter. If you have a DAC or other device that has obvious noise issues, like hearing odd noises from your speakers when you open a window on your computer, then adding good isolation may solve your problem. However, I can't recall ever experiencing a situation where there were no obvious noises, but adding isolation "produced some subtle improvement in sound quality". In general, when you have noise issues, they result in audible noise.
I find the same to be true for line noise filters. If you have a line noise problem, that means you're hearing noises during the quiet spots in the music, and a line noise filter is quite likely to help. However, if you DON'T have a line noise problem, it isn't going to make any difference.
To me, many vendors egregiously oversell the premise that, "even though you don't hear any noise, it's still there, and producing subtle degradation of the sound". The reality is that, if you don't hear a noise problem, the it's most likely that you just don't have a noise problem. And, if so, then fixing a problem you don't have isn't going to improve anything.
While it's possible for such a situation to occur... where some otherwise inaudible noise causes some other subtle issue... such situations are extremely few and very far between.
... as far as I can tell, the XMC-1 isn't especially sensitive to jitter or power noise... ... , I've asked before but don't remember hearing a response: do you know what's been done on the RMC-1, RMC-2 (AKA RMC-1L), and XMC-2 for USB galvanic isolation, and general jitter immunity? I'm guessing that if a lot of work has gone into that, then there'll be very little to gain by using fancy/expensive external Ethernet-to-USB Roon Bridges like the SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo. Hhmmm, interesting. But doesn't Optical S/PDIF (AKA Toslink) limit you to 96kHz/24bit PCM? Which is a fabulous bit rate and I seriously doubt that anyone will be able to hear anything better, but still, I have a lot of stuff that's higher resolution including a bunch of DSDs that my stupid partner in crime keeps buying. Casey P.S. I think that I've mentioned that the XMOS Firmware build environment supports Native DSD up to DSD128 (AKA DSD x2) by default and DSD256 (AKA DSD x4) with some small build changes ( XMOS PDF document). The only thing required on the Linux side for this when transmitting DSD to such an XMOS receiver is the proper USB Verdor and Device IDs in sound/usb/quirks.c:snd_usb_interface_dsd_format_quirks(). |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 9, 2018 14:49:27 GMT -5
S/PDIF comes in two types - optical (Toslink) and electrical (Coax); both use the same signal format, but transmitted using different media.
Both are technically capable of operating at 24/192k, but most Toslink hardware tops out at 96k, while most Coax inputs handle at least 24/192k.
(I think the Toslink inputs on the XMC-1 may actually work at 192k.)
However, most Coax inputs seem to have lower jitter than most Toslink inputs, and it is a generally accepted truism that Toslink has worse jitter performance. Of course, being optical, Toslink has perfect near-infinite galvanic isolation.
The Audiophilleo has a single asynch USB input and a single Coax S/PDIF output.
Like the Eitr, it is expected to replace your current USB input circuitry.
(I have the original model; the newer version also supports DSD.)
... I also have a quite high end USB-to-S/PDIF converter that delivers lower jitter than any of these little boxes everyone is discussing... It's made by a company called Audiophilleo... has galvanic isolation, delivers a bit-perfect S/PDIF output, and has an actual confirmed output jitter spec of 2.6 picoseconds (RMS). ...Hhmmm, interesting. But doesn't Optical S/PDIF (AKA Toslink) limit you to 96kHz/24bit PCM? Which is a fabulous bit rate and I seriously doubt that anyone will be able to hear anything better, but still, I have a lot of stuff that's higher resolution including a bunch of DSDs that my stupid partner in crime keeps buying. Casey P.S. I think that I've mentioned that the XMOS Firmware build environment supports Native DSD up to DSD128 (AKA DSD x2) by default and DSD256 (AKA DSD x4) with some small build changes ( XMOS PDF document). The only thing required on the Linux side for this when transmitting DSD to such an XMOS receiver is the proper USB Verdor and Device IDs in sound/usb/quirks.c:snd_usb_interface_dsd_format_quirks(). |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 9, 2018 14:50:25 GMT -5
“The reality is” if you don’t Consciously hear noise but your brain does, AND the music sounds better, Then it sounds better weather you can explain it or not! Your brain is much smarter and has more abilities then anyone knows at this time in human development..
Why do we fall in love with the Best/ Worst possible person? Just thought I’d throw this one at ya!
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,095
|
Post by klinemj on Nov 9, 2018 16:24:53 GMT -5
Personally, I would say that the endpoint is the one and only critical part. However, to me, the endpoint is where the digital data gets converted back into analog audio - which would be the DAC. To me, all of the boxes and wires before that are "just part of the network" - and "either the network does its job or not". Keith I really do appreciate all your contributions to the Lounge and Emotiva. You are a very smart guy. However, on this topic, you keep making statements like this yet many of us hear have heard - with our own ears - gear that contradict this - significantly. And, you readily admit you have not heard any AND just above in response to me - you admitted your system isn't even set up in a way that you could use one. While I value your technical opinion, the ultimate test in audio is the sound. That's what the consumer pays for. So, frankly - when your technical opinion goes against the experience of consumers who have heard it, your technical opinion loses credibility. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 17:49:34 GMT -5
No... but, then, I don't do network/server access at home... so I really don't have much use for one. I have my audio system in one room - and I play everything from a direct-connected hard drive. At the moment, I have a Raspberry Pi reading the files form the disc, and sending them via asynch USB to an XMC-1. I already know that the Raspberry Pi (running Volumio) can deliver a bit-perfect data stream... And, as far as I can tell, the XMC-1 isn't especially sensitive to jitter or power noise... So there's nothing there to potentially improve in any significant way. I also have a quite high end USB-to-S/PDIF converter that delivers lower jitter than any of these little boxes everyone is discussing... It's made by a company called Audiophilleo... has galvanic isolation, delivers a bit-perfect S/PDIF output, and has an actual confirmed output jitter spec of 2.6 picoseconds (RMS). (That is measured at the output... not at the clock chip, which most manufacturers do, and which is totally misleading... and is about 10x better than the typical spec on the S/PDIF interface itself.)
I bought it some time ago... "just to put the jitter question to rest"... it cost around $600 as I recall. Since, for all practical purposes, it delivers "perfect data, with perfect timing, and galvanic isolation", if anything else were to sound noticeably different, the only possible reason would be because of some FLAW in the other device.)
I would love to recommend it based on its amazingly good technical performance and reasonable price.... but I don't notice much if any actual difference when I use it with my XMC-1 or my DC-1.
However, since there's no way anything else that sells for less than several thousand dollars can actually offer better performance, I don't bother comparing other little boxes to it.
(The Audiophilleo is basically a higher performance, and much more expensive, functional equivalent of the Schiit Eitr.)
I don't usually keep it connected because, as I said, it really doesn't seem to make much if any audible difference.
However, I've pretty well given up on the possibility of anything else offering "audibly better performance".
And...for all you nay say about them, you still have not heard one yet...have you? Mark What where you using as the source for the Audiophilleo? What power supply where you using for the source. Was the Audiophilleo using its PurePower? Audiophilleo seems to think power to the unit is very important. Also any chance the receiver’s internal reclocking is not as good as what your Audiophilleo has for clocking? Your DAC seems to have the same or similar internal ASRC and reclocking scheme, but maybe has a better analog stage. As such, have you tried analog input into your receiver in bypass mode to avoid all internal DSP? BTW the Rendu series would feed your USB Audiophilleo clean power because the USB outputs have dedicated 5V linear regulators. In your setup it seems like your Raspberry Pi is using USB for the spinning drives, Ethernet, SD card, and USB Audio. At at least that is how I understand it to work. BTW the Rendu series have different paths to the CPU with only USB Audio on the USB hub. Also, no spinning drives on the Rendu series and instead we have a way to mount drives over the network. |
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 17:55:37 GMT -5
“The reality is” if you don’t Consciously hear noise but your brain does, AND the music sounds better, Then it sounds better weather you can explain it or not! Your brain is much smarter and has more abilities then anyone knows at this time in human development.. Why do we fall in love with the Best/ Worst possible person? Just thought I’d throw this one at ya! I know you are being sarcastic:) However, some people actually hear audible noise in the form of AC hum coming out of the speakers. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,095
|
Post by klinemj on Nov 9, 2018 17:56:29 GMT -5
However, since there's no way anything else that sells for less than several thousand dollars can actually offer better performance... I'll add one more to the listen of questions for Keith that vortecjr posted..."Keith...how do you KNOW the statement above from you is true?" Mark |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 9, 2018 18:02:34 GMT -5
However, since there's no way anything else that sells for less than several thousand dollars can actually offer better performance... I'll add one more to the listen of questions for Keith that vortecjr posted..."Keith...how do you KNOW the statement above from you is true?" Mark I’m listening!  OH, many haven’t! 😢 |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 9, 2018 18:08:24 GMT -5
“The reality is” if you don’t Consciously hear noise but your brain does, AND the music sounds better, Then it sounds better weather you can explain it or not! Your brain is much smarter and has more abilities then anyone knows at this time in human development.. Why do we fall in love with the Best/ Worst possible person? Just thought I’d throw this one at ya! I know you are being sarcastic:) However, some people actually hear audible noise in the form of AC hum coming out of the speakers. I’m Not being sarcastic at all, much the opposite. I Don’t see how you think you know how the brain truly works when the best minds of the scientific world will tell you otherwise. I’m not discussing obvious noises such as hum, hiss and buzz. |
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Nov 9, 2018 18:22:49 GMT -5
The reality is that a lot of that work falls under "following design best practices".
As far as I know, neither the XMC-1 nor the RMC-1 has much in the way of galvanic isolation - and not on the USB input. ... Is this because adding galvanic isolation is relatively expensive? But, assuming that Emotiva has followed best practices, wouldn't that still make Emotiva's well-designed equipment susceptible to a bad source device which was electrically noisy?
To be honest, I'm in your camp with regard to most of the digital chain not making any real difference as long as the Digital Audio Data arrives correctly in time for the DAC to use. I have a friend who's over the moon with his new SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo hooked up to his Teac NT-503, claiming that he hears a tremendous improvement. To me this tells me that the USB Input section of the Teac is really bad.
Casey
|
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 19:12:27 GMT -5
I know you are being sarcastic:) However, some people actually hear audible noise in the form of AC hum coming out of the speakers. I’m Not being sarcastic at all, much the opposite. I Don’t see how you think you know how the brain truly works when the best minds of the scientific world will tell you otherwise. I’m not discussing obvious noises such as hum, hiss and buzz. Okay. Where did I say I knew how the brain truly works? I don't even know how people work:) |
|
|
|
Post by vortecjr on Nov 9, 2018 19:23:43 GMT -5
The reality is that a lot of that work falls under "following design best practices".
As far as I know, neither the XMC-1 nor the RMC-1 has much in the way of galvanic isolation - and not on the USB input. ... Is this because adding galvanic isolation is relatively expensive? But, assuming that Emotiva has followed best practices, wouldn't that still make Emotiva's well-designed equipment susceptible to a bad source device which was electrically noisy?
To be honest, I'm in your camp with regard to most of the digital chain not making any real difference as long as the Digital Audio Data arrives correctly in time for the DAC to use. I have a friend who's over the moon with his new SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo hooked up to his Teac NT-503, claiming that he hears a tremendous improvement. To me this tells me that the USB Input section of the Teac is really bad.
Casey
On a receiver even pennies matter when you consider large volume. Galvanic isolation is a double edge sword because it adds noise. If you take the i2s signal from the USB receiver which can be high in jitter and reclock it...then the added jitter from the galvanic isolation may not be an issue. It really depends on the circuit. I have seen it done both ways... |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 9, 2018 19:32:09 GMT -5
I’m Not being sarcastic at all, much the opposite. I Don’t see how you think you know how the brain truly works when the best minds of the scientific world will tell you otherwise. I’m not discussing obvious noises such as hum, hiss and buzz. Okay. Where did I say I knew how the brain truly works? I don't even know how people work:) LOL, Thats just my point. Just because we don’t understand how or why something sounds better and not just different doesn’t mean that its not real. I truly just stumbled across these NAA’s and decided to try as there wasn’t any risk with the return policies offered by both companies. Mark tried yours and I tried the sotm. how people work? Haven’t a clue! I just try to be kind and let God sort them out. 😁 |
|
