Wombat said:
I believe big-brand companies are more knowledgeable in handling issues of hi-fidelity audio reproduction, like noise floor and psychoacoustic study.
I've met an audiophile reviewer. His listening room is one of the "best" I've visited. It is designed to express any differences of audio components. Even a small difference can be detected, maybe also by trained ears, e.g. lifting the AC cord away from the floor affects the sonics, etc. This kind of listening test should be also conducted.
The ability to perceive is another thing. This means differences exist but many people can't hear them.
Audio tweaks are possible. Can Wi-Fi affect sonic quality ? Perhaps this can be shown in a listening test, not ABX type, but by trained ears and in "sensitive" systems.
My friend told me "It is good for you not to be able to hear these discernable differences. You're still *happy* with your system. Once you hear them, you'll always hear them. And you'll get mad particularly when you can't eliminate such annoying sounds."
I remember reading somewhere that engineers at McCormack suggest their systems must be left turn-on for two months in order to get the *maximum* sonic production capability. The amps can produce the best sounds. I think those engineers kept hearing changes every week until the 8th week.
I have a modified Squeezebox 2 (modded by bolder cables, www.boldercables.com). I have the "basic" upgraded power supply from Bolder Cables and the basic modifications. The modified Squeezebox 2 beats my Proceed PMDT (digital transport only) to my Ack Dack 2.0 DAC or to my Proceed AVP (and using the DACs in the AVP). And the Squeezebox beats it handily. If you go to www.audiocircles.com, you'll see reviews where modified Squeezeboxes beat out CD players that cost thousands of dollars. Plus, once you get used to the ability to hear any song in your collection at any time, without getting up and finding the CD, you can't go back to CDs.
I hope this isn't deviating from the topic to much, but has anyone seen this before or attempted a project like it. http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/rundfunker/. It's a DIY linux based system that scans the WLAN for audio files. I think it would be interesting to do something like that, but utilize a dedicated hard drive and some sort of USB DAC.
Attachments
Here is another link to their website, it has a little more information. https://troubadix.multimedia.fh-augsburg.de/rundfunkertrac/
On the subject of Wi Fi and audio systems: I have seen and heard firsthand the problems these wireless transmitters can cause in an audio system. Vacuum tube amplifiers seem to be particularly susceptable. With no signal, a soft digital chime, overlaid with rythmic ticking, can be easily heard through the system. More than likely, this signal is being plucked from the air on our somewhat longer than normal interconnects, but the effect is not subtle, in any case. I know immediately if a cell phone is about to ring in the building, as the signal hits the main system several seconds before the phone actually rings.
I can imagine how bad a continuous RF signal would be for sound.
I can imagine how bad a continuous RF signal would be for sound.
jimbo1968 said:
Yes it is. You can always buy a wired-only SB if you are worried about the efect of wireless signals on the sound of your system.
But, don't worry about it. If a low powered 2.4 GHz transmitter can affect the sound of your stereo equipment, you have some really, really, poorly designed/built equipment.
I_F
Charles Hansen said:
is your intention to discourage people from purchasing ayre equipment or is that simply a side-effect?
bb (who is really happy with firstwatt, zu, and slim devices, because they all provide a level of customer attention seen almost nowhere else, in addition to their spectacular producs)
pm, that would be my question as well. I can certainly imagine an effect much as Charles describes if the shielding and RF overload properties were compromised in pursuit of some other engineering goal. Since I saw the claim that tube systems are particularly susceptible, and coincidently that's what I use, I'm most eager to try the experiment for myself.
The nice thing about it is that if the effect is one of those subtle things that only the Illuminati can hear, this is something trivially easy to test blind.
The nice thing about it is that if the effect is one of those subtle things that only the Illuminati can hear, this is something trivially easy to test blind.
davidsrsb said:
Exactly so. This tends to pose a problem in practice.
The AC power cable is pretty difficult to shield, as the shielding would have to extend all the way back to the power plant, as well as to every single building connected to the line. Since that doesn't seem too realistic, another option would be to use batteries.
However, it becomes difficult to deal with the issue of loudspeakers. Goldmund used to use (they still may, I don't know) a large coaxial connector for their proprietary coaxial loudspeaker cables, and this could be helpful here. Their current loudspeakers have metal enclosures, but I don't know that they are grounded to the shield of the coaxial cable. Everyone else who uses loudspeakers (or headphones) is pretty much out of luck.
Or you could try turning of your wi-fi, cordless phone, and cellular phone off and see what happens.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.