Do the people you trust have websites? I'd like to follow up if any of them explain why THD FFTs are a good guide to how something sounds, as opposed to some kind of intermod tests.
No chance of my getting carried away with any measurements! Yeah, I agree that FFTs are more powerful than simple THD, and therein lies the danger. The danger here is of believing that the map is the territory. After all you did say that if FFTs show up the same over a range of power levels, then you'll conclude that the amps sound the same. To me, that's an unsupported conclusion to draw.
One reason why I say this is I've tried using my Sony digital recorder to capture what I call 'crap sound'. So far, I've failed - its obvious to my ears but refuses to show up in FFTs. I keep looking though...
abraxalito?
Wow that's the funniest thing I've read from you SY in an otherwise uninvolving tail end of a thread - you lecturing jkeny on morality. Way to go
That's a pretty low thing for you to say, abraxalito. I was strongly tempted to report this post because it's an out-and-out insult, but I've never reported anyone yet as I believe it's better to let it all hang out. Which may be right, as I'm pretty sure in this case it hasn't done your reputation one shred of good with the overwhelming majority of fair-minded people on this forum.
w
You called? How can I be of service?
You think its low to call out hypocrisy as funny? Please do explain why - I'm not averse to being called low but I would like to see grounds for it.
I really do not follow what you're saying here. What reputation for example? - I really have no idea what my reputation is and nor do I care. Seems reputation is quite a big thing with you though waki - would you like to explain why?
No a scope wasn't used, it was a cheap sound card parading as a scope.
Hi,
Not just Pat is ROTFLMA...
I must say the longer this thread gets the more funny it becomes. Some guys are regular comedians. Didnt suspect they had it in them.
Early on in the thread I intended to actually post some relevant and constructive stuff, but as I would have been pretty much the lone sage in the wilderness I simply looked on.
And it is absolutely funny how all the blind men argue about an elephant that is not even in the room. Goodness gracious me.
Said he in an excellent North London voice:
"To quote Lieutenant Commander Data: "Would you please continue the petty bickering? I find it most intriguing.", is real pukka, innit?"
Ciao T
Blind Men and the Elephant
(by John Godfrey Saxe)
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
" 'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Not just Pat is ROTFLMA...
I must say the longer this thread gets the more funny it becomes. Some guys are regular comedians. Didnt suspect they had it in them.
Early on in the thread I intended to actually post some relevant and constructive stuff, but as I would have been pretty much the lone sage in the wilderness I simply looked on.
And it is absolutely funny how all the blind men argue about an elephant that is not even in the room. Goodness gracious me.
Said he in an excellent North London voice:
"To quote Lieutenant Commander Data: "Would you please continue the petty bickering? I find it most intriguing.", is real pukka, innit?"
Ciao T
Blind Men and the Elephant
(by John Godfrey Saxe)
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
" 'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Last edited:
The question is not the jitter level on the spdif stream, it's the EFFECT of that jitter on the analog output. There shouldn't be one until that jitter is severe enough to cause the receiver to lose lock and apparently that is indeed the case.
Lots of half-baked and technically incorrect criticism, but not a shred of contrary data.
RFI Attenuation.
Hi Guys,
I've just come across this threads and thought I'd add my two penn'orth (of fuel to the fire that seems to be raging here, but I've not read the whole thread - life's too short ).
I am a 70 year old numptie newbie to hi-fi with absolutely no knowledge or qualifications in electrics or electronics, just a pair of fading ears and an opinion of what I hear. So arguing theory with me is pointless, please understand.
I got interested in this subject as I do have a John Kenny mod'd HiFace and I very much like what it does. But I am generally of the opinion that nothing (in any subject) is so good that it cannot be improved so I raised the subject with a much more knowledgeable but open minded friend on another audio forum. He was interested enough in the subject to make me a pair of his excellent 'home brew' co-ax cables, one with a 10db attenuator hidden in one end and the other one without the attenuator but otherwise technically and cosmetically identical apart from different coloured identification bands. Please be aware that these home brew cables are generally accepted by others that have them as being extremely good and indeed won a cable 'bake off' held about a year ago in London against some very, as in VERY, expensive commercially available interconnects.
I tried these cables alternately in my system between HiFace and heavily mod'd Beresford 7520 DAC (mod'd up to Caiman spec for those that are familiar with this range of DACs). I was very surprised to hear a clearly audible preference for one of these cables and reported such to the friend who made them within 45 minutes of starting the test. He was interested but otherwise said nothing. I listened for 24 hours, on and off, and the longer I listened the more confirmed my original opinion was. I was very relieved to have it confirmed that the cable I preferred was the attenuated one.
I preferred the cable because it was apparent to me that the upper reaches were clearer, cleaner somehow, the bass line went lower (not so monotonic) and was much tauter. Individual instrument placement within the soundstage was more pronounced (identifiable) with more apparent space between the instruments. The rise and fall (decay) of each note was sharper and more evident. Forgive me for the non-audiophile terminology but, as I said, I'm new to this 'game'.
My friend and I were so intrigued by this major improvement that we are currently carrying out further tests. He has produced a 'test mule' cable on which the RFI attenuation on each end can be varied and I am currently 'playing around' with it. At the moment all that I have established is that a total attenuation of 25db (13 db at one end and 12db at the other) is the cut-off point above which no sound is audible and my gut feeling is that, as we increased the attenuation towards 25db the sound may have got better but that is just an initial impression and subject to confirmation, OK?
My well meaning advise to all is to stop throwing your theories at this subject to pooh-pooh it and to invest a very small sum in RFI attenuators and risk demolishing your firmly held theories.
I'm now going to hide behind the sofa until things quieten down again but if anyone is interested enough to ask non-technical questions, feel free.
Cheers,
Dave
Hi Guys,
I've just come across this threads and thought I'd add my two penn'orth (of fuel to the fire that seems to be raging here, but I've not read the whole thread - life's too short
).I am a 70 year old numptie newbie to hi-fi with absolutely no knowledge or qualifications in electrics or electronics, just a pair of fading ears and an opinion of what I hear. So arguing theory with me is pointless, please understand.
I got interested in this subject as I do have a John Kenny mod'd HiFace and I very much like what it does. But I am generally of the opinion that nothing (in any subject) is so good that it cannot be improved so I raised the subject with a much more knowledgeable but open minded friend on another audio forum. He was interested enough in the subject to make me a pair of his excellent 'home brew' co-ax cables, one with a 10db attenuator hidden in one end and the other one without the attenuator but otherwise technically and cosmetically identical apart from different coloured identification bands. Please be aware that these home brew cables are generally accepted by others that have them as being extremely good and indeed won a cable 'bake off' held about a year ago in London against some very, as in VERY, expensive commercially available interconnects.
I tried these cables alternately in my system between HiFace and heavily mod'd Beresford 7520 DAC (mod'd up to Caiman spec for those that are familiar with this range of DACs). I was very surprised to hear a clearly audible preference for one of these cables and reported such to the friend who made them within 45 minutes of starting the test. He was interested but otherwise said nothing. I listened for 24 hours, on and off, and the longer I listened the more confirmed my original opinion was. I was very relieved to have it confirmed that the cable I preferred was the attenuated one.
I preferred the cable because it was apparent to me that the upper reaches were clearer, cleaner somehow, the bass line went lower (not so monotonic) and was much tauter. Individual instrument placement within the soundstage was more pronounced (identifiable) with more apparent space between the instruments. The rise and fall (decay) of each note was sharper and more evident. Forgive me for the non-audiophile terminology but, as I said, I'm new to this 'game'.
My friend and I were so intrigued by this major improvement that we are currently carrying out further tests. He has produced a 'test mule' cable on which the RFI attenuation on each end can be varied and I am currently 'playing around' with it. At the moment all that I have established is that a total attenuation of 25db (13 db at one end and 12db at the other) is the cut-off point above which no sound is audible and my gut feeling is that, as we increased the attenuation towards 25db the sound may have got better but that is just an initial impression and subject to confirmation, OK?
My well meaning advise to all is to stop throwing your theories at this subject to pooh-pooh it and to invest a very small sum in RFI attenuators and risk demolishing your firmly held theories.
I'm now going to hide behind the sofa until things quieten down again
but if anyone is interested enough to ask non-technical questions, feel free.Cheers,
Dave
With all the criticism of the technical test there has not been much scrutiny of the listening tests. We have no evidence that there was any kind of control to these tests. (if there was and I missed it, please point it out to me).
Why are the FFT tests held to a higher standard than the listening tests?
.
DaveK: interesting that what you have described matches exactly what others have said. Independantly too, from different countries around the world. Mmm, thats interesting. So we have mebbe 50, or 100 pairs of ears who have heard a difference but only 3 or 4 sets of measurements, at least 2 of which claim a difference. Interesting, no?
Pano: There was no scrutiny. Zero, nada nothing. Just one man and his hifi, going back and forth, back and forth.
To these eyes, right now, I believe that to be every bit (hah!) as valid as the tests that have been endlessly argued over from the start of this thread.
"you measured it wrong.... no I didn't I measured it right, no you didn't, yes I did...."
" you listened wrong... no I listened right.... no you're wrong, no I'm right"
Anyone see anything similar in that?
Fran
Pano: There was no scrutiny. Zero, nada nothing. Just one man and his hifi, going back and forth, back and forth.
To these eyes, right now, I believe that to be every bit (hah!) as valid as the tests that have been endlessly argued over from the start of this thread.
"you measured it wrong.... no I didn't I measured it right, no you didn't, yes I did...."
" you listened wrong... no I listened right.... no you're wrong, no I'm right"
Anyone see anything similar in that?
Fran
- Status
- Not open for further replies.