Twisted Pear Audio - Buffalo32S (ES9018 DAC) - Page 41 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Twisted Pear

Twisted Pear Superior quality electronic kits

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29th May 2009, 03:57 PM   #401
glt is offline glt  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Thanks for the comparison. Interestingly enough, some golden-ear types have described the the first quality as "high" jitter and the second as "low" jitter...
__________________
www.hifiduino.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2009, 06:22 PM   #402
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey, UK
Quote:
Originally posted by glt
Thanks for the comparison. Interestingly enough, some golden-ear types have described the the first quality as "high" jitter and the second as "low" jitter...
This sort of pseudo-science stretches credibility to breaking point. I wonder if anyone knows of any peer-reviewed studies examining the effect of expectation on perception of sound. I imagine it's a powerful effect and I admire Russ and Brian for their determination to stick to the measurable effects. As the Rock Man in Harry Nilsson's "The Point" wisely said: "ya see what you wanna see and ya hear what you wanna hear - ya dig?"
This DAC should be better (as far as I can tell) than previous DACs, since the chip is the latest and best technology and Russ and Brian appear to be perfectionists.
Anyway, I'm off-topic and don't want to antagonise anyone. I'd love to hear an A/B comparison anyway (if only I could afford one ).I'm desperately trying to find junk I can sell so that I can build a B32 and bathe in its sonic pool of delights.

As you were...
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2009, 09:25 PM   #403
mikelm is offline mikelm  England
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: England
Send a message via Yahoo to mikelm
There is an established technique of introducing some noise to enable previously inaudible sounds to become audible.

As one of the major plus's of these buffalo dacs is low noise it may be reasonable to speculate that we are experiencing this effect in reverse.

as u were ( again )
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2009, 09:41 PM   #404
Javin5 is offline Javin5  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Switzerland
More pseudoscience? Or is this solid, science based engineering?

Kurt
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2009, 10:13 PM   #405
hayenc is offline hayenc  United States
diyAudio Member
 
hayenc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Send a message via Yahoo to hayenc
Quote:
Originally posted by Javin5
More pseudoscience? Or is this solid, science based engineering?

Kurt

Personally, I look forward to having my Buffalo 32s put together. And I will compare it side by side with my DAC1, just as I did for the OPUS beta way back when (see TP support site). And it will likely be subjective and my listening preferences.

But, for the record, I have a PhD in Physics and have been a tenured professor. Have I now flipped to pseudoscience? No, science is always the best understanding of what we know today, based on our best inferences from the past.

Do we know all there is to know? Not at all. We need to stay consistent with what we know from science, and open to what science still has not quantified for us. Every time we think we have a full scientific explanation for how well we can see or hear, we get surprised by what we don't know. This makes high-end audio most interesting.

Russ, apologies for the slight off-topic rant. I suggest, we enjoy the surprises and enjoy the music.

Craig
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2009, 10:52 PM   #406
Javin5 is offline Javin5  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Switzerland
Hi hayenc

My comment was not addressed to you, but I agree with most of what you say. As we all know, each one has its own, subjective listening preference, and this is entirely ok. I'm certainly looking forward to your comparison. If you could add some comparative measurement to your listening evaluation, this would be even more interesting.

I have a Buffalo 32s operating since a couple of days and I have certainly not found it lacking in resolution. If I remember correctly, a number of posters have concurred with this. Trying to describe the sound would really end up describing, to a large degree, the sound of the total system, of which the Buffalo 32s is only one component. Anyway, I'm really happy with the result. Next thing I plan, is to try some higher bit rates from the PC hard disk.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2009, 12:10 AM   #407
hayenc is offline hayenc  United States
diyAudio Member
 
hayenc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Send a message via Yahoo to hayenc
Yes, we seem to be in agreement, but my concern is with what would constitute a meaningful measurement. We both understand that this is one component in a system in a room and your system and room will be very different from mine, much as I suspect our listening preferences and training will be much different. So we might find a measuring instrument which could make a measurement independent of all the other variables, but I doubt I have to money to afford such an instrument and wonder what it could say that Russ and Dustin have not already said. And would it change my mind as to how I think they sound? Unlikely.

I have read through the Benchmark book that came with my DAC1 and seen all the measurements in there. None seemed to help me with how it would sound, other than showing they clearly understand problems with clock jitter and noise shaping that Russ has also been very cautious with in his design.

In the end, I am left to just enjoy or not enjoy the music that comes out. That is why I buy this stuff.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2009, 12:24 AM   #408
3lviz is offline 3lviz  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Come on dudes. Either you like it or you don't.

There is little correlation between individual subjective experience and objective measurements, when it comes to hi-fi quality. And it should not even matter if there was such correlation.

Especially because the "standard" measurement leaves so much room for the device to sound different anyways. And measuring a good+ DAC with those standard measurement methods is like getting pulse from a dead person.

And if the measurements are good, would you still listen to something you don't like or if they are bad would you turn off something you like?
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2009, 12:31 AM   #409
hayenc is offline hayenc  United States
diyAudio Member
 
hayenc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Glendale, AZ
Send a message via Yahoo to hayenc
Quote:
Originally posted by 3lviz
Come on dudes. Either you like it or you don't.

There is little correlation between individual subjective experience and objective measurements, when it comes to hi-fi quality. And it should not even matter if there was such correlation.

Especially because the "standard" measurement leaves so much room for the device to sound different anyways. And measuring a good+ DAC with those standard measurement methods is like getting pulse from a dead person.

And if the measurements are good, would you still listen to something you don't like or if they are bad would you turn off something you like?

I thought that is what I just said and what we all agree about.

No desire for any arguing here, just for enjoying the music.

I have two Opus's, one the beta, and another dual mono. Missed on the original Buffalo, but am building out the 32s now. Russ can attest to how much I have supported his work and what that means as respect for his products. I don't plan to send any of them back or turn them off, but I will let you in on a secret. My DAC1 has not seen power for months.

All the best,

Craig
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2009, 12:40 AM   #410
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey, UK
Quote:
Originally posted by 3lviz

There is little correlation between individual subjective experience and objective measurements, when it comes to hi-fi quality. And it should not even matter if there was such correlation.

Is that true? I would've thought that objective measurements will have a bearing on subjective experience insofar as the accuracy of an electronic sound-generating device goes.

What I want from a DAC is transparency/accuracy. I want the analogue signal coming out of it to be as close to the one that was originally digitised in the first place. Is that not the ultimate goal of a DAC?
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:14 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2