Luca,
I personally highly appreciate the ideas, tweaks and solutions you have shared with us on this and other threads.
Some members are, with all due respect, a bit short on trained ears and hesitant to try something different which DOES make sense.
None of us have the same hearing ability, same equipment, same room and same preferences so it is pointless convincing to each other what they should like or dislike.
Instead of a too much of very often weak theorizing it would be a way better to share the best practices since this is a diy forum.
I won't further discuss with anyone in this respect. Fire at will.
Last edited:
Great analogy, but you just have it the wrong way around. To people simply trusting their senses, the world appears flat, but to people familiar with what science tells us, it is not.
I have asked you to explain in what way Nyquist-Shannon doesn't apply. You don't seem to be able to.
Science itself tells that in a restricted field of application ground IS flat (it's taken as flat reference in many many science experiments and research!). Senses are not wrong in that case.
But Earth is not flat, as it goes beyond senses extension and a different application field is required.
So if you don't consider the context and limiting factors, you can miss reality. That's what i wanted to say.
Really you didn't get it? We are talking about it from 1 day now... maybe you should re-read the posts...
Anyway, please, i'm not the only one that is bored about this discussion, just stop it.
I think London's University study (call it metastudy) is enough, as it puts a word END to this argument and it meets what most of us thinks and perceives.
If you can't live with that, i'm sorry for you.
I won't post any longer about that.
Last edited:
Brilliant combination in one post. You find one study that on a quick reading seems to support your world view, and suddenly that is The Truth. Right.
Thanks! We all appreciate it.
Not to be ironic, but i think that if we had met in our life, we would have been great friends. With different ideas and methods, but great friends anyway.
Please forgive this OT consideration.
Sorry, this is not a study, but statistic nonsense. I see no connection with physics here.
Yes. It is not a study that involves any actual experiments, but just a meta-study (a review of a bunch of different studies). So if you include a bunch of studies that have been discredited and never replicated, are you surprised that you find a "small but statistically significant ability to discriminate high resolution content". Note that no analysis is made as to why there might be a noticeable difference (such as the audible intermodulation that was found in several of the experiments.
Anyway, any study that includes the infamous Oohashi paper is not worth the paper it is not printed on.
Garbage in, garbage out.
Hello friends. Can someone answer me - these data correspond to the signals on contacts A0 A1 A2 I2SoverUSB ??
PINS
DSD
FLAG A2 A1 A0 Output
Sorry for my bad english..
PINS
DSD
FLAG A2 A1 A0 Output
0 0 0 0 44.1kHz
0 0 0 1 48kHz
0 0 1 0 88.2kHz
0 0 1 1 96kHz
0 1 0 0 176.4kHz
0 1 0 1 192kHz
0 1 1 0 352.8kHz
0 1 1 1 384kHz
1 1 0 X DSD64
1 1 1 X DSD128
Another question, is DSD 256 mode indication in this device?0 0 0 1 48kHz
0 0 1 0 88.2kHz
0 0 1 1 96kHz
0 1 0 0 176.4kHz
0 1 0 1 192kHz
0 1 1 0 352.8kHz
0 1 1 1 384kHz
1 1 0 X DSD64
1 1 1 X DSD128
Sorry for my bad english..
Last edited:
😀
Whell, mine is not custom made 😀 just plain chines one 😀
(with couple custom holes 😀😀😀)
You win me on that 😀