I know. It doesn't bother me too much where Mark spends his money but he is spreading serious misinformation.
I am not spreading misinformation at all. You are.
People can hear low level distortion whether you like it or not, not all people but some certainly can. According to Earl Geddes, we have a pretty good idea of how about 95% of the population can hear. He said that the other 5% have never been studied. He went on to say that new tests would have to be developed for that, and the a preliminary study would probably cost in the range of several to several tens of thousands of dollars. So far, no one has funded the additional research, so no one actually knows what you claim to know.
Regarding the claims of Evenharmonics, he is a well known troll who most people seem to think has some mental issues.
Look, you two may be more or less normal in that statistics that apply to what Earl said was about 95% may apply to you. You may not hear low level distortion very well. Nothing to be ashamed of, and no reason to claim others must necessarily be the same or less than the same as you.
By the way, I routinely invite people to come here to Auburn and see for themselves. If you are seriously interested in finding out the truth about what people can hear, then you are invited too. On the other hand if you are another Evenharmonics, well, we hope you are seriously interested in science and truth finding, not simply trying to win debates. Scientific disagreements are never settled by debate, they have to be settled by scientific experimentation, and yes, including proper measurement.
People can hear low level distortion whether you like it or not, not all people but some certainly can. According to Earl Geddes, we have a pretty good idea of how about 95% of the population can hear. He said that the other 5% have never been studied. He went on to say that new tests would have to be developed for that, and the a preliminary study would probably cost in the range of several to several tens of thousands of dollars. So far, no one has funded the additional research, so no one actually knows what you claim to know.
Regarding the claims of Evenharmonics, he is a well known troll who most people seem to think has some mental issues.
Look, you two may be more or less normal in that statistics that apply to what Earl said was about 95% may apply to you. You may not hear low level distortion very well. Nothing to be ashamed of, and no reason to claim others must necessarily be the same or less than the same as you.
By the way, I routinely invite people to come here to Auburn and see for themselves. If you are seriously interested in finding out the truth about what people can hear, then you are invited too. On the other hand if you are another Evenharmonics, well, we hope you are seriously interested in science and truth finding, not simply trying to win debates. Scientific disagreements are never settled by debate, they have to be settled by scientific experimentation, and yes, including proper measurement.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
No problem, Bigun. I don't sell anything, nor shall I do so in the future.
Regarding the issue of debate, I don't consider how Evenharmonics is viewed by other members to be at the level of a scientific disagreement.
Regarding the issue of debate, I don't consider how Evenharmonics is viewed by other members to be at the level of a scientific disagreement.
Last edited:
Scientific listening experimentation? To what cause? Do you know what constitutes scientific? Online audio forum is not a scientific journal. Furthermore, such test must be very well designed, carefully interpreted and hopefully replicated and finally meta-analysis could be applied to those and then we can talk about science and scientific testing.
All I see from you is scientific illiteracy and scientism. Repeating double blind ABX(it's funny and quite revealing how you insist on double blind ABX as it is not the most sensitive protocol in this case for detecting differenceis)and science ad nauseam will not invoke the things you chose to believe in.
You are every bit as subjective and un-scientific as you think people you criticize are.
Which protocol is there that's better for detecting audible difference between DACs? Please share.
So you are saying Markw4 is subjective and unscientific.
No - read a little more carefully. He's saying that you think Markw4 is subjective and unscientific but that you're no different to how you think Markw4 is.
It isn't difficult to do scientific experiments, school children do them. Proving what other people can and cannot hear is very very very difficult.....and I believe (should be) of little consequence to an individual. Needing to do so could be a sign of mental issues 😉
Last edited:
Gareth, many amp designers such as John Curl, Nelson Pass and Jason Stoddard have professed to have lesser hearing discrimination compared to others, and still people love them and their products. I think there really is nothing to be ashamed of when one's hearing is not as discriminating as somebody else's.
All,
Let me gently redirect the conversation to the OP's original ask that is outlined in posts 10 and 14.
- preferred budget of $200 - $400, but can go up to $1000
- as close to "state of the art" as possible, relative to a Buffalo II
Thanks to those members who have offered suggestions in that direction.
Let me gently redirect the conversation to the OP's original ask that is outlined in posts 10 and 14.
- preferred budget of $200 - $400, but can go up to $1000
- as close to "state of the art" as possible, relative to a Buffalo II
Thanks to those members who have offered suggestions in that direction.
I already mentioned a potential option around $200, in the form of the upcoming Allo Revolution dac.
Now for the $1,000 option: An AK4499 evaluation board, with JLSounds I2SoverUSB, and a set of various power supplies to power it decently, get as much as possible off of the default +-15v rails. An Arduino for I2C control.
The eval board is $600. I2SoverUSB around $89. Arduino, I dunno, under $50 easily. An R-core power transformer or two and some voltage regulators for the rest. Fair amount of DIY work to put it together.
Sound quality can be superb if the power supplies and I2S hookup are done as well as possible. Potentially a $3,000+ level dac in the end, possibly more if HQPlayer and a powerful PC are available. Can sound better than some dacs selling in the five figures.
I think time will show that it can clearly exceed the $1,000 or so Chinese AK4499 dacs in terms of sound quality. No MQA though 🙂
Now for the $1,000 option: An AK4499 evaluation board, with JLSounds I2SoverUSB, and a set of various power supplies to power it decently, get as much as possible off of the default +-15v rails. An Arduino for I2C control.
The eval board is $600. I2SoverUSB around $89. Arduino, I dunno, under $50 easily. An R-core power transformer or two and some voltage regulators for the rest. Fair amount of DIY work to put it together.
Sound quality can be superb if the power supplies and I2S hookup are done as well as possible. Potentially a $3,000+ level dac in the end, possibly more if HQPlayer and a powerful PC are available. Can sound better than some dacs selling in the five figures.
I think time will show that it can clearly exceed the $1,000 or so Chinese AK4499 dacs in terms of sound quality. No MQA though 🙂
Last edited:
Mark,
Yes, you and some other members have been super helpful not only with suggestions, but also with sharing your (stunningly deep) knowledge in his area. Hallcon83 has a lot to work with (I am taking notes too).
Thanks.
Yes, you and some other members have been super helpful not only with suggestions, but also with sharing your (stunningly deep) knowledge in his area. Hallcon83 has a lot to work with (I am taking notes too).
Thanks.
Have you ever considered analysing your own approach with the same level of critical analysis? This "you're wrong so I must be right" arguement simply doesn't cut it!
I know a few people with golden ears. I was shocked when I found someone surely can hear what I can't hear for the first time, but now I just accept the reality. 🙂
Something interesting I have discovered is, many people with better hearing abilities usually listen to the music at lower volume. Some exceptions, of course. I wonder that louder listening behavior degrades the hearing abilities, or those who have better abilities doesn't have to listen to music loudly...
It could simply be that everything distorts less at lower volumes. It also takes a while to adjust to low volumes, I like to listen late at night when it's quiet, I find I can keep edging the volume down.
I would say, get a proven DAC with good reputation and measurement.
Don't buy any Chinese boards from dark web with your bitcoin. 🙂