Alex,
If there is not a stock Hiface to be found locally, in the interests of a full & thorough analysis, I'm willing to send him a stock Hiface. I would like to take this out of the back-water Vendor's Bazaar, however as I believe that it is a continuation of a number of threads that were closed down:
- RF Attenuators = Jitter Reducersl being the most recent being
- What can measurements show/not show?
- Modifying USB cable to supply 5v This one was not started by me
In all of these threads the detractors argued against the concept presented, never tried the suggested idea for themselves & simply dismissed it all as subjective Booga-boo.
For my part, I had these devices sent to SY - a modified Hiface (modified to replace some USB power by battery) & some RF attenuators, hoping to address this doubt with some tests (including listening tests).These tests failed to show any differences between the modified Hiface & a cheap $30 Chinese USB-SPDIF converter & the RF attenuators didn't show the double attenuation of reflections that I predicted.
Now Pano has stated that his measurements show these Rf attenuators do indeed show this double attenuation of reflections (he calls it overshoot) & his subjective listening tests conclude that the Hiface sounds better than a cheap $30 Chinese device. As stated above this is a difference he reckons he can identify in blind tests.
If there is not a stock Hiface to be found locally, in the interests of a full & thorough analysis, I'm willing to send him a stock Hiface. I would like to take this out of the back-water Vendor's Bazaar, however as I believe that it is a continuation of a number of threads that were closed down:
- RF Attenuators = Jitter Reducersl being the most recent being
- What can measurements show/not show?
- Modifying USB cable to supply 5v This one was not started by me
In all of these threads the detractors argued against the concept presented, never tried the suggested idea for themselves & simply dismissed it all as subjective Booga-boo.
For my part, I had these devices sent to SY - a modified Hiface (modified to replace some USB power by battery) & some RF attenuators, hoping to address this doubt with some tests (including listening tests).These tests failed to show any differences between the modified Hiface & a cheap $30 Chinese USB-SPDIF converter & the RF attenuators didn't show the double attenuation of reflections that I predicted.
Now Pano has stated that his measurements show these Rf attenuators do indeed show this double attenuation of reflections (he calls it overshoot) & his subjective listening tests conclude that the Hiface sounds better than a cheap $30 Chinese device. As stated above this is a difference he reckons he can identify in blind tests.
Alex, having thought about this some more, I believe Pano will hear a distinct difference between the stock & modified Hiface, but will not be able to measure any difference. In a way, I believe this is a red herring & goes straight to the heart of the matter. SY has already demonstrated this thread was started to try to delve into this, "What can measurements show/not show?". Maybe this could be answered by Pano, if he is so inclined & has the time, by showing any measurable differences between the Chinese device & the Hiface. First, I guess that blind listening is needed to ascertain that this ain't no Booga-boo & that differences between the devices do actually exist (on the system being listened to 🙂)?
Yes, his use of headphones is a good one & helps to reveal finer detail. What headphones usually fail to portray adequately is sound stage & this was something I recommended him to try - a speaker based system for these qualities.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.