It was stated as a presumption only, but I checked and you are correct about the filters. So noted, thank you. Half-band filters are symmetrical, so the Chord time alignment filter is presumably for compensation of some other part of the overall system.
Last edited:
That's a technical detail, my favorite is "One thing that seems to be missing from the best digital I have heard is the same level of room sound that can be heard on a good record. DSD seems to help with reproduction of room sound." which comes into collision with the First Principles, the digital format adds information to a digital stream
.
Ok fine, I don't know which John they were talking about then.
I will let these technical design experts continue to criticize John Pseudosmith.
Hi anatech,
My issues with diyaudio members or audio enthusiast people are not those trying to say non-oversampling is more natural. It's more the members which say the PCM63 is the most ultimate DAC chip ever & that modern designs are all flawed.
Then second the audio enthusiast people which have a measurement doctrine & try to convince people passionate about sound that the SanDisk Clip+ or the Cirrus Logic CS4398 into AD823, is the limit of human perception... I think it's not even 80% into human perception~
So is the noise good or bad? We discussed this years ago in the context of stochastic resonance, I agree with Bob provided the ticks and pops are not there and only the random noise is left with the same spectral density as the LP.
OTOH some of my favorite of Bob's LP's clearly have tape hiss far louder than the LP surface noise (maybe not at low frequencies?).
I kind of like Depak Chopra, although I have never invested in his 'books' or whatever he might sell to the public to make a living. But then, i once met Ram Das and found him enlightening about 45 years ago, and I read one of his books. I personally like to keep an open mind about such things, as I find them believable.
Now,when it comes to Jack Bybee and his products, I can only speak for what I have listened to myself, and that is how I came to first meet him.
He was a test for credibility, I realize, but I heard his first product work in my own system first, without knowing him, and I trust my ears. IF I had not heard a difference with my BEST set-up, (much better than most of you can muster up), I would have ignored him as I do so many exotic products.
Now, this was over 25 years ago that I first met him, and I have personally tested his credibility over these 2.5 decades, more than you know. He has always proven to be honest in his intentions, and his products seem to work, no matter what people think, and so I have usually defended him, especially on this website. Personally, none of his quantum based products ever got into Parasound, Constellation, Audible Illusions, or Vendetta products. They are just too expensive for what they do, and the owners of these companies are usually more conservative than I am, and it just wasn't worth trying to convince them to use them. That doesn't mean that they didn't work, because I have heard them work in a number of systems over the decades.
Now, what is my actual business relationship with Jack Bybee. I never worked for Jack Bybee, except as a consultant on lightning protection, and this was in a few products that he made years ago. He did use my name, but not with my explicit permission, and I have always been concerned that I was given more credit than I was due, because he used my name with the product. The most I ever got was $5 per individual unit, and this ended about 20 years ago. I never got a penny for a later product, with my name associated with it that costed about $5000, and Jack again used my name to sell the product, but I once again contributed to adding a 10uf motor start cap across the power line, and a gas filled lightning arrestor, to get around using a MOV that Jack wanted to avoid. That was MY contribution to virtually ALL his products. He stopped making this $5000 product even before informing me that he was making it, so he gave me the prototype of the unit, to make up for using my name. The product is now in my audio system, but is unavailable to anyone else, as far as I know. That's about it, everybody
Now,when it comes to Jack Bybee and his products, I can only speak for what I have listened to myself, and that is how I came to first meet him.
He was a test for credibility, I realize, but I heard his first product work in my own system first, without knowing him, and I trust my ears. IF I had not heard a difference with my BEST set-up, (much better than most of you can muster up), I would have ignored him as I do so many exotic products.
Now, this was over 25 years ago that I first met him, and I have personally tested his credibility over these 2.5 decades, more than you know. He has always proven to be honest in his intentions, and his products seem to work, no matter what people think, and so I have usually defended him, especially on this website. Personally, none of his quantum based products ever got into Parasound, Constellation, Audible Illusions, or Vendetta products. They are just too expensive for what they do, and the owners of these companies are usually more conservative than I am, and it just wasn't worth trying to convince them to use them. That doesn't mean that they didn't work, because I have heard them work in a number of systems over the decades.
Now, what is my actual business relationship with Jack Bybee. I never worked for Jack Bybee, except as a consultant on lightning protection, and this was in a few products that he made years ago. He did use my name, but not with my explicit permission, and I have always been concerned that I was given more credit than I was due, because he used my name with the product. The most I ever got was $5 per individual unit, and this ended about 20 years ago. I never got a penny for a later product, with my name associated with it that costed about $5000, and Jack again used my name to sell the product, but I once again contributed to adding a 10uf motor start cap across the power line, and a gas filled lightning arrestor, to get around using a MOV that Jack wanted to avoid. That was MY contribution to virtually ALL his products. He stopped making this $5000 product even before informing me that he was making it, so he gave me the prototype of the unit, to make up for using my name. The product is now in my audio system, but is unavailable to anyone else, as far as I know. That's about it, everybody
To be fair, that PCM63 based Rotel CD player was a massive upgrade over that piece of garbage 1-bit Marantz CD63SE...
Anyone remember the CD723? Ah, the glory of multibit, well at least the 15 bits that remained after the buggy digital volume control had thrown away the last bit under the bus... Such a cult following this turd had...
Hi John,
I guess between Jack using your name, and your eagerness to leap to support anything unconventional before looking at it generated suspicion in many people, including myself (as you well know).
I will tell you straight out that I have a great deal of respect for you. But by the same token, and I guess it is your personality, your outlook on fellow experimenters and designers leaves a great deal to be desired. Conceit would be one word that comes to mind.
I do wish you well, and maybe some day before you leave this earth, you might learn to treat others with some respect and view other technical people as an opportunity to learn a little something. Certainly your approach could be less dismissive.
-Chris
I guess between Jack using your name, and your eagerness to leap to support anything unconventional before looking at it generated suspicion in many people, including myself (as you well know).
I will tell you straight out that I have a great deal of respect for you. But by the same token, and I guess it is your personality, your outlook on fellow experimenters and designers leaves a great deal to be desired. Conceit would be one word that comes to mind.
I do wish you well, and maybe some day before you leave this earth, you might learn to treat others with some respect and view other technical people as an opportunity to learn a little something. Certainly your approach could be less dismissive.
-Chris
You have obviously never crossed paths with the followers of the TDA1541.
Please, spend time studying how cognitive biases can shape our sensory experiences.
I swear, y’all would claim that actually, our eyes don’t actually *mechanically* see everything upside down, because they’ve looked at a lot of stuff and it’s always right side up
Yes, you need to stack the TDA1541 on top of itself 16 times in order to achieve a signal which is pure / high resolution.
It is necessary to differentiate between the autonomic nonconscious and the nonautonomic conscious nervous systems. What sense perception and consciousness have in common is unreliability, creating a temporary, selective, shifting internal image of reality that cannot be rendered distinct from emotion, volition, previous experience, preconceptions, beliefs, personal, social, cultural and hystorical influences by any means.
Sensory experience is illusiory and consciousness is private, there is no such notion as objectivity. Shared opinions do not imply objectivity and convergence in repeated subjective observations does not add up to immaculate objective (scientific) observation. Theories are not testable against observations. Measurements are general (not objective).
Sensory experience is illusiory and consciousness is private, there is no such notion as objectivity. Shared opinions do not imply objectivity and convergence in repeated subjective observations does not add up to immaculate objective (scientific) observation. Theories are not testable against observations. Measurements are general (not objective).
Last edited:
You yourself didn't put AD797 on your top list. The test linked by Scott/Matt clearly shows an example of situation where people didn't prefer an AD797 circuit.
If you have good ears you should know why some people prefer A and why some people prefer B. It's preference. But at the top of my ability to perceive sound is the perception of fatigue...
Modern designs have always been wide bandwidth. The clear and most important effect is detail/transparency. Everyone likes transparency, but like Andrea_Mori used to imply, do you want to enjoy the music or want to be tortured? I will always prefer the utmost transparent system as long as I can listen to the music all day long with it.
Several years ago my favorite (class-B) amp is using Panasonic 2SB1317 (a 20MHz device) but my most transparent amp was using 60MHz and 80MHz NEC device. I used this latter amp for finding faults in speakers etc. Later when one of the B1317 was burnt (mishandling) I had to modify the transparent amp to make it more enjoyable. An 69pF Miller cap in the amp is the highest I have ever used in my amps (It's a total redesign, but I have always tried to minimize compensation, and that is the minimum I could go with).
Last edited:
Don't know where you got that unwise idea. Makes placing the 14 decoupling caps for each dac a bit tricky.
Seems like I virtually introduced cognitive psychology, Kahneman & Tversky, etc. to this forum. Nobody talked about it much or at all before that to my knowledge. Maybe just the old 'expectation bias' trope, certainly not the accepted definition from cognitive psychology. I did that after studying the subject for 10 years. How about you?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.