What Does It Take To Turn The PC Into A Hi-Fi Audio Platform ?

[Wirrunna]

Interesting article, worth a read -
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733.html



A camel is a racehorse designed by a committee.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wirrunna's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3225
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[bakker_be]

Given the trust I have for Tom's Hardware in general, that's quite a
sobering article :)



Main System: Touch; Marantz SR-5004; TMA Premium 905; TMA Premium 901;
BK Monolith+ FF; HDI Dune Smart D1; Pioneer PDP-LX5090H
iPad 32GB Wifi + Squeezepad (local playback activated)
Acer Iconia Tab A700 + Squeezeplayer
Wandboard Duallite + CSOS, integrated LMS activated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bakker_be's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=30369
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[SlimChances]

I subscribe to the view that Occam's Razor provides the best solution.
This article demonstrates this perfectly in my view



Logitech Media Server Version: 7.8.0 - 1386246861 @ Fri Dec 6 19:06:27
PST 2013
Operating system: Debian - EN - utf8
Platform Architecture: x86_64-linux
Perl Version: 5.14.2 - x86_64-linux-gnu-thread-multi
Database Version: DBD::SQLite 1.34_01 (sqlite 3.7.7.1)
One SB Touch connected by ethernet - Denon AVR -1912 Receiver, Paradigm
4.1 speakers
One SB Boom wireless
One SB Radio wireless
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SlimChances's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=165
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Archimago]

Nice no-nonsense article... The kind of thing you'd expect from computer
geeks ;)



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Keith_Beef]

I read that last night; very interesting indeed, and something I've been
looking into for a while.

Late in 2013 I bought a little DAC built around a Burr-Brown chip; I
connected this to a USB isolator from electronics-shop.dk to my Sony
Vaio. The audio from the DAC feeds the aux input of a little Yamaha
MCR-640.

It's not really audiophile gear, I admit, but it is good enough for my
cloth ears and in any case much better that the sound I got from
connecting the headphone jack of the computer to the aux input.

There's also an interesting article 'here on UbuntuForums'
(http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1921650).


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith_Beef's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=62590
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[satkinsn]

So, this continues what I see as a run of good news. High quality sound,
properly understood, ain't expensive, and is getting easier and easier
to reach. What you have to concern yourself with is not *that* much -
jitter isn't an issue unless something is broken. Ditto for cables. And
so on for amps.

As TH concludes, (and I wish I'd understood better, sooner) your money
should go mostly to your speakers and headphones. Which come to think of
it, makes sense.

s.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
satkinsn's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11398
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[blacsno]

Hmmmm What an interesting article! The single most important piece is
the DAC! If you are converting CD to FLAC. Since hard drive space isn't
a concern anymore, I've moved onto aiff format with the added benefit of
tagging. If you are like also converting LP's into aiff/flac format.
Then your turntable setup will suck up lots of cash just like the DAC.
The only PC component is a professional sound card ie RME Hammerfall or
Lynx Audio.

My setup:

PC SqueezePlay config to use Windows WDM-KS
Windows Server 2011 using Sever 7.8
Linn Sondek turntable
McIntosh MDA1000, McIntosh C2300,........

All I can is on playback the 24bit 96Hz file sound damn close to the
original recording. True the bulk of the cost was in stereo equipment
not in the PC.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
blacsno's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29362
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Julf]

The single most important piece is the DAC!

More important than the speakers? Or just more important than the
computer?

If you are converting CD to FLAC. Since hard drive space isn't a concern
anymore, I've moved onto aiff format with the added benefit of tagging.

Are you saying aiff has better tagging than flac, or that both flac and
aiff have better tagging than raw CD files?

All I can is on playback the 24bit 96Hz file sound damn close to the
original recording.

Have you verified you can hear a difference (in a blind test) between
24/96 and 16/44 (with otherwise identical recordings)?



"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[blacsno]

Post by Julf
More important than the speakers? Or just more important than the
computer?
Are you saying aiff has better tagging than flac, or that both flac and
aiff have better tagging than raw CD files?
Have you verified you can hear a difference (in a blind test) between
24/96 and 16/44 (with otherwise identical recordings)?

1.) I understand people have a view of hierarchy on what to buy first.
The point is the DAC is very important part of your setup! Where does it
stand in the hierarchy of purchasing? That is your personal preference
when is it time to buy. In my case I went from my Sony ES75 DAT recorder
to RME hammerfall then settled in with McIntosh. Each step was an
improvement over the other.

2.) Hearing the difference between 24/96 vs 16/44: This was my
methodology on testing between the formats. I convert analog LP into a
24/172, 24/96, and 16/44 wav files. The between all 3 format from high
to low there wasn't a "OH MY GOSH MOMENT"! You can hear very subtle
differences where 24/172 and 24/96 sounded similar, yet is that
difference worth the HUGE file size? IMO AHHH NO!!! While listening to
24/96 vs 16/44, once again very subtle differences. The 24/96 just
sounded smoother and more natural. Just like before you get a bigger
file size vs. 16/44. I went with 24/96 since hard drive space is cheap
enough to absorb the file size. 16/44 isn't the baby you toss out with
bath water either!! Please understand NONE of the format sounded
identical to the original source LP. It's all about the file size and
are you willing to support it. If one is buying digital downloads I can
see how "FANBOY" appears on the scene. Like I said earlier I do my own
mastering from LP's to AIFF format.

Ripping a CD to anything higher than its original spec has no added
value. You can't make more that isn't present on the disc!! To improve
16/44 "see point 1" get a better DAC!!!!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
blacsno's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29362
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Archimago]

Post by blacsno
2.) Hearing the difference between 24/96 vs 16/44: This was my
methodology on testing between the formats. I convert analog LP into a
24/172, 24/96, and 16/44 wav files. The between all 3 format from high
to low there wasn't a "OH MY GOSH MOMENT"! You can hear very subtle
differences where 24/172 and 24/96 sounded similar, yet is that
difference worth the HUGE file size? IMO AHHH NO!!! While listening to
24/96 vs 16/44, once again very subtle differences. The 24/96 just
sounded smoother and more natural. Just like before you get a bigger
file size vs. 16/44. I went with 24/96 since hard drive space is cheap
enough to absorb the file size. 16/44 isn't the baby you toss out with
bath water either!! Please understand NONE of the format sounded
identical to the original source LP. It's all about the file size and
are you willing to support it. If one is buying digital downloads I can
see how "FANBOY" appears on the scene. Like I said earlier I do my own
mastering from LP's to AIFF format.

For point 2 there. I would recommend taking the 16/44 data and then
upsampling it to 24/172 and compare that on your DAC to the original
24/172 and see if you can tell the difference. The "subtle" differences
should become more obvious if they exist.

One possibility for folks who claim they hear a difference on any
specific DAC is that the performance could be different depending on
what is fed into the machine. A simple linear phase upsample with SoX or
dBPowerAmp and listening to the same track at the same sample rate on
the DAC at the higher conversion resolution would remove some other
variables and provide a more direct comparison. This also allows a very
nice ABX test in something like Foobar since the DAC would not be
switching sample rates between the tracks!

Let us know how you do on a test like the above and I'm always looking
for what tracks people use to listen to differences like this.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[blacsno]

Will try! Never thought about trying that? My guess it WON'T sound like
the original 24/172 file.......

1.) If the original 16/44 file won't have the "INFO" so upsampling to
24/172 can't create "INFO". So it will sound different...
2.) Next the upsampling by a DAC via its chip set's will also affect the
final output. So ii will sound different...
3.) I did used to upsampled to 96Khz not anymore once Squeeze Play can
access files Hi-Rez natively. Playing the file in its native format
always had more open sound. IMO.... Once again it could be my DAC
causing that!!:eek:

Because I master from LP's.... The hard truth is "One can't CLONE analog
into digital"! All one can hope for is to recreate a very close
approximation. So create and use native playback at 24/172 would be the
goal, but HUGE files. I know by upsampling one is trying to smooth out
the sine curve. Yet at what cost.... Since the DAC is guessing on what
is should sound like.:(


------------------------------------------------------------------------
blacsno's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=29362
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Archimago]

Post by blacsno
Will try! Never thought about trying that? My guess it WON'T sound like
the original 24/172 file.......
1.) If the original 16/44 file won't have the "INFO" so upsampling to
24/172 can't create "INFO". So it will sound different...
2.) Next the upsampling by a DAC via its chip set's will also affect the
final output. So ii will sound different...
3.) I did used to upsampled to 96Khz not anymore once Squeeze Play can
access files Hi-Rez natively. Playing the file in its native format
always had more open sound. IMO.... Once again it could be my DAC
Because I master from LP's.... The hard truth is "One can't CLONE analog
into digital"! All one can hope for is to recreate a very close
approximation. So create and use native playback at 24/172 would be the
goal, but HUGE files. I know by upsampling one is trying to smooth out
the sine curve. Yet at what cost.... Since the DAC is guessing on what
is should sound like.:(

The truth is that one cannot "clone" the exact sound of an LP every time
you play it! Remember, from the perspective of precision, no 2 LP
playbacks will "sound" the same even with the same vinyl and the same
gear - small variations like cartridge alignment, static, dust, ambient
temperature, vibration isolation, and accuracy of the mechanical process
(eg. turntable speed) will cause more variation than what you get with
CD or especially file playback. (Not to mention that each time an LP is
played, there will be inevitably small changes to the vinyl itself.)

Anyhow, spend 30 minutes to try out the upsampled 16/44 --> 24/172 and
do the ABX. You might be surprised at how little difference (if any) you
hear. True that "INFO" has been lost, but realize that the human ear and
the playback gear are not without limitations and there is a point where
"good enough" is truly good enough and there's no need to be neurotic.



Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[Mnyb]

Also analog does not have endless resolution vinyl is equvavilent of
11bit dithered digital or 13bit undithered aproximately.

If one wants to argue the virtues of analog use reel to reel tape as an
example ,vinyl has compromises it simply does not sound as the master
tapes and the master engineer has to tweak a lot of stuff even to make
it work in the cutting process! That's part of the vinyl "sound" but it
is a "sound" ( just as mono bass 20dB channel separation in the
midrange, >0.5% 2nd order distortion etc )

With modern digital audio with dither the noise is just as random as
good old analog noise so it practically equvavilent . Edit: equvavilent
with the very best theoretical analog that rarely exist in practice

It true that when you digitise vinyl it would not always sound the same
but in the best case it does. When you digitise it you usually don't
crank up the volume so you miss the acoustic feedback that is a part of
the vinyl sound :) so it migth actually sound better . The phono stage
used can also influence a lot the modern anti riaa curve has a cutoff in
the subsonic range older phono stages migth not have this or you can
chose to use subsonic filter separately. The give away if you see your
speaker cones wobble in an out , (if I remember correctly many subsonic
filters where not particularly well made , I thinks it's better done in
modern phono stages ) .the rumble and clicks and pops can actually have
more amplitude than the music so you migth need the recording headroom
of 16bits or better I would sugest to be carefull with the recording
levels so you don't get digital clipping ! That is nasty .

Cheers



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered Fostex PM0.4
Misc use: Radio (with battery)
iPad1 with iPengHD & SqueezePad
(in storage SB3, reciever ,controller )
server HP proliant micro server N36L with ClearOS Linux

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mnyb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4143
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[probedb]

Someone needs to watch http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml as it would
explain why bigger numbers are not making more accurate files.



'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
probedb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7825
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[probedb]

Post by blacsno
Hmmmm What an interesting article! The single most important piece is
the DAC! If you are converting CD to FLAC. Since hard drive space isn't
a concern anymore, I've moved onto aiff format with the added benefit of
tagging. If you are like also converting LP's into aiff/flac format.
Then your turntable setup will suck up lots of cash just like the DAC.
The only PC component is a professional sound card ie RME Hammerfall or
Lynx Audio.
.....
All I can is on playback the 24bit 96Hz file sound damn close to the
original recording. True the bulk of the cost was in stereo equipment
not in the PC.

Can anyone spot the real "audiophile" in the room ;)

I haven't found anything to outperform my £30 FiiO D3 yet.



'last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/probedb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
probedb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7825
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[jimmypowder]

I would have to say you need 1,000 dollar digital cables in order to
have a great system .




------------------------------------------------------------------------
jimmypowder's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=61215
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[SlimChances]

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/magnan_signature_silver_bronze.htm

are the key to excellent sound for my golden ears



Logitech Media Server Version: 7.8.1 - 1398786621 @ Sun May 4 03:04:31
UTC 2014
Operating system: Debian - EN - utf8 Platform Architecture:
x86_64-linux
Perl Version: 5.18.2 - x86_64-linux-gnu-thread-multi
Database Version: DBD::SQLite 1.34_01 (sqlite 3.7.7.1)
One SB Touch connected by ethernet - Denon AVR -1912 Receiver,
Paradigm 4.1 speakers
One SB Boom wireless
One SB Radio wireless
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SlimChances's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=165
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[darrenyeats]

No recording technology be it analogue or digital can "clone" its input.
They are all imperfect representations.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk



Check it, add to it! http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503.

SB Touch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023

[ralphpnj]

blacsno you need to watch http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml, it would
explain how digital audio works because it seems you don't understand
it.
No recording technology be it analogue or digital can "clone" its input.
They are all imperfect representations.
an analogue signal generator; in the middle, digital A/D/A; and the
result on an analogue scope. Recommended!
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk

A well produced spiffy video can not hide the fact that it is just chock
full of hard science and hard science is anathema to audiophiles. Plus
the tablet used in the video wasn't an iPad, which clearly shows just
how little the so "expert" called actually knows. :)



Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom Desktop w/DAC-Aragon amp-Energy Veritas 2.1
& Energy sub
Bedroom: Touch-HR Desktop w/DAC-Audio Refinement amp-Energy Veritas 2.0
Guest Rm: Duet-Sony soundbar
Garage: SB3-JVC compact system
Controls: iPeng; SB Controller; Moose & Muso
Server: SBS on dedicated windows 7 computer w/2 Drobos
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101023