|
VideoTapir posted:I'm telling you the bolts on this overpass support have to be wooden. It will smooth out the vibrations and give them a nice warm tone. That would actually work a lot better than what has been done before: quote:In early February 2011, a maintenance crew found a fixture lying in the middle travel lane in the northbound tunnel. Assuming it to be simple road debris, the maintenance team picked it up and brought it back to its home facility. The next day, a supervisor passing through the yard realized that the 120 lb (54 kg) fixture was not road debris but was in fact one of the fixtures used to light the tunnel itself. Further investigation revealed that the fixture's mounting apparatus had failed, due to galvanic corrosion of incompatible metals, caused by having aluminum in direct contact with stainless steel, in the presence of salt water. The electrochemical potential difference between stainless steel and aluminum is in the range of 0.5 to 1.0V, depending on the exact alloys involved, and can cause considerable corrosion within months under unfavorable conditions.
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 10:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
The audiophile company who designed and manufactured this product, Ayre Acoustics, refuses to release the device's output impedance and claims that output impedance has no impact on audio quality. There's really no chance that the Pono is going to sound good when these sort of comments are being made by the designer and manufacturer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
Chafe posted:The audiophile company who designed and manufactured this product, Ayre Acoustics, refuses to release the device's output impedance and claims that output impedance has no impact on audio quality. Prepare your mocking rays: I have a Pono player. It sounds good. I'd put it on par with my main digital playback system - a squeezebox touch running into a Benchmark DAC1 HDR (which I need to upgrade to the newer model, because... Well, because). I'm also the sort of nut that uses a different power supply for my squeezebox touch because the idea of a switching power supply so close to the low level audio signals (and poor shielding) in my phono setup gave me the heebie jeebies. Mock on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
--edit: ^^^ I have a bridge to sell you, too.KozmoNaut posted:No, because gently caress giving money to scammers. Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Jan 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
jhcain posted:Prepare your mocking rays: It's no fun when you're actually asking for it  I am curious however, and I have some honest questions. What on Earth convinced you to actually spend money on a Pono? Bear in mind that it's actually very likely to sound worse than your average iPod or Sandisk Clip Zip or other MP3 player: Pono Kickstarer backer posted:I have one, and its technology sucks balls. Switching subjects slightly from the Pono, what exactly are you expecting to gain from upgrading your perfectly functional DAC1 for a DAC2, when literally the only measurable difference is a couple of dBs worth of SNR, of which the DAC1 already had absolutely stellar specs? And lastly, have you measured and objectively tested if using a different power supply on your Squeezebox actually makes any difference?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:"And let's not say about the claim from Ayre themselves saying it's 80-90% as good as their $20,000 amp." 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
 if you think that's outrageous.The Audio Note Gaku-ON II monoblock tube amplifier costs $250K. Of course, you'll need two of them. They deliver just 50 watts each, by the way. And of course, you'll want to pair those with a set of Audio Note AN-E SOGON speakers. That's another $165K. For a set of ordinary rectangular box 2-way speakers. To be "fair", there is about 40lbs of silver all told in the wiring and external crossover, which probably accounts for a lot of the insane pricing. The best part is that the Snell speaker the design is based upon cost around $1K back when it was still produced. And you'll need a CD player. The Audio Note CDT-Six costs $200K. And then you'll need a DAC. The Audio Note DAC5 Signature will set you back a cool $55K. And it's a non-oversampling DAC, which is means it'll have significant distortion. Wonderful. $920K, just to be able to listen to CDs. Badly. KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Jan 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
Wait, the Pono is running Android 2.2? That's at least 4 years ago holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
Chafe posted:Wait, the Pono is running Android 2.2? That's at least 4 years ago holy poo poo. That's not really relevant though, as you're not going to be installing applications on it, and it's likely a heavily customized fork. There's lots of embedded devices out there still running on like a 6 year old version of Windows CE or something similar, because nearly everything else gets handled by the OEM's firmware.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:It's no fun when you're actually asking for it "What on Earth convinced you..." I like the premise of the "ecosystem" proposed, primarily the idea of going back and taking another shot at converting analog recordings to digital - early CD transfers, in particular, ain't nothing to write home about. I was also curious as to how the hardware would turn out. "Likely to sound worse," isn't really my experience so far. It's also something different - why not give it a shot? Why the move to DAC2? Same reasons, really, that drove Benchmark to introduce the new model. I like the idea of the extra direct indicator lamps on the front of the device, and especially the updated attenuation stage. Oh, and remote absolute phase inversion something I haven't had since my old Aragon D2A, so that's worth something (to me.) "measured.." I could probably measure the crap out of that power supply swap, but what's the appropriate unit for plotting "heebie jeebies"? A switching power supply can be a nasty little thing. Removing it from the environment makes it one less thing to think about. That kickstarter rant about how terrible the Pono player is was a little confounding to me - (s)he starts with "I have one," and ends with "I've actually never wanted to back out of a kickstarter as much as I have with Pono." If you have one and hate it, just sell it, and pretend it never happened. It's not like buying one via the kickstarter has put a tattoo on your forehead... OR HAS IT? Someone get me a mirror!! Meanwhile, no mention of how that person thought it actually, you know, sounded?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
jhcain posted:"What on Earth convinced you..." I like the premise of the "ecosystem" proposed, primarily the idea of going back and taking another shot at converting analog recordings to digital - early CD transfers, in particular, ain't nothing to write home about. I was also curious as to how the hardware would turn out. "Likely to sound worse," isn't really my experience so far. It's also something different - why not give it a shot? Because it's $400 for a glorified MP3 player that doesn't offer any actual benefits over a $70 Sandisk Sansa Clip Zip. I agree that it would be nice to finally have some good mastering on mainstream releases, but why does it have to be mired in bullshit audiophilia? quote:Why the move to DAC2? Same reasons, really, that drove Benchmark to introduce the new model. I like the idea of the extra direct indicator lamps on the front of the device, and especially the updated attenuation stage. Oh, and remote absolute phase inversion something I haven't had since my old Aragon D2A, so that's worth something (to me.) Well sure, if you bought it for the features. If I replaced my FiiO DAC with the DAC2 HGC, it could take the place of my preamp as well, which would look better on my desk, since it's physically smaller. It also costs more than my entire setup combined, including active speakers, multiple subwoofers and DSP-based crossover/active speaker controller. In other words, not worth it for an inaudible difference. quote:"measured.." I could probably measure the crap out of that power supply swap, but what's the appropriate unit for plotting "heebie jeebies"? A switching power supply can be a nasty little thing. Removing it from the environment makes it one less thing to think about. What makes it "a nasty little thing"? What's wrong with switching power supplies? quote:That kickstarter rant about how terrible the Pono player is was a little confounding to me - (s)he starts with "I have one," and ends with "I've actually never wanted to back out of a kickstarter as much as I have with Pono." If you have one and hate it, just sell it, and pretend it never happened. It's not like buying one via the kickstarter has put a tattoo on your forehead... OR HAS IT? Someone get me a mirror!! Meanwhile, no mention of how that person thought it actually, you know, sounded? Perhaps the poster wanted to warn other people to fall for blatant bullshit as they had done? Some people actually want the best for their fellow human beings, imagine that 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Because it's $400 for a glorified MP3 player that doesn't offer any actual benefits over a $70 Sandisk Sansa Clip Zip. Because bullshit audiophile money gets the re-transfers funded, to be quite honest. Last I heard, most of the people who work for Pono don't think the format the music's beign sold in will do much of anything for better quality, but they also say that most of the remastering wouldn't be done at all if that old musician hadn't thrown in his crazy rich guy money and gotten a bunch of other people who were easily bowled over with audiophile hype to do so as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
But these improved quality transfers will forever be tainted with the "HD audio" audiophile bullshit. I foresee a massive failure for the whole Pono project. But if it succeeds (against all odds), at least it's easy to downsample to 16/44.1 and save an approximate ton of storage space without any audible impact. But what really bothers me is that this is a complete waste of bandwidth, storage space and effort, for something that literally doesn't matter if they'd just done the mastering correctly the first time. The people behind all this bullshit should get a "waste of a finite resource" ticket.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:But these improved quality transfers will forever be tainted with the "HD audio" audiophile bullshit. Neither storage space nor bandwidth is much of a finite resource. This is basically like having old timey industrialists try to look good by building massive libraries in random cities. Sure they were doing it for vanity, but they did also get good book collections going.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Neither storage space nor bandwidth is much of a finite resource. But this is basically like reprinting all the books on 4x5m large pages, but keeping the text itself the same size as the originals, stuck in a corner. A bunch of wasted effort for nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:But this is basically like reprinting all the books on 4x5m large pages, but keeping the text itself the same size as the originals, stuck in a corner. A bunch of wasted effort for nothing. It isn't though. A lot of the stuff was poorly remastered for initial CD releases and then barely touched since. It doesn't matter that the new intermediate format they want to use is huge, you can downsample it all just fine and audio stored is better than what we had before just from not half-assing it so the record company can say they got 200 new CD titles in the past month.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Can we talk about how this thing is the worst possible shape they could have chosen barring a sphere or like a sea urchin shape? Has anybody checked if Neil Young has pyramidal indentations in his buttocks or thighs? Like a niche which he slides the Pono into, Robocop gun style.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Because it's $400 for a glorified MP3 player that doesn't offer any actual benefits over a $70 Sandisk Sansa Clip Zip. Useless, stupid moronic Pono doodad: Well, you enjoy your Clip Zip, I'll enjoy this Pono thing. It's a triangle shape, so it doesn't roll away, duh! Benchmark: And why wouldn't I buy something "for the features"? If the cost/benefit isn't right for you, you should not buy one. In fact, I refuse to allow you to buy one. I plan to, because it may well yield an improvement in performance. The additional features will be a super duper exciting bonus. Again, the manufacturer might have actually believed it a genuine improvement over the last unit, why wouldn't I? Switching power supplies, in particular cheap little ones, can introduce electrical noise, by nature of their design. I chose to simply eliminate even the potential for that electrical noise entering my system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
jhcain posted:Again, the manufacturer might have actually believed it a genuine improvement over the last unit, why wouldn't I?   Ladies and gentlemen, the target audience for most of this thread's topics. Because if the manufacture says that it might be a small improvement, it must be worth buying! (You actually think someone might do that -- lie on the Internet?) jhcain posted:Switching power supplies, in particular cheap little ones, can introduce electrical noise, by nature of their design. I chose to simply eliminate even the potential for that electrical noise entering my system. There is this thing called capacitors. You may have heard of them. PS: The Benchmark DAC2 uses a switching power supply. Also, you should probably look at the changes in switching power supplies. Sure, the early SMPS designs were noisy little shits. (Although, often, what you were hearing wasn't RFI; more often, audible effects were due to inductive coupling with mains.) Modern SMPS designs produce very little RFI due to soft-switching techniques, and have significant filtering on the output. (e: Typo, the DAC2 is SMPS, the DAC1 is a retarded linear design.) ullerrm fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Jan 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
ullerrm posted:
A small improvement is an improvement. Simple enough. Is there no middle ground between "Buy these wood blocks to put your speaker cables on for $1000 and all your wishes will come true" and "This updated model of a respected bit of gear is an improvement over the previous model"? Me, I make my own wooden blocks. Free!* And yes, of course, a switching power supply can be cleaned up and isolated. I just removed it from consideration. The Benchmark uses a linear power supply, not a switching one. *no wooden blocks
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
The problem to me with this high resolution trend is that it's just going to convince even more people that anyone recommending anything better than spotify played via bluetooth on a Beats Pill is a crazy person, and this time it's the audiophiles playing reductio ad absurdum by intentionally claiming all "compressed" music [even lossless] is compromised. People come over to my apartment and they like my [modest] sound system and when I tell them they could get 95% of the way there for a few hundred dollars they look interested until I mention that I'm not talking about a soundbar or some other single box solution. I think people are so burned out on technology that anything that isn't molded plastic with a "go" button just gets dismissed as lame dad gear. At least Sonos seems to have some interest in their stuff sounding good [if not particularly "accurate"] and the experience of setting it up and using it is fantastic. I feel like that by making all of these absurd claims these audio companies are just focusing on the dad gear end of the market because they know they'll actually buy stuff and it's pushing out other people who could get into good audio but just look at the whole scene and go "ugh."
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
jhcain posted:And yes, of course, a switching power supply can be cleaned up and isolated. I just removed it from consideration. The Benchmark uses a linear power supply, not a switching one. Ah, typo in my first post. The DAC1 used a linear power supply. The DAC2 is switch-mode. (That's why it no longer has that ridiculous toroidal transformer in it.) DAC1 internals: http://kenrockwell.com/audio/benchmark/images/dac1-hdr/D3S_7734-inside-1600.jpg DAC2 internals: http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/gi.mpl?u=19047&f=dac2-internal.jpg That's why the DAC1 had a input voltage selection switch, and why the DAC2 does not. (It's also why the DAC1 was a big dumb space heater that drew 15W even when idle, while the DAC2 idles at less than a watt.) e: Edited some needless personal attack out. You won't be convinced anyways. Feel free to waste money on this stupid poo poo, I suppose. ullerrm fucked around with this message at 01:28 on Jan 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
ullerrm posted:Ah, typo in my first post. The DAC1 used a linear power supply. The DAC2 is switch-mode. (That's why it no longer has that ridiculous toroidal transformer in it.) You're right - I'm not convinced. I also don't even know what point you're trying to make - The new unit is more efficient, and not a dumb space heater, but I shouldn't buy one? What is acceptable for me to procure, oh one so wise in the ways of apparently all? Tell me!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
jhcain posted:You're right - I'm not convinced. I also don't even know what point you're trying to make - The new unit is more efficient, and not a dumb space heater, but I shouldn't buy one? What is acceptable for me to procure, oh one so wise in the ways of apparently all? Tell me! You're missing the point, but whatever. Waste your money on whatever you want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Holy poo poo those things are expensive. You're spending 2 grand on a DAC? Can I see pictures of your rig?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:Holy poo poo those things are expensive. You're spending 2 grand on a DAC? Can I see pictures of your rig? Hmm. I guess this will be amusing: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
How much money have you spent on cables?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
jhcain posted:Hmm. I guess this will be amusing: That's probably a nice sounding system but the fact that you're both concerned with having a super nice DAC and using tube amps seems odd to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
It looks pretty loving rad, anyway. How loud can it go without appreciable distortion?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
ullerrm posted:DAC1 internals: http://kenrockwell.com/audio/benchmark/images/dac1-hdr/D3S_7734-inside-1600.jpg  Ken Rockwell does audio stuff too?KozmoNaut posted:Even if we gave them the benefit of the doubt, it simply isn't possible for them to exceed the measured performance of the Benchmark DAC2. Since there will always be an analog component to any sound reproduction system, entropy and thermal self-noise puts a limit of around 120dB SNR. BigFactory posted:That's really stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
More importantly: how many Yello records do you own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
phongn posted:He was an audio engineer before he became the vanguard of crappy pictures of his children. He's firmly on the ABX side, IIRC. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
jhcain posted:Hmm. I guess this will be amusing: You make these threads worthwhile. Just wanted you to know that. Can I interest you in a bridge? Or perhaps a piece of prime real estate on the moon?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
qirex posted:That's probably a nice sounding system but the fact that you're both concerned with having a super nice DAC and using tube amps seems odd to me. --edit: Also, I poked some of the component numbers of the DAC1, that I could decipher, into Google. I don't see what's so special with these. I have same or better poo poo on my Soundblaster for a fraction of the price. Also, since everyone has a hard-on for Nichicon Gold caps, why don't I see them used? Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Jan 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
jhcain posted:Hmm. I guess this will be amusing: That's sick. What are the speakers, magneplanars?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Yeah, that's a loving retarded contradiction. What's a super-accurate DAC good for, when you're going to distort the poo poo out of the signal?! I have given up reasoning with jhcain. When someone insists on sticking with tube amps, yet still voices concern over noise from switching power supplies and considers upgrading one very high-quality DAC to another because the specs are ever so slightly better and because it uses less power, it is absolutely useless trying to make them see sense. Regarding the Benchmark DACs, the company name actually isn't hyperbole, for once. They truly do make the most accurate DACs available, they measure better than anything anyone else makes. I can't say whether that's worth something to you. I love that they exist, because it proves that you can make the absolute best product in your chosen area by using serious engineering knowhow, rather than audiophile woo-woo. When you can get what is literally the best of the best for $2K, it puts a nice perspective on just how much bullshit is going on when unscrupulous snake oil salesmen are hawking $50K DACs with absolutely no measurements posted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
I use multiple minidisc recorders as DACs, and the setup in our room cobbled up from various sources (a few studio monitors, some 70s amps etc) and costing no more than $1,000 probably runs louder and just as clean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I have given up reasoning with jhcain. When someone insists on sticking with tube amps, yet still voices concern over noise from switching power supplies and considers upgrading one very high-quality DAC to another because the specs are ever so slightly better and because it uses less power, it is absolutely useless trying to make them see sense. Ok, this is fascinating. Where are you trying to reason with me? It's not like I'm threatening to jump off a bridge here. The part about the using less power should obviously be a joke. There are certain things that are "real," and some are "audiphile nonsense." I'm probing to see if anyone in this thread is willing to acknowledge the continuum. Looks like pretty much no. Ok. What I think makes sense is upgrading a bit of gear because it's better. Even if it's only a little bit better. And maybe, just maybe, that "little bit" is more than a little bit. If it was a $20 upgrade, would that be rational? Free? Moving a switching power supply out of an environment where microvolt audio signals are present isn't rational in your world, either. I get it. So what? As for the tube amplifiers, stating categorically that they will "distort the poo poo out of the signal" isn't reasonable, either. It's also untrue. These aren't guitar amplifiers, obviously. Cabling in that system is probably in the couple hundred dollar range, total. Belden, and other ordinary brands. The speakers are electrostatic, the main amplifiers are Cary, the crossover was built by me from Marchand boards. The LF amplifier is an Adcom, and the subwoofers are HSU. The for the fun of vinyl, that's a Rega RP3. All quite modest, in this realm. None of this is voodoo, and it sounds very nice. Just because it might have cost more than an ipod and a soundbar doesn't make it irrational. It's difficult to draw a parallel, but I'd imagine most people have something in their lives that's "more than they need," but is also not complete and utter crap? I started off here to bring a real world experience with the Pono player. Yes, it's $400. No, it does not sound like crap. It actually does sound quite good. Is it a good "value"? Probably not. But then, lots of things aren't. I emphatically agree that it's a shame that it's been wrapped in the Audiophile nonsense, both positive and negative. Now, that $1200 Sony digital Walkman thing - that oughta get folks REALLY riled up!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
jhcain posted:There are certain things that are "real," and some are "audiphile nonsense." I'm probing to see if anyone in this thread is willing to acknowledge the continuum. Looks like pretty much no. Ok. Like every audiphool, you're way over the line into quakery, and like them all, you can't deal with anyone pointing out errors in logic, so spin your wheels in a miasma of sunk-cost rationalizing. Why should anyone offer you anything other than snide derision? Your "switching power supply" paranoia is complete nonsense. Should people just keep repeating the same thing (hint: capacitors exist for a reason) until you independently research how audio technology works vs. reading manufacturers claims as the gospel truth?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2015 15:11
|
|
