|
|
Post by gommer on Jan 12, 2011 8:20:24 GMT
www.xxhighend.nl/or www.phasure.com/It's supposed to be the ultimate audio player. Must admit it seems to have some nifty features and I, for one, will certainly try it for it's constant phase NOS sin(x)/x compensation. Cheers, Marc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2011 8:49:40 GMT
www.xxhighend.nl/or www.phasure.com/It's supposed to be the ultimate audio player. Must admit it seems to have some nifty features and I, for one, will certainly try it for it's constant phase NOS sin(x)/x compensation. Cheers, Marc Hi Marc Better not let Frans see this one !  Peter St. can also hear differences between .wav files with identical checksums when played back from system memory  . In fact, with his different versions of the "engine", playback can be bit perfect, yet sound quite different, as I understand. JeffC from Brisbane has used XXHE, and is a member of Peter's forum, but things are a bit hectic in Brisbane at the moment. Alex P.S. Although Peter offered me a free copy, I haven't taken him up on it, as it appears to be still a work in progress. Neither do I like players that are the results of a "committee" tuning it. I was a bit concerned recently when I saw a post by Peter elsewhere, where he didn't prefer the SQ of a higher resolution file that the small U.S. recording studio made available for evaluation. I have always appreciated well recorded high res material over 16/44.1, and wonder if tuning by general consensus had any part in these results. Let's face it, not all playback systems and listening rooms are created equal. |
|
|
|
Post by gommer on Jan 12, 2011 9:31:30 GMT
Better not let Frans see this one ! Peter St. can also hear differences between .wav files with identical checksums when played back from system memory . In fact, with his different versions of the "engine", playback can be bit perfect, yet sound quite different, as I understand. You wicked man! This voodoo stuff was actually what got my attention and why I post about it here. Neither do I like players that are the results of a "committee" tuning it. I didn't realize it works this way, haven't dug that deep yet. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2011 10:06:17 GMT
Better not let Frans see this one ! Peter St. can also hear differences between .wav files with identical checksums when played back from system memory . In fact, with his different versions of the "engine", playback can be bit perfect, yet sound quite different, as I understand. You wicked man! This voodoo stuff was actually what got my attention and why I post about it here. Neither do I like players that are the results of a "committee" tuning it. I didn't realize it works this way, haven't dug that deep yet. Hi Marc Speaking of voodoo. You may have seen posts here by John Kenny about his modifications to the Hiface using special Lithium batteries ? Well, John and myself have had many running battles with the closed minded engineer types of another major forum. John was dumped on because of his claims about PSU influence on digital sound, as well as the use of SPDIF attenuators to reduce the reflections by twice the amount of the actual signal, and the SQ then improving. Recently another fairly hard line sceptic obtained one of John's modified Hifaces for evaluation.These guys do not believe that the shape and timing of the 1s and 0s can affect SQ,as long as the check sums are identical, they believe that the PC will correct all problems. Anyway, take a look at the attached link, where a good friend of their major sceptic has to reconcile his views with what he is now hearing. Regards Alex www.diyaudio.com/forums/vendors-bazaar/176255-enjoythemusic-review-jkeny-modified-hiface-2.html |
|
|
|
Post by gommer on Jan 12, 2011 10:34:48 GMT
Actually, I don't have a problem believing (actually I'm convinced) that *anything* in a digital string from bits on storage to DAC can influence jitter and that jitter alters sound. OTOH it's hard for my brain to 'get' or 'believe' that anything else than jitter can alter sound in the digital domain. Hence all properly done and reclocking DAC's fed from S/PDIF 'should' sound the same with checksum matching files.
Problem is, that I've not seen any comparisons yet that match *all* criteria in the previous sentence.
But, I've not had the chance to listen and look for possible differences yet, but that's soon going to change. DAC and Panda are near finished and AKG-701 is ready to shine. Allthough, there's one caveat in my setup: the DAC is fed from USB and therefore it's not a reclocking DAC, there's jitter reduction at best. But 'at best' in best circumstances: clean and separate power going to the USB bridge (PCM2707 only used for USB to I2S), glue logic and I2S DAC's (x24), Tent clock for the bridge and battery power
|
|
Peter St. can also hear differences between .wav files with identical checksums when played back from system memory 
. In fact, with his different versions of the "engine", playback can be bit perfect, yet sound quite different, as I understand.