Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency

«‹›13 »

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

One of my favorite pieces of insanity is people going nuts for original model Playstations as audiophile CD players.
http://dogbreath.de/PS1/index.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=31123&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

# ¿ Jul 7, 2009 18:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 12:22

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

See the thing is that you need to not just develop some stupid tweako bullshit product but you need to market the crap out of it including bribes er I mean ad buys in well respected audio magazines and getting space at trade shows and stuff.

# ¿ Jul 8, 2009 18:08

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Twiin posted:

I'm especially fond of how AV boards that are otherwise sane and rational will have a cables forum that is an 'ABX-free zone'. If you talk about double-blind testing, you're banned.

head-fi is neither sane nor rational

# ¿ Jul 11, 2009 17:44

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Machina Dynamica is an incredibly elaborate troll who will sell you a bag of rocks if you order them

# ¿ Jul 14, 2009 17:45

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

What I think is funny is that you'd think with the passion that these guys have for music [especially jazz and classical] they'd be big supporters of the arts but it seems like they're not for the most part.

# ¿ Jul 15, 2009 17:47

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

*spends $75,000 "recreating the experience of being right there at a show"*
*every jazz club in the world goes out of business*

# ¿ Jul 15, 2009 20:05

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I saw this linked on AVS:
http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm

A $300 amp and a $200 DVD player connected with cable from 7-11 sitting on a wooden chair

vs.

$12000 pre/pro, fancy "CD transport", fancy cables sitting on isolation stands.

Results:
38 persons participated on this test
14 chose the "A" system as the best sounding one
10 chose the "B" system as the best sounding one
14 were not able to hear differences or didn't choose any as the best.

# ¿ Jul 24, 2009 18:36

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

If I was building a listening room I'd probably spend more money on the furniture than the amps. You can get a killer pro amp like a Crown XTi for a grand.

# ¿ Jul 30, 2009 18:08

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Peven Stan posted:

Can't believe this classic hasn't been posted yet.

Creative is about as far from audiophilia as you can get though, retarded claims about audio quality permeate the low end of the market too, e.g. Bose.

Speaking of which one of my favorite products is the Slim Devices Transporter. The normal squeezebox has a very good D/A converter and pretty high qality components. They couldn't get high end buyers to believe that it sounded good at $300 so they made a $2000 super squeezebox with the best of everything and a fancy metal case and it's actually sold pretty well.

qirex fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Aug 4, 2009

# ¿ Aug 4, 2009 19:38

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Squibbles posted:

Hear that? It gets rid of noise you can't hear which makes everything sound better (after you listen to it for a week... or maybe a month)!

I think you'll find the sonic improvements are much more pronounced once the 30-day return period has elapsed.

# ¿ Aug 22, 2009 00:24

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Zombie Dictator posted:

The funny thing is about all this bullshit with CDs and whatnot is that if any of it was true, it would mean that data corruption on software-based CDs would be rampant. If you need to freeze/color/shave a CD in order to get the "true" sound, then how come if that same CD had data on it that data would be usable without special treatment?

I froze my MS Office install disc and now my bold fonts are "fatter", my Excel column dragging is smoother and my PowerPoints have a more holographic presence with more forward oranges and sparklier bullet points

# ¿ Sep 1, 2009 21:10

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Doc Spratley posted:

You may also try digital room eq'ing.

I was thinking about getting a thread going on this, just need to get a new mic for measurements.

what's with the dip at 80Hz?

# ¿ Sep 2, 2009 19:04

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Rescue Toaster posted:

I had a real winner on the line a few months ago on diyaudio.com, he claimed that the same CD ripped using EAC would result in different sounding wave files depending on if it was ripped with any old drive and a fancy blu ray burner.

This INCLUDED him showing md5 hashes of the two files clearly showing they were identical down to the last bit. He claimed the two .wav files clearly sounded different. Must have been the hard drive storing the jitter! Except even then he claimed he could copy the files around (burn them to a data disc, etc...) and still hear it.

I'm pretty sure this guy ended up getting different MD5s because the filenames were different.

qirex fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Oct 5, 2009

# ¿ Oct 5, 2009 05:28

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Gromit posted:

I hope you're joking here.

I know for a fact I read about something like that once it might have been on the Slim Devices "Audiophiles" forum. The dude was all "why are the file sizes 6 bytes different if they're EXACTLY the same, huh smart guys?" and someone finally noticed the 6 more letters in one of the file names.

qirex fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Oct 5, 2009

# ¿ Oct 5, 2009 18:11

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I just wonder how much of that $1 mil is markup. $600k? $700?

# ¿ Oct 16, 2009 15:45

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I don't know how anyone could miss the way cymbals sound at really low bitrates, especially using MP3. There's a few songs with very distinctive synth noises I can always tell when they're compressed, namely "Cowgirl" by Underworld and "Looking for the Perfect Beat" by Afrika Bambaataa. I think that's because the compression algorithms are tuned more towards vocals than perfect waveforms. The original MP3 creator used "Tom's Diner" extensively when working on it.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2009 21:50

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

fishmech posted:

There are objective standards for audio - do a simple double blind test or hook up an oscilloscope or something and check against a reference signal - audiophiles just absolutely refuse to use them.

No oscilloscope can possibly as accurate as their magic ears.

almost all these dudes are like 60 and can't hear

# ¿ Oct 20, 2009 17:51

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

McPhearson posted:

Basically he got the uni to give him money to see if poo poo you cant hear affects your response to music .

Find some really gnarly drum & bass to play on the system or one of those cheesy lowrider "MEGA BASS 9000" discs.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2009 18:59

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

TheMadMilkman posted:

And the speaker in question, as part of a $300,000 system (the turntable accounts for half of that):

Why are there 5 amps? Or is that 4 amps and something else?

As far as "what exactly does all this fancy poo poo get you?" that's really more about the customer than the product. Some people want to own hand-built objects made out of exotic materials and are willing to pay more for it regardless of if it makes any real performance difference. A $150,000 Ulysse Nardin watch doesn't keep better time than a Timex but it sure looks cooler.

qirex fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Oct 26, 2009

# ¿ Oct 26, 2009 18:51

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Yeah what I'm saying is that there's a market of people who will buy the fancy-looking thing with outrageous claims. It's not a big market though, these companies that make $30,000 amps probably only have a handful of customers so while they're clearing $10k/unit if you only sell 20 a year that's maybe enough for a 3 or 4 person operation depending on how much they spend on marketing.

If tomorrow some researcher came out with a $200 utterly perfect speaker driver there would still be people willing to pay $15,000 for "the best" speakers with those drivers in them.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2009 19:17

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

What are the "dual mono power supplies" about? Is there actually a separate power supply for each channel? What's the point on a preamp and line stage? They barely use any power compared to an amp.

Power stuff is right behind cables on the worthless snake oil ranking IMO.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2009 19:36

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

TheMadMilkman posted:

placing the power supply (and more specifically, the transformer) as far from possible from the audio path is a good thing to do

Before the advent of switched-mode power supplies sure but all these dudes running linear power supplies or even off of car batteries are clearly in the "tweako BS" category in my book, especially since linear power supplies are far more likely to hum and act strangely within normal AC power variations.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2009 20:40

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Actually for critical listening in a quiet environment using a really good needle there is some risk of picking up motor noise from a direct drive turntable. That said you can get a REALLY good belt drive turntable for home listening for a grand or so.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2009 23:18

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

proudfoot posted:

I have absolutely no idea how an "improved power supply" and other analog mods will improve 1080p that is being bit-streamed to a display, or improve upscaled DVDs. Do his improvements make bits flip or something?

this

quote:

Then to make it an Ayre, we dismantle it completely and recycle everything except the main PCB (with the video decoder, ABT scaler chip, and HDMI transmitter), the transport mechanism, the VFD display, and the remote control handset.

Almost sends a single tear of pride down my face. "We get rid of everything (except the parts that load and turn the disc, read the data off of it, decode it, scale it if necessary, control the unit, control the display and send the video and audio to the output jacks) and replace it all with incredibly expensive replacement parts!" :xd:

edit: all the people in the thread going "wow, thanks for your detailed response, now I get it" are just icing on the cake.

qirex fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Nov 4, 2009

# ¿ Nov 4, 2009 18:45

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I think the problem is that audiophiles expect digital audio to be as fiddly as analog and the people who sell them gear are happy to promote that idea. I know I've seen serious discussion about what brand of CD-R sounds better.

# ¿ Nov 6, 2009 17:33

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

timb posted:

FLAC and ALAC are about 50% smaller, on average. That's significant.

More like 30-40% smaller, it depends on the music. I'm only doing it for the tagging really, it's not like a 200 gig library is that much more manageable than a 300 gig one. I think my ALAC stuff averages around 400 megs per album.

# ¿ Nov 10, 2009 20:30

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

here's a gem from the squeezebox forums:

quote:

I said I do hear a difference between networked SBS or TinySC, at this point I don't know for sure why. It MAY be different data, but I don't think so. Phil's test will prove that one way or the other.

If the bits are identical then "proving" it gets hard. At this level of quality (I DID say the touch's outputs are very good didn't I?) finding iron clad causal relationships between measured signal parameters and perceived sound gets difficult, the differences in the signals are very small. By the time you get sensitive enough instruments to measure the small differences you have a lot of noise sources riding on top of things. It seems the human perception system can be affected by very small amounts of certain types of distortions even when they seem to be swamped by other distortions and noise. Unfortunately we don't know what these are so its hard to come up with filters in the measuring systems to match.

The point of all that was that if you want hard measurement data that proves it, you are probably not going to get it. That leaves what people hear. Thats much more difficult to "prove".

edit: oh even better

quote:

Bytec posted:
FLAC and PCM should sound the same because both are losless formats.
If only it were that simple!

There is no disputing that the 1's and 0's are correct. This, however, does not tell the whole story.

The differences being heard here will be due to increased jitter or noise - or possibly both - when the processor is working hard to decode a FLAC file.

JITTER :doom:

qirex fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Nov 19, 2009

# ¿ Nov 19, 2009 19:42

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Spoondrift posted:

The flaw in your reasoning is your assumption that the DAC sees 0.9V or 1.1V as "one". This is not the case. The DAC has no concept of bits. Voltages go in, voltages come out.

If digital signal transmission worked that way we wouldn't have hard drives or the internet. There is a wide range of voltages that the DAC will accept as "1", probably anything between 0.5v and enough to damage the equipment.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2009 20:14

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Hey he's not being hard-headed, he's just asking questions

The Fox News troll.

# ¿ Nov 23, 2009 02:03

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

HKR posted:

logictech is already cornering that market with it's $2000 audiophile Squeezebox

Jitter. For streaming audio.

The Transporter is hilarious because you can tell they don't really "buy it" but when they figured out they could slap an extra screen and $200 more in "audiophile grade" components on top of a $300 squeezebox and sell it for $2k they figured why the hell not? There were people practically demanding it on their forums and they could get a jump on the rest of the audiophile market.

# ¿ Nov 23, 2009 17:21

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Neurophonic posted:

http://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=64

So it's like particle physics kung fu?

those pictures aren't even of kung fu, it's akido

# ¿ Nov 25, 2009 18:16

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Thenipwax posted:

What the gently caress is wrong with people?!?

Cognitive dissonance and the "Initation effect" combine into an unstoppable cloud of post-hoc justification. "This thing was really expensive, people on the internet say it's great and I don't want to admit I got suckered" can really be enough to change your perception of things.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2009 23:14

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Devian666 posted:

For the $399 they are paying for a 5-pack of flashing lights they could have bought a UPS for their stereo that gives them noise free AC power.

UPS units do not act as "filters" if they were charging/draining the battery constantly they'd only last a couple weeks, they're normal surge protectors unless there's a failure.

# ¿ Dec 3, 2009 23:50

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

blugu64 posted:

poo poo, forget the motor, and just have it powered by an animal (think hamster powered), and sell it as 'organically powered', and it obviously helps your music sound more natural, and in tune with the cosmic rhythms nature.

No, an exotic hardwood crank would work best. You could sell replacement cranks made out of different materials to match the tonality of different genres of music

# ¿ Dec 5, 2009 00:33

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Shadowhand00 posted:

I like how there's a bit of carbon fiber in the cable's head.

they use carbon fiber in jet fighters and formula 1 aircraft it offers unparalleled strength-to-weight of course it belongs on a high end video cable

e: I wonder if these companies are pissed about HDMI because they'll be selling fewer cables overall, a DVD player used to require a component cable and optical or coax for audio. They're probably not easy to slap together by hand like coax either.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2009 19:22

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

MrBling posted:

Goldplating seems to be very important to these people.

you tell us about it, Mister Bling

# ¿ Dec 9, 2009 22:05

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

eddiewalker posted:

Video in my audio?

gently caress :doh:

what was I thinking?

# ¿ Dec 10, 2009 06:45

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Acinonyx posted:

My favorite part of this thread remains the audiophiles trashing the professional musician with perfect pitch because he just didn't have a good enough ear to hear what they were hearing. Playing music is a whole different skill set from listening to music apparently.

they bust out the same "logic" whenever anyone points out that the studios all music is recorded and/or mastered in all use cheap cables [except the ones that Monster Cable bays a bunch of money to]

# ¿ Dec 15, 2009 23:28

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

quote:

It's another thing entirely (and in my experience, totally useless) to say, "The Ayre delivers the same data to the display as the Oppo, so therefore there cannot be any difference in the picture quality."

laughing out loud

# ¿ Dec 30, 2009 22:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 12:22

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

You can't call a spade a spade on AVS without getting called a troll, It's perfectly fine to say "I don't believe any of this makes a difference" but their mods are really trigger happy. Plus I don't know if it's sock puppeting or what but it seems like every guy who works for a company on there has a bunch of dudes riding his nuts ready to white knight for him.

qirex fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Jan 1, 2010

# ¿ Jan 1, 2010 23:08

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency

«‹›13 »