Another playback software to argue over

[RayCtech]

I agree, Ray, that bit-perfection is a very basic requirement & that lots of other factors have/can have their effects.
However, essentially saying "everything matters" as in your post is somewhat different from demonstrating the specific effect of one factor, particularly when it is considered by many to be impossible. I consider it worth investigating.

To avoid polluting this thread I will later open a couple of new threads to discuss "mission impossible"..

 

[jkeny]

To avoid polluting this thread I will later open a couple of new threads to discuss "mission impossible"..

Sure, I'm happy to contribute, if I can

 

[Groucho]

Is it the claim that this software is different (better?) than audio playback software written by less enlightened (i.e. professional) software engineers, even if the user's DAC uses asynchronous USB linked to the PC via a galvanically-isolated link? If it is not possible to answer an unequivocal 'No' to this, then it seems to me that the entire edifice of engineering is in doubt. In other words, the best efforts of the finest hardware system designers to eliminate interdependence between hardware and software would have failed, and it really would be remarkable that anything in engineering could be relied upon to work at all.

 

[jkeny]

Is it the claim that this software is different (better?) than audio playback software written by less enlightened (i.e. professional) software engineers, even if the user's DAC uses asynchronous USB linked to the PC via a galvanically-isolated link? If it is not possible to answer an unequivocal 'No' to this, then it seems to me that the entire edifice of engineering is in doubt. In other words, the best efforts of the finest hardware system designers to eliminate interdependence between hardware and software would have failed, and it really would be remarkable that anything in engineering could be relied upon to work at all.

Let's see - you are using two well known logical fallacies in your post
- the strawman argument "anything in engineering could be relied upon to work at all" - "the entire edifice of engineering is in doubt" - this is usually followed by "planes would fall out of the sky", etc.
- appeal to authority argument "audio playback software written by less enlightened (i.e. professional) software engineers" & "the best efforts of the finest hardware system designers to eliminate interdependence between hardware and software would have failed" & "remarkable that anything in engineering could be relied upon to work at all."

Maybe these articles will answer some of your questions
- is it JUST bits that are important?
- why doesn't aysnch USB solve all these problems?
- why don't engineer's JUST deal with any noise issues infesting the DAC?

This quote comes from the USB cables thread with links to suggested reading

Do you really envision nice clean bits perfectly flowing through a cable?

These provided some good insight into what's really happening in the real world:

http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-1-what-digital
http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-2-are-bits-just-bits

Much more complexity here than what meets the eye.

 

[Groucho]

Let's see - you are using two well known logical fallacies in your post

Not really. I specified the aynchronous mode via galvanically-isolated link. If you are saying that it would still be affected by the software, then what further steps need to be taken to eliminate this variability? If you don't think this is possible, then we have found a case where formal engineering claimed to have solved a problem, but thanks to the tireless efforts of audiophiles, we have discovered it had not. In this case the effect is audible ("night and day") but not, apparently, measurable. In other cases it may be the difference between an aircraft staying in the air or falling out of the sky.

If instead of a link within the same room we send the bits over wi fi, or a microwave link, or the internet, what steps would we need to take to eliminate any audible or measurable contamination from the medium or the software used? If we can't, I say it's a pretty big failure of engineering!

 

[jkeny]

Not really. I specified the aynchronous mode via galvanically-isolated link. If you are saying that it would still be affected by the software, then what further steps need to be taken to eliminate this variability?

Have you read the links given? Rather than dealing with endless waffle - get a DAC of the type you specify (what do you suggest,btw) & compare different playback software

If you don't think this is possible, then we have found a case where formal engineering claimed to have solved a problem, but thanks to the tireless efforts of audiophiles, we have discovered it had not. In this case the effect is audible ("night and day") but not, apparently, measurable. In other cases it may be the difference between an aircraft staying in the air or falling out of the sky.

When have "formal engineering claimed to have solved a problem"? And would it shock you if they did & they didn't quite tell the full truth?

If instead of a link within the same room we send the bits over wi fi, or a microwave link, or the internet, what steps would we need to take to eliminate any audible or measurable contamination from the medium or the software used? If we can't, I say it's a pretty big failure of engineering!

Try & think of the DAC conversion process in terms of concurrent disturbances in the system state while critical audio processes are being handled.

 

[Groucho]

Try & think of the DAC conversion process in terms of concurrent disturbances in the system state while critical audio processes are being handled.

Can it be done? Can a digital link (audio, or any other form of signal you desire) be made independent of the medium or software that is sending the bits? If not, why not? If yes, then why can't we do it with PC audio playback?

 

[Julf]

Try & think of the DAC conversion process in terms of concurrent disturbances in the system state while critical audio processes are being handled.

But the "critical audio processes" in the DAC are still pretty well isolated from what goes on in the PC. While John Swenson's speculation about how jitter on even a galvanically isolated USB input can cause audible differences in the DAC clock function by modulating gound noise is interesting, it is at this point just speculation. Fortunately it ought to be reasonably easy to measure and verify, taking it beyond speculation, but I am not aware of any tests that would have proven Swenson's hypothesis - are you aware of any?

 

[jkeny]

Can it be done? Can a digital link (audio, or any other form of signal you desire) be made independent of the medium or software that is sending the bits? If not, why not? If yes, then why can't we do it with PC audio playback?

Have you read the links?
Suggest you do.
Who said "independent of"? You do have a tendency to exaggerate & mis-state things
Are you going to ignore all my questions & suggestions & indulge in interminable waffle, instead?

 

[jkeny]

But the "critical audio processes" in the DAC are still pretty well isolated from what goes on in the PC.

Speculation on your part & this software proves you are wrong but of course you refuse to try it

While John Swenson's speculation about how jitter on even a galvanically isolated USB input can cause audible differences in the DAC clock function by modulating gound noise is interesting, it is at this point just speculation. Fortunately it ought to be reasonably easy to measure and verify, taking it beyond speculation, but I am not aware of any tests that would have proven Swenson's hypothesis - are you aware of any?

Yes, Swenson has stated that he has measured it.

 

[Julf]

Speculation on your part & this software proves you are wrong but of course you refuse to try it

As I have stated before, I would love to try it, but I am not going to buy Windows 8 just to be able to try one piece of software .

Swenson has stated that he has measured it.

Are the measurement results available?

 

[Groucho]

When listening to audio streaming over the internet, can we tell which ISP host server software is being used, which type of internet router, which wi fi router etc. is being used? I hope we can give an unequivocal 'No' to this. If we can't say 'no', we are in the laughable position of claiming to hear the telltale signature of the server in California which talks via fibre optics (Hewlett Packard patch panels can sound a little harsh) to some other router thingy (Cisco routers sometimes sound a little mellow) in New York then via a satellite link to Ireland (ViaSat gives particularly wide sound stage) etc.

If we can say 'no', then we can conclude that by placing a hardware/software 'buffer' in the middle, we can completely eliminate any telltale signature of the upstream components. The asynchronous DAC via galvanically-isolated link is the same system in miniature.

 

[jkeny]

As I have stated before, I would love to try it, but I am not going to buy Windows 8 just to be able to try one piece of software .

I would suggest it's easier to borrow a laptop & try it compared to your "Fortunately it ought to be reasonably easy to measure and verify,"
Until you do, your posts are just trolling

Are the measurement results available?

Why don't you ask him?

You started with your blind tests requirements & that was answered.
You are now chasing measurements!
Ever give up trying to knock something you have not enough interest in to even try?

 

[jkeny]

When listening to audio streaming over the internet, can we tell which ISP host server software is being used, which type of internet router, which wi fi router etc. is being used? I hope we can give an unequivocal 'No' to this. If we can't say 'no', we are in the laughable position of claiming to hear the telltale signature of the server in California which talks via fibre optics (Hewlett Packard patch panels can sound a little harsh) to some other router thingy (Cisco routers sometimes sound a little mellow) in New York then via a satellite link to Ireland (ViaSat gives particularly wide sound stage) etc.

If we can say 'no', then we can conclude that by placing a hardware/software 'buffer' in the middle, we can completely eliminate any telltale signature of the upstream components. The asynchronous DAC via galvanically-isolated link is the same system in miniature.

Yes you certainly are in a laughable position with your lame attempts at exaggeration.
Care to answer anything I asked?
Have you read the links?
Have you tried the software?

 

[jkeny]

As somebody already said - what does it matter to you guys - you have no interest in trying it as your belief system doesn't allow it.
There are many others who have not posted on this thread & think the same as you.
What drives your posting??

 

[Julf]

I would suggest it's easier to borrow a laptop & try it compared to your "Fortunately it ought to be reasonably easy to measure and verify,"

As I haven't stipulated the hypothesis, it is not my job to prove it. As long as it is unproven, it is just speculation. We can all speculate.

Why don't you ask him?

I am not the one who has used his speculation to support my argument. I am more than happy to keep regarding it as what it seems to be - unsubstantiated speculation.

You started with your blind tests requirements & that was answered.

Would you happen to have the test results of the blind test you keep referring to?

 

[Julf]

When listening to audio streaming over the internet, can we tell which ISP host server software is being used, which type of internet router, which wi fi router etc. is being used? I hope we can give an unequivocal 'No' to this. If we can't say 'no', we are in the laughable position of claiming to hear the telltale signature of the server in California which talks via fibre optics (Hewlett Packard patch panels can sound a little harsh) to some other router thingy (Cisco routers sometimes sound a little mellow) in New York then via a satellite link to Ireland (ViaSat gives particularly wide sound stage) etc.

Ah, but now we come to a really interesting question - how much do the NSA PRISM wiretaps degrade sound quality?

 

[jkeny]

Julf, trying to drag this thread into your usual circular spiral arguments as per other forums, I see.
Please give up, it's tedious.

 

[amirm]

Please don't hit the Reply button if your post is about a person rather than a technical point.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

When listening to audio streaming over the internet, can we tell which ISP host server software is being used, which type of internet router, which wi fi router etc. is being used? I hope we can give an unequivocal 'No' to this. If we can't say 'no', we are in the laughable position of claiming to hear the telltale signature of the server in California which talks via fibre optics (Hewlett Packard patch panels can sound a little harsh) to some other router thingy (Cisco routers sometimes sound a little mellow) in New York then via a satellite link to Ireland (ViaSat gives particularly wide sound stage) etc.

If we can say 'no', then we can conclude that by placing a hardware/software 'buffer' in the middle, we can completely eliminate any telltale signature of the upstream components. The asynchronous DAC via galvanically-isolated link is the same system in miniature.

I don't think you can say no, and John, I don't think this is exaggeration. There are plenty of audiophiles who believe they hear USB cables, ethernet, optical cable, hard drives; who believe you can isolate and re-clock the signal and still hear the computer. So why not a host server or wifi router? I think we can believe this is exaggeration until a respected high-end manufacturer comes up with an audiophile wireless router, at which point it will become another audiophile reality. And why would the router we can see have an audible effect that the ones we can't see don't? Why indeed.

Oh and John, you named this thread "Another playback software to argue over." You invited the debate. Disagreeing with you is not trolling.

Tim