Who's buying the UpTone Audio ISO REGEN?

[amirm]

For now, you "heard" nothing. You perceived a change. Your hearing system is constantly filtering immense amount of data it is capturing into short-term memory. That memory has enough capacity for a few seconds. A massive, hugely lossy filter dumps ton of data out of short term memory and remembers a few things. This is normally on autopilot. When you change gear, you influence what you are remembering in long term memory and that capture is different than autopilot mode. You brain then concludes that a difference must have existed at your inner ear. In reality, the same stimulus came into your brain but you were influenced by what you were thinking.

If you care if the soundwaves captured by your ears really changed, then you must take out the above variable.

Doing controlled tests is far more time consuming than the type of testing you all do. Why would the scientific community be so stupid to spend time and energy on controlled testing when your type of testing would do? I once commissioned a test of lossy audio codecs by an external party following ITU BS1116. The bill was $25,000! The answer is that for results to be reliable you need to do it right. In this case we recruited people, payed them $100 each for their time, hired people to conduct the test, etc.

So go ahead and tell us we are stupid. And while you are at it, explain why medical science doesn't rely on someone saying they took some extra vitamins and their hair grew back, and their cancer was cured. 'cause I am pretty sure these testimonials are as genuine to them as yours is about Regen.

 

[Legolas]

Anytime you change something, there is 99% chance you hear a difference if you are an audiophile. And it almost always will be a change for better. This happens regardless of whether the sound has changed at all!

It is simply being human. When you search for change, you focus on the music, all of a sudden you hear detail you had not heard before. You hear finer notes. You hear the quiet parts. All of this happens even if you are self aware of it.

This is why no matter what the tweak is, it sells and it has advocates. It can't possibly that anything thrown into audio system has the same uncanny ability to "reduce noise level, remove veils, make the sound more analog, etc."

Try this simple experiment. Play a digital file three times in a row and pay attention to what is different in each run. I guarantee you that you will hear differences from run to run even though you have changed nothing!

This is why as soon as we take the knowledge of whether something has or has not changed in controlled testing, all of these assured differences vanish. The outcome becomes random with the person getting no better than 50% chance of being right.

Hence the reason audio science, where this stuff matters to people's lives, hearing, education, livelihood, puts no value on your type of ad-hoc testing. You must remove knowledge of what is being tested.

Teach a loved one to on a daily basis to connect, or disconnect the Regen without you knowing it. Every day you come to your system you play it. And you write down your score. After a week, compare your scores to the loved one's log of whether she/he changed things or not. I will pay your loved one $100 in Amazon credit to run this test for you. Will you do it?

Disagree with you here. I have been upgrading for 20 years and I spend an intense period on usually 6 tracks to consistently compare before and after a change in my system. In each case I CAN detect a change, sometimes better, other times not. In some cases some things about the sound improved (timbre, bass dynamics etc) but other areas stayed the same. The human ear is incredibly sensitive, and aural memory is IMO very good. In fact I would say aural memory in an audiophile is along the level of sight in most people, possibly better. Remember the courts use an identity parade (sight memory) as part of legal case, and that is normally quite some time after the event.

If we bring the A/B demo down to hours, maybe minutes apart and with well known tracks IMO we are talking microscopic levels on audio detection here. I would challenge you to provide measurements of an analogue signal that demonstrates a better sound than another signal that doesn't. We have to use tech specs as background data, but listen to the effect of any device in the real world (use your ears).

I would also say to you you are trolling Uptone Audio in a smear campaign that has gone well beyond audio related opinions. I think it is high time the moderators stepped in....

 

[opus112]

If you care if the soundwaves captured by your ears really changed, then you must take out the above variable.

Does the medical patient care if the drug they took cured them by means of placebo or by means of biochemistry?

 

[jkeny]

Disagree with you here. I have been upgrading for 20 years and I spend an intense period on usually 6 tracks to consistently compare before and after a change in my system. In each case I CAN detect a change, sometimes better, other times not. In some cases some things about the sound improved (timbre, bass dynamics etc) but other areas stayed the same. The human ear is incredibly sensitive, and aural memory is IMO very good. In fact I would say aural memory in an audiophile is along the level of sight in most people, possibly better. Remember the courts use an identity parade (sight memory) as part of legal case, and that is normally quite some time after the event.

Indeed & Amir is ignorant & remains stubbornly so, of how auditory perception actual works & the active research on it - preferring instead his simplistic & mechanistic world view of how/what we hear. We are much more sensitive of changes in pattern - when we conscious focus on a particular piece of music or sound stream, we seem to lay down a pattern (a statistical analysis, if you like of that pattern which gets strengthened, refined by continuous exposure/focus on this sound stream). This is often why we choose a favourite piece of music to compare new audio replay devices. It's also why we know our spouse's/children's voice & the nuances we pick up on, seemingly without focus on A/Bing any difference!

I'm afraid the A/B mafia have developed & pushes this mechanistic view of hearing as it suits their agenda/ world view

If we bring the A/B demo down to hours, maybe minutes apart and with well known tracks IMO we are talking microscopic levels on audio detection here. I would challenge you to provide measurements of an analogue signal that demonstrates a better sound than another signal that doesn't. We have to use tech specs as background data, but listen to the effect of any device in the real world (use your ears).

I would also say to you you are trolling Uptone Audio in a smear campaign that has gone well beyond audio related opinions. I think it is high time the moderators stepped in....

This is the other point which Amir is constantly challenged to - does he believe that there are audible differences which are not measureable & please no BS about placebo. it's a bit like trying to get an answer out of Trump about whether he believes in global climate change

 

[Marce]

Oh how reality is twisted when it comes to audio... Myself I have given up trying to discuss audio with those that consider themselves golden eared audiophiles, because there is a total reluctance to see the truth, rather sad really, mainly middle aged men get insulting to people because they try and inject some facts in to the discussions on audio and audio equipment (especially the more Peter Belt style designs (ground boxes comes to mind here). Working in the wide world of electronics and often on cutting edge or high reliability projects we rely on measurements to give up empirical feedback (listening tests form part of that where audio products are involved). To design a piece of kit without measurements (especially digital based gear) is unbelievable... Only in audio.
Luckily for you GEB guys I wont waste anymore time posting here (or other audio based sites) just let you get on with your disillusional lives, me I've just discovered Spotify so have a 20 year backlog of musics I couldn't afford or just missed to catch up on...
Look forward to any USB device measurements though, and don't forget the Uptone Regen is a basic USB hub that is all... The main device used is pretty common in USB hubs as its a USB hub controller

 

[opus112]

Ah Marce, still tilting at the same windmills as over on DIYA I see Do enjoy Spotify - I have a hunch it'll be more rewarding than projecting your own foibles onto other posters on audio forums

 

[Marce]

Ha ha, my experience in electronics allows me to have valid comments for certain aspects of design, that is not tilting at windmills, that is having an educated viewpoint... Thanks for proving my point Opus exactly the point I was making educated comment based on experience get insults if they don't fit with the belief system (my foibles get me work on many high reliability designs, wonder why)... does this do audio any good, no we need to be more honest and open, then maybe we can get good audio reproduction back into mainstream instead of squeaky mobile phones everywhere...

 

[audioarcher]

For now, you "heard" nothing. You perceived a change. Your hearing system is constantly filtering immense amount of data it is capturing into short-term memory. That memory has enough capacity for a few seconds. A massive, hugely lossy filter dumps ton of data out of short term memory and remembers a few things. This is normally on autopilot. When you change gear, you influence what you are remembering in long term memory and that capture is different than autopilot mode. You brain then concludes that a difference must have existed at your inner ear. In reality, the same stimulus came into your brain but you were influenced by what you were thinking.

If you care if the soundwaves captured by your ears really changed, then you must take out the above variable.

Doing controlled tests is far more time consuming than the type of testing you all do. Why would the scientific community be so stupid to spend time and energy on controlled testing when your type of testing would do? I once commissioned a test of lossy audio codecs by an external party following ITU BS1116. The bill was $25,000! The answer is that for results to be reliable you need to do it right. In this case we recruited people, payed them $100 each for their time, hired people to conduct the test, etc.

So go ahead and tell us we are stupid. And while you are at it, explain why medical science doesn't rely on someone saying they took some extra vitamins and their hair grew back, and their cancer was cured. 'cause I am pretty sure these testimonials are as genuine to them as yours is about Regen.

Hi Amir,

What you say about humans being able to fool themselves is certainly true. You are just as easily fooled into hearing no difference if that is what you expect or want to hear.

Long term listening and testing will get to the bottom of it though. Whenever I try new tweaks to my system I will listen for a while then switch back to the old configuration. After doing this several times I will pick a favorite and move on. Sometimes the change is so apparent that this is not really necessary.

Whether it is scientific testing or human testimonials, neither mean jack if you are not personally satisfied with the results. Which unfortunately means each individual needs to try it for themselves to really know whats up. This means wasting a lot of money on things that are not what you want, in order to find what you are after. This really goes for anything in life not just audio equipment. It really depends on how picky you are, and what lengths you are willing to go to get what you want.

Sean

 

[amirm]

Hi Amir,

What you say about humans being able to fool themselves is certainly true. You are just as easily fooled into hearing no difference if that is what you expect or want to hear.

Hi Sean. That's true. The way we get around that in the industry/research is that the outcome matters. Literally your job and livelihood depends on whether you get the right or wrong answer. Imagine publishing results of not wanting to hear and someone else hiring people who did and how embarrassing that would be.

Indeed this happened on AVS Forum where I was challenged by an extreme objectivist as to whether I can hear some small difference or not. The objectivists post his results saying he could not. I post showing that I could. Problem for the other dude was that the timestamps showed that he was hitting the voting buttons without much time between them. I can dig up the details if you like.

Long term listening and testing will get to the bottom of it though.

Unfortunately it has the opposite effect. I have been given countless blind tests. When differences get smaller and smaller, the only way I can hear the difference is by minimizing the switching time often down to a quarter of a second, i.e. a note or two. Make that any longer and in the exact same test, I fail to reliably hear the difference.

Formal tests have been done that show the same. Here is Clark in his AES published paper,

As you see, long term testing made the outcomes far worse, not better. Again, I can tell you this from tons of experience. Long term testing absolutely removes your sensitivity to hearing small differences. And this is backed by medical science as I described.

Now we could teach science new lessons by you all getting together and doing the type of comparison test documented above. Why not do that and show you know better?

Whether it is scientific testing or human testimonials, neither mean jack if you are not personally satisfied with the results. Which unfortunately means each individual needs to try it for themselves to really know whats up. This means wasting a lot of money on things that are not what you want, in order to find what you are after. This really goes for anything in life not just audio equipment. It really depends on how picky you are, and what lengths you are willing to go to get what you want.

Sean

But Sean, the most unsatisfied group of music lovers are the high-end audiophiles. They are constantly searching for the next tweak and change. I have a 17 year old DAC and I have little desire to change it. Why? Because it is the same DAC that has allowed me to hear small differences that other audiophiles would not dare taking the same test let alone pass it.

The problem with doing audibility tests wrong is that the effect you thought was there, really wasn't and that naturally wears off. So you try to next tweak and "aha, it made things sound better." But that again is a false conclusion so it too wears out.

Of course it is your money and your hobby so choose it as you like. In my case, I follow established protocols that the research industry has created to advance my knowledge of what works and what doesn't. Not because I blindly follow it, but because my hat was handed to me when I didn't! Nothing like promising the marketing organization of a multi-billion dollar company that you have made a better audio technology in your sighted evaluation, only to have it be shown to be actually worse than your competitor in controlled testing! You make that mistake a few times and then you learn that the research community is not dumb and has protocols for a reason.

So what you do is yours. But please let's not state myths as facts to the rest of us. Long term testing absolutely reduces your sensitivity to hearing small differences. It just does. The data says so. So does how your body is built.

 

[amirm]

Does the medical patient care if the drug they took cured them by means of placebo or by means of biochemistry?

The medical science does because we want to determine what drug is really effective as opposed to ones that might work due to power of suggestion.

If you were faced with heaven forbid, terminal disease, would you want to rely on placebo effect of a drug or one that has shown outcomes outside of that influence?

 

[Steve Williams]

Name me a few drugs as you put it that "might work to cure cancer due to power of suggestion" or are you now professing to be an expert in the medical field

 

[amirm]

Let me address a bit of Alex's post.

I tested the original Regen because one of his customers bought it, didn't hear any difference, and wanted to see what the measurements would show. He asked me if I would test it and I said yes, and he sent it to me.

On ISO Regen, I didn't even know the device existed. In an email exchange with someone who was interested in another product, he asked me if I had measured the ISO Regen. He said he was interested but would not buy it without seeing the measurements. I went there and at first wasn't too keen on spending this much money on my own to test the device. I have been testing budget DACs recently and for this price I could buy 3-4 more to test. He insisted and I decided to go ahead and buy it.

I have documentation for both of these if anyone cares.

 

[Steve Williams]

I applaud Alex for sending your money back and refusing to sell you one. IMO this is no different than signs we see on restaurant doors stating "we reserve the right to deny device to anyone". You are a persona non grata and I commend Alex for his actions. I also believe you have been on a smear campaign of Uptone Audio as members have stated. If your friend won't use his ears to test the device but relies on measurements have him buy it and test it before he sends it to you

Kudos to Alex

 

[audioarcher]

Hi Amir,

You can do whatever you like. I like my approach. DBT is not very practical for a lone hobbyist.

 

[amirm]

Name me a few drugs as you put it that "might work to cure cancer due to power of suggestion" or are you now professing to be an expert in the medical field

Cure cancer? I don't know. But improvements in symptoms which may lead a patient to think what they are taking is curing their cancer by reducing symptoms, my quick search shows that is the case: https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/95/1/19/2520190/Placebo-Effects-in-Oncology

Is this wrong? And why is it that as a medical doctor, you have no respect for audio science/research using similar methodology in controlled test?

 

[amirm]

Hi Amir,

You can do whatever you like. I like my approach. DBT is not very practical for a lone hobbyist.

Agreed. But I can provide measurements for us to chew on if the manufacturer doesn't obstruct.

 

[Steve Williams]

Cure cancer? I don't know. But improvements in symptoms which may lead a patient to think what they are taking is curing their cancer by reducing symptoms, my quick search shows that is the case: https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/95/1/19/2520190/Placebo-Effects-in-Oncology

Is this wrong? And why is it that as a medical doctor, you have no respect for audio science/research using similar methodology in controlled test?

sorry bucko but that doesn't fly with me. Your original post was "might work to cure cancer due to power of suggestion"

And noe comes your famous ability to deflect where you back pedal and now state "improvements in symptoms which may lead a patient to think what they are taking is curing their cancer by reducing symptoms

Typical of you but we all now know you so carry on

 

[audioarcher]

Agreed. But I can provide measurements for us to chew on if the manufacturer doesn't obstruct.

You can probably do them anyway if someone loans you one. Will they reveal anything useful? Maybe?

From what I understand, you are a software engineer, not an electrical engineer. Apples and oranges. Would you allow a Dentist to do open heart surgery on you? I would much rather see measurements from someone with more knowledge on the subject.

 

[amirm]

sorry bucko but that doesn't fly with me. Your original post was "might work to cure cancer due to power of suggestion"

And noe comes your famous ability to deflect where you back pedal and now state "improvements in symptoms which may lead a patient to think what they are taking is curing their cancer by reducing symptoms

This is what I said:

So go ahead and tell us we are stupid. And while you are at it, explain why medical science doesn't rely on someone saying they took some extra vitamins and their hair grew back, and their cancer was cured. 'cause I am pretty sure these testimonials are as genuine to them as yours is about Regen.

I said "someone saying." I didn't not say that actually happened. There are countless examples of that online. Here is people saying carrot juice cured their cancer: http://cancerisover.blogspot.com/

"In any case, my advice is generally this: Five cups per day of carrot juice per day was able to cure my cancer. That may or may not be enough for you and your cancer. Depending upon the type, stage, aggressiveness, and major tumor size of your cancer and your body weight, it could take as much as a gallon per day to get your cancer to start shrinking. As it gets smaller, however, it will take less per day to keep it shrinking, possibly even proportionately less."

This is no different than people saying devices like Regen made their audio better. I am sure they believe it. Question is, should the rest of us and the scientific community? Answer is no.

Typical of you but we all now know you so carry on

Thank you. Hopefully one day you will answer why you abandon your medical training when it comes to audio.

 

[amirm]

You can probably do them anyway if someone loans you one. Will they reveal anything useful? Maybe?

I actually have hopes that the ISO Regen has value in the isolation it provides. There are DACs out there that don't do that. Here is an example, Schiit Modi 2: http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/budget-dac-review-schiit-modi-2-99.1649/

As I change the system activity, the analog output of the DAC varies! Clearly this can benefit from a true isolator.

Indeed my beef with the original Regen was that instead of solving the isolation problem where we have data that it can be an issue, it went and solved a problem no one asked (make USB waveforms sharper).

From what I understand, you are a software engineer, not an electrical engineer. Apples and oranges. Would you allow a Dentist to do open heart surgery on you? I would much rather see measurements from someone with more knowledge on the subject.

I grew up with electronics in 1960s and 1970s learning from my older brother. I built my first amplifier and RF radio, etc. when I was less than 10 years old. Naturally I followed the footsteps of my brother and got my degree in Electrical Engineering in 1982. My first job though was in developing operating system so it was software focused although my hardware experience came plenty handy since an operating system directly interfaces with the hardware. My second job was at Sony where I lead the development of both hardware and software. The hardware was full design and development of a computer from ground up, including VLSI development, etc. I left and became VP of R&D for another hardware company called Abekas where we built professional hardware for video broadcast and post production market. Here we again developed both board level and ASICs. Two of the hardware products won Emmy awards. We sold that company and I went to work for another hardware company as VP of engineering (Pinnacle Systems which was sold to Avid). My last job was at Microsoft where I again used my systems and hardware knowledge to build a bridge between Microsoft and the entire consumer electronics industry, getting design wins in every piece of silicon to game consoles and phones.

I bought our first Audio Precision analyzer back in Sony days when the company was a start-up and everyone was still buying stale HP equipment. I was so impressed with how much it could do. This was the first audio precision analyzer anyone had bought at Sony. I bought another one for my group when I was at Microsoft.

I have also used other measurement gear such as Prism Sound dsound. At LA Audio show, I had a great 2-3 hour conversation about working with them to advance the functionality of their analyzer.

Do I know everything? No. But please don't assumptions this way. Ask me questions and I am happy to explain. You don't wake up and do the testing I have done, have it be published for the world to read and review. This is the kind of work that I do: http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

And that is the reason I can get the mindshare of major instrument makers. After 35 years of doing the stuff, I have earned some knowledge to keep my nose clean.