Computer Audio Bake-Off

Richard, I would say keep looking at the options for a while.
FWIW I'm sure you could get something efficient and simple in concept that ticks all the sonic boxes, given a little more time exploring.

On the PL71/SPU, this sounds excellent but very distinctive to my ears (mainly the SPU) and I honestly don't think that any digital source is going to replicate that 'sound'.

I'd take the result of the bake-off to show that for you, computer audio 'works' and can sound very good. That's a good place to start from - now explore the options in more detail.
 
What hold more computer audio Bake-Offs - no thanks - or if I do then no trade.

Anyway the continuation of this is the London Bake-Off Show last Sat in Oct. There is a room for this dedicated to computer audio and we will have loads of other solutions present, but I have found what I want - for the moment and also I can have input in it to make it better - it has the fundementals, the foundation of what I want and we will see what I can do to make it better on the PSU, analogue and interface side and Jason (Figlet) can do his digital stuff.
 
Richard Dunn said:
What hold more computer audio Bake-Offs - no thanks - or if I do then no trade.
Click to expand...

That's a bit harsh - I actually made a point of bringing someone else' dac in an attempt to keep it clean :)

What I meant was borrow and listen to plenty of kit. Doesn't have to be a bake-off.
 
Many and various speakers have passed through my room: single driver, dipole, open baffle, passive, active, panel, horn, sub+sat, transmission line, ribbons, beryllium, diamond: all falling into one of the three categories above. My speaker quest is far from over: I couldn't be more open-minded!

I don't want to be forced into an unbalanced counter-position about the Xonar PC, which was in many ways commendable, but it also had obvious flaws: I wasn't the only one to comment on them. I used that card (linear-powered) in an earlier project, and even fitted it with an Ultraclock: it's not bad. But it's most obvious strength (and weakness) is that it's a bit loud and crude, with obvious mid-range distortion.

But let's be charitable: for a 'toe-in-the-water' computer audio system, it's brilliant. And I know for a fact that Jason's next system will be better . . .
 
RobHolt said:
That's a bit harsh - I actually made a point of bringing someone else' dac in an attempt to keep it clean :)

What I meant was borrow and listen to plenty of kit. Doesn't have to be a bake-off.
Click to expand...
I don't now count you as trade, or perhaps fringe trade.

Rob, I have never been known not to give my POV clearly, and shall we say with dynamics and scale :D
 
The complexity of computer audio is much under-rated. Motherboards sound different, different kinds of drive affect the signal path differently; switching components in monitors matter; different USB ports behave unpredictably; operating systems and player software and memory brands and processor power requirements and input jitter and output jitter and system latency and driver software and clocking and digital transmission protocols and the entire spectrum of D>A conversion technology – all impact hugely on performance.

It's a journey: you can't just grab a laptop, jack in a cable and pat yourself on the back. You can count the number of real experts in this field on your fingers.

And Richard: the conceit that 'playing a few songs on some PCs' takes even the tiniest first step on a path toward excellence is risible. Jason and others in the room are on the right track: they participate in forums and meetings to learn, not to hector, grandstand or preach. Let's have more signal and less noise, please.
 
hubsand said:
The complexity of computer audio is much under-rated. Motherboards sound different, different kinds of drive affect the signal path differently; switching components in monitors matter; different USB ports behave unpredictably; operating systems and player software and memory brands and processor power requirements and input jitter and output jitter and system latency and driver software and clocking and digital transmission protocols and the entire spectrum of D>A conversion technology ââ'¬â€œ all impact hugely on performance.

It's a journey: you can't just grab a laptop, jack in a cable and pat yourself on the back. You can count the number of real experts in this field on your fingers.

And Richard: the conceit that 'playing a few songs on some PCs' takes even the tiniest first step on a path toward excellence is risible. Jason and others in the room are on the right track: they participate in forums and meetings to learn, not to hector, grandstand or preach. Let's have more signal and less noise, please.
Click to expand...
There is only one person here playing those games, I organised the bake-off because I know nothing, but I know what I want and seeing it is my product, my system we are talking about and you were only a last minute addition against my better judgement it is you that seem to be doing all the half arsed spouting. Shuggie has already put the point and Rob is being very diplomatic, but I am not known for that skill :p

For what ever reason your equipment didn't work - just accept it and move on - organise your own one if you want a different outcome, if you can get anyone to come to it after this performance.
 
Maybe you should of taken Keith up on his MAC,itunes,Amarra solution using either the Weiss or the Metric Halo as the DAC via firewire.
Best option for computer audio out there at the moment IMO :)
 
hubsand said:
The complexity of computer audio is much under-rated. Motherboards sound different, different kinds of drive affect the signal path differently; switching components in monitors matter; different USB ports behave unpredictably; operating systems and player software and memory brands and processor power requirements and input jitter and output jitter and system latency and driver software and clocking and digital transmission protocols and the entire spectrum of D>A conversion technology ââ'¬â€œ all impact hugely on performance.
Click to expand...

I agree it is complex, but the effects often aren't huge, and you sometimes find that the underdog component such as Jason's PC sound card will perform on a par with or even out-perform an expensive audiophile solution.

The huge mistake made by many audiophile companies is the assumption that the big mainstream players don't know how to build great kit. High quality audio isn't the preserve of the tweaker or 'upgrader' and sadly this so called upgrading is often done without understanding IMO. Cap and op amp swapping is the classic example because sometimes what is fitted - despite being old design, cheap or out of favour - is the right component for the job.

A good example of this is the OP275 op amp fitted into the cambridge dac to take the balanced circuit feed back to SE. The designer of that unit writes often on the properties of op amps and tends to rate the 275 as pretty average. So why use that in the CA dac?
Well, it was recently brought to my attention that the 275 has a couple of properties making it perfect for that particular task in the circuit. You can sub the latest and greatest op amp at £10 a pop and you'll compromise those properties.
The inventor or seasoned designer will know this, most tweakers including those doing it professionally won't.
 
Richard Dunn said:
There is only one person here playing those games, I organised the bake-off because I know nothing, but I know what I want and seeing it is my product, my system we are talking about and you were only a last minute addition against my better judgement it is you that seem to be doing all the half arsed spouting. Shuggie has already put the point and Rob is being very diplomatic, but I am not known for that skill :p
Click to expand...

Lets keep a sense of balance here. So many different types of digital replay was bound to produce varied opinions.

People often like what they want to like. I seem to remember the result of another bake off being rubbished because a PL71 did not meet with universal approval.

As Rob pointed out the best a bake-off can really do is make one sit up and say, ooh that was good, I need to find out more.

Unless a bake off is held with scientific methods and procedures it's fun first and objective opinions second. That often means reading things that people won't say face to face and TBH that's the power of forums that people can and do say what they really think, even though those opinions may be contradictory to ones own views!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The utility of this thread seems to be an examination of whether a computer (+DAC) can sound as good as a well fettled turntable, like one of the better Linn LP12s, or RD's Pioneer.

Remember that Jason expressed the view that his preferred digital system of the day (about which I shall maintain a discreet silence) sounded as good as the turntable. I'm not sure I quite agree, but, like David, feel that digital is the only way forward.

However, a top-flight digital transport is not easily achieved, and finding a DAC with comparable dynamic range and resolution is a big ask, too. Although fine Redbook recordings exist, I wonder whether you need a minimum of 24/96 to match well pressed vinyl on a properly engineered turntable.

It's a difficult conversation, this, Richard: I see people bending over backwards to be terribly tactful and positive about your views and system (heaven forbid we have a gloves-off round-table discussion of the speakers!), while personally coming under a barrage of bizarre prejudice and slander. Is there any way we can just talk about computers and music and stuff, without the vitriol?
 
RobHolt said:
I agree it is complex, but the effects often aren't huge, and you sometimes find that the underdog component such as Jason's PC sound card will perform on a par with or even out-perform an expensive audiophile solution.

The huge mistake made by many audiophile companies is the assumption that the big mainstream players don't know how to build great kit. High quality audio isn't the preserve of the tweaker or 'upgrader' and sadly this so called upgrading is often done without understanding IMO. Cap and op amp swapping is the classic example because sometimes what is fitted - despite being old design, cheap or out of favour - is the right component for the job.

A good example of this is the OP275 op amp fitted into the cambridge dac to take the balanced circuit feed back to SE. The designer of that unit writes often on the properties of op amps and tends to rate the 275 as pretty average. So why use that in the CA dac?
Well, it was recently brought to my attention that the 275 has a couple of properties making it perfect for that particular task in the circuit. You can sub the latest and greatest op amp at £10 a pop and you'll compromise those properties.
The inventor or seasoned designer will know this, most tweakers including those doing it professionally won't.
Click to expand...

Thats the trouble the computer side is not that complex now,if you want to go down the PC route with Foobar etc maybe it is.I used a RME 9632 soundcard with foobar,SRC and ASIO real pain in the arse to get right forever tweaking.
Moved over to a MAC mini,itunes,AIFF files,Amarra and an Apogee DAC sorted !
All controlled by an Ipad:JOEL:
Best computer audio I've had,and been trying for years ;)
 
A Mac Mini with Amarra or Pure Music and something to condition the power line (in or out would do) is a great no-hassle system. I'm all Mac for work: loathe Windows, actually. But I've not been able to persuade a Mac to sound as transparently right as a linear-powered ITX board running Linux or W7. It pains me.
 
Purite Audio said:
I think Richard is/was looking for a product to sell .
vb Keith.
Click to expand...

Is it not evil to sell things? But reviewing the latest threads on the NVA forum, you're dead right!

Who'd have believed that the bigging up of a certain linear-powered ITX-based Asus Xonar-kitted Windows PC would precede the release of an NVA computer audio player of exactly that specification? No wonder it generated such enthusiasm! The price is £2K. And it's getting excellent grass-roots promotion already.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Purite Audio said:
I think Richard is/was looking for a product to sell .
vb Keith.
Click to expand...
It wasn't the prime motive, which was a source to use for dems and for shows, but Figlet is up for it so why waste an opportunity. This doesn't mean it will be commercial or saleable, in which case I still have my desired source.

Lets face it you can't buy PL-71s either apart from 2nd hand from US or once in blue moon on uk ebay, but I would under no circumstance swap it for something currently in production.
 
hubsand said:
The utility of this thread seems to be an examination of whether a computer (+DAC) can sound as good as a well fettled turntable, like one of the better Linn LP12s, or RD's Pioneer.

Remember that Jason expressed the view that his preferred digital system of the day (about which I shall maintain a discreet silence) sounded as good as the turntable. I'm not sure I quite agree, but, like David, feel that digital is the only way forward.

However, a top-flight digital transport is not easily achieved, and finding a DAC with comparable dynamic range and resolution is a big ask, too. Although fine Redbook recordings exist, I wonder whether you need a minimum of 24/96 to match well pressed vinyl on a properly engineered turntable.

It's a difficult conversation, this, Richard: I see people bending over backwards to be terribly tactful and positive about your views and system (heaven forbid we have a gloves-off round-table discussion of the speakers!), while personally coming under a barrage of bizarre prejudice and slander. Is there any way we can just talk about computers and music and stuff, without the vitriol?
Click to expand...
This is just bizzare you have already accused the speakers and the accoustics as the reason you dac sounded like a midi system on the Subjectivist thread. You seem to tailor facts in each post to try to keep the promo going. If you had just accepted people opinion with good grace none of this scrap would have happened, but you just dissed everything in sight apart from you. Well it is very simple, your product didn't perform, which is your problem not mine as I have solved my problem, all I have got here is the crap flowing in the wake of it.

Nobody need to be tactfull about my system in any way, I have clearly said at Subjectivist and I say here, I am big enough to take criticism or have someone not like my compromises without thrashing around trying to create a damage limitation exercise - quite simple there is no damage it is only your ego that perceives it. I say again Uglymusic loves your DAC, I have enormous respect for Uglymusics ears so your DAC is good - FULL STOP. For my job it doesn't do the job, it is that simple.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hubsand said:
Is it not evil to sell things? But reviewing the latest threads on the NVA forum, you're dead right!

Who'd have believed that the bigging up of a certain linear-powered ITX-based Asus Xonar-kitted Windows PC would precede the release of an NVA computer audio player of exactly that specification? No wonder it generated such enthusiasm! The price is £2K. And it's getting excellent grass-roots promotion already.
Click to expand...
I recommend that if anyone wants reality they should read the thread at Subjectivist, this is just more game playing.
 
Does Jason/Figlet post on ZG, I would be interested to hear his server, my own experiments a few years back with a Lynx 16aes card weren't all that fruitful.
Keith.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top