Σήμερα έπεσα πάνω σε ένα πολύ ενδιαφέρον blog post:
http://archimago.blogspot.gr/2016/08/measurements-intel-nuc6i5syh-and-audio.html
Για να μην πολυλογώ, ο blogger έκανε ένα συγκριτικό ανάμεσα σε διάφορα hardware transports που διαθέτει και πιο συγκεκριμένα, ένα Intel Nuc, το HTPC του, ένα Odroid C2 καθώς και ένα surface. Πήρε μετρήσεις με παραπάνω από ένα DAC, αλλά μιας και δεν υπήρχαν διαφορές ως προς αυτό που θέλω να πω, θα ποστάρω αυτές με το Geek Out V2:
Όπως θα παρατηρήσετε, οι διαφορές είναι από μηδενικές έως αμελητέες.
Σε επόμενο post του, έγραψε τα εξής συμπεράσματα:
http://archimago.blogspot.gr/2016/08/musings-do-audiophile-computer-based.html
Προσωπικά δεν έχω το τεχνικό υπόβαθρο να κρίνω τη μεθοδολογία του, αλλά τα συμπεράσματα στα οποία καταλήγει, είναι αυτά λίγο ή πολύ ότι πιστεύω και εγώ, έστω και "διαισθητικά".
Ποιά η δική σας γνώμη με βάσει τα παραπάνω; Έχει νόημα τελικά ο πονοκέφαλος για το απόλυτο audio hardware configuration του transport μας;
http://archimago.blogspot.gr/2016/08/measurements-intel-nuc6i5syh-and-audio.html
Για να μην πολυλογώ, ο blogger έκανε ένα συγκριτικό ανάμεσα σε διάφορα hardware transports που διαθέτει και πιο συγκεκριμένα, ένα Intel Nuc, το HTPC του, ένα Odroid C2 καθώς και ένα surface. Πήρε μετρήσεις με παραπάνω από ένα DAC, αλλά μιας και δεν υπήρχαν διαφορές ως προς αυτό που θέλω να πω, θα ποστάρω αυτές με το Geek Out V2:
Όπως θα παρατηρήσετε, οι διαφορές είναι από μηδενικές έως αμελητέες.
Σε επόμενο post του, έγραψε τα εξής συμπεράσματα:
http://archimago.blogspot.gr/2016/08/musings-do-audiophile-computer-based.html
On Computer Transports and Sound Quality
Unless programmed to manipulate the digital data, if we're talking about "bitperfect" transmission of digital audio to an outboard DAC, there is no reason to think there is any unusual or unique "sound" to these devices as demonstrated by the NUC vs. ODROID-C2 vs. laptop vs. HTPC measurements. Asynchronous interfaces (like USB and ethernet as previously examined) have already dealt with jitter for years such that nobody to this point has demonstrated audibility differences in controlled tests, and therefore in my opinion the only thing left is the issue of electrical noise which is the bugaboo being touted as the rationale for all kinds of digital audio "problems" these days.
In "dealing" with this "issue" of electrical noise, all kinds of tweaks have furthermore been offered for sale to prospective buyers (or at least those audiophiles with enough faith to accept the "diagnosis" and "cure"). Gear like the Audioquest Jitterbug, UpTone Audio Regen, iFi iPurifier, optical ethernet isolators have been suggested (like the TP-Link MC200CM), as well as the upcoming PS Audio LANRover (reminds me of my tests using the inexpensive USB ethernet extender) are all being touted as beneficial when hanging off your USB port!
After all these years of listening and testing encompassing laptops from Apple and those running Windows, to Microsoft Surface Pro, to a recent MacBook, to Linux OS, to low-power ARM machines like the ODROID-C2, to motherboards like the Gigabyte or ASUS, to software OS optimizations and "audiophile software music players" like Fidelizer and JPlay, and the Intel NUC recently, the conclusion is rather obvious to me. Bitperfect playback from a reasonable quality computer, using an asynchronous interface, and through a reputable DAC would result in the same sonic output irrespective of claims I've heard otherwise. I have found no need for special power supplies, fancy cables, or specialty devices for example to clean up the USB signal. In my mind "reasonable" just means a device that's known to be reliable and has a good reputation, rather than something that needs be endorsed by an audiophile guru. This is the most logical position to take intellectually given how digital devices work, based on objective results I've found, and subjectively I have no cause to testify otherwise. To put it bluntly... Yes, "bits are bits" using modern digital computer playback hooked up to a good asynchronous DAC!
This doesn't mean I don't have preferences for the soundroom playback device of course. Some devices might operate faster. I might prefer a certain tablet control app. Acoustically silent fanless devices are great. I might like a certain appearance or size (sure, heavy devices created out of beautifully machined metal can look great and instill confidence). I might want a multitude of digital in/out options. I might prefer DLNA +/- Roon +/- Squeezebox playback. I might want the ability to hook up a local USB drive. These are just some of the potential features and subjective values I might place on the device and if important, I wouldn't mind spending extra money on these qualities. However these features generally would not affect the ultimate utilitarian function - "high fidelity" audio playback.
Time and again, tests show that a good DAC like the TEAC UD-501, or Light Harmonic Geek Out V2 can resolved >16-bits of dynamic range (>96dB), with no evidence of added distortion, nor change to frequency response with any of these computers serving the data. This means that in a properly functioning system, you really can't say that one bitperfect device "brought out the midrange", "controlled bass better", "lowered the noise floor", "had even lower distortion", "changed the soundstage" (ie. interchannel effect and stereo illusion somehow changed!) or "made the dynamics so much more powerful and exciting" than any other without coming to terms with the cognitive dissonance these comments would imply! If one were to truly hear difference such as these, the likelihood is that one did not set things up properly and should consider what went wrong. In fact, none of the asynchronous DACs I've tested at length (TEAC, Light Harmonic GO2, AudioEngine D3, Focusrite Forte, Creative E-MU 0404USB, ASUS Essence One) have shown significant variation in measured analogue output using different computers over the years.**
It's fascinating watching the audiophile market, the build-up of excitement around devices, the ebb and flow of products as they work their way through the audiophile mind-share and supply chain. Like the "flavour of the year" in 2015 with the UpTone Audio USB Regen, a device which supposedly improved USB transmission through a single-port hub, I'm amazed by all the hype around the microRendu recently. Folks, it's basically a low-power ARM SBC*** with Linux-based DLNA/Squeezebox/Roon playback. I think the most interesting part of the whole package is the software flexibility - that's great. But considering the asking price for the microRendu of US$640 (without power supply) for functions I can replicate with the ODROID-C2 for less than $100USD including power supply and some decent USB cables to boot, I see no reason to bother giving it a try. In fact, given how fast the SBC sector develops, one might even try the ~$10USD NanoPi Neo as reported on Computer Audiophile (no video capability like the microRendu) and be reasonably confident that you're not missing anything - kudos to Chris for posting information on the device! I think it's wiser to take the savings and go support one's favourite artists by buying more music.
By the way, I've seen the recent microRendu + iFi power supply measurements done by Amir. My suspicion since I don't have the device to test is that there was a ground loop in the measurement set-up given the very strong 60Hz hum using the iFi SMPS. Elimination of the ground loop would likely have shown no noise floor difference between the various conditions. This of course speaks to the importance of managing one's wiring and grounding which can be tricky in some situations and might need some ingenuity for where and how the components are plugged in (especially in a complex multichannel system in my experience when there are many amps, unbalanced RCA cables, etc...) This is why I prefer balanced XLR gear and cabling through my system when I can. You'll generally know if this is a problem because of audible humming through the system. In any event, I'm rather confident that in another year, the microRendu will be deprecated for much nicer looking boxes with claims of even better sound
.
Unless programmed to manipulate the digital data, if we're talking about "bitperfect" transmission of digital audio to an outboard DAC, there is no reason to think there is any unusual or unique "sound" to these devices as demonstrated by the NUC vs. ODROID-C2 vs. laptop vs. HTPC measurements. Asynchronous interfaces (like USB and ethernet as previously examined) have already dealt with jitter for years such that nobody to this point has demonstrated audibility differences in controlled tests, and therefore in my opinion the only thing left is the issue of electrical noise which is the bugaboo being touted as the rationale for all kinds of digital audio "problems" these days.
In "dealing" with this "issue" of electrical noise, all kinds of tweaks have furthermore been offered for sale to prospective buyers (or at least those audiophiles with enough faith to accept the "diagnosis" and "cure"). Gear like the Audioquest Jitterbug, UpTone Audio Regen, iFi iPurifier, optical ethernet isolators have been suggested (like the TP-Link MC200CM), as well as the upcoming PS Audio LANRover (reminds me of my tests using the inexpensive USB ethernet extender) are all being touted as beneficial when hanging off your USB port!
After all these years of listening and testing encompassing laptops from Apple and those running Windows, to Microsoft Surface Pro, to a recent MacBook, to Linux OS, to low-power ARM machines like the ODROID-C2, to motherboards like the Gigabyte or ASUS, to software OS optimizations and "audiophile software music players" like Fidelizer and JPlay, and the Intel NUC recently, the conclusion is rather obvious to me. Bitperfect playback from a reasonable quality computer, using an asynchronous interface, and through a reputable DAC would result in the same sonic output irrespective of claims I've heard otherwise. I have found no need for special power supplies, fancy cables, or specialty devices for example to clean up the USB signal. In my mind "reasonable" just means a device that's known to be reliable and has a good reputation, rather than something that needs be endorsed by an audiophile guru. This is the most logical position to take intellectually given how digital devices work, based on objective results I've found, and subjectively I have no cause to testify otherwise. To put it bluntly... Yes, "bits are bits" using modern digital computer playback hooked up to a good asynchronous DAC!
This doesn't mean I don't have preferences for the soundroom playback device of course. Some devices might operate faster. I might prefer a certain tablet control app. Acoustically silent fanless devices are great. I might like a certain appearance or size (sure, heavy devices created out of beautifully machined metal can look great and instill confidence). I might want a multitude of digital in/out options. I might prefer DLNA +/- Roon +/- Squeezebox playback. I might want the ability to hook up a local USB drive. These are just some of the potential features and subjective values I might place on the device and if important, I wouldn't mind spending extra money on these qualities. However these features generally would not affect the ultimate utilitarian function - "high fidelity" audio playback.
Time and again, tests show that a good DAC like the TEAC UD-501, or Light Harmonic Geek Out V2 can resolved >16-bits of dynamic range (>96dB), with no evidence of added distortion, nor change to frequency response with any of these computers serving the data. This means that in a properly functioning system, you really can't say that one bitperfect device "brought out the midrange", "controlled bass better", "lowered the noise floor", "had even lower distortion", "changed the soundstage" (ie. interchannel effect and stereo illusion somehow changed!) or "made the dynamics so much more powerful and exciting" than any other without coming to terms with the cognitive dissonance these comments would imply! If one were to truly hear difference such as these, the likelihood is that one did not set things up properly and should consider what went wrong. In fact, none of the asynchronous DACs I've tested at length (TEAC, Light Harmonic GO2, AudioEngine D3, Focusrite Forte, Creative E-MU 0404USB, ASUS Essence One) have shown significant variation in measured analogue output using different computers over the years.**
It's fascinating watching the audiophile market, the build-up of excitement around devices, the ebb and flow of products as they work their way through the audiophile mind-share and supply chain. Like the "flavour of the year" in 2015 with the UpTone Audio USB Regen, a device which supposedly improved USB transmission through a single-port hub, I'm amazed by all the hype around the microRendu recently. Folks, it's basically a low-power ARM SBC*** with Linux-based DLNA/Squeezebox/Roon playback. I think the most interesting part of the whole package is the software flexibility - that's great. But considering the asking price for the microRendu of US$640 (without power supply) for functions I can replicate with the ODROID-C2 for less than $100USD including power supply and some decent USB cables to boot, I see no reason to bother giving it a try. In fact, given how fast the SBC sector develops, one might even try the ~$10USD NanoPi Neo as reported on Computer Audiophile (no video capability like the microRendu) and be reasonably confident that you're not missing anything - kudos to Chris for posting information on the device! I think it's wiser to take the savings and go support one's favourite artists by buying more music.
By the way, I've seen the recent microRendu + iFi power supply measurements done by Amir. My suspicion since I don't have the device to test is that there was a ground loop in the measurement set-up given the very strong 60Hz hum using the iFi SMPS. Elimination of the ground loop would likely have shown no noise floor difference between the various conditions. This of course speaks to the importance of managing one's wiring and grounding which can be tricky in some situations and might need some ingenuity for where and how the components are plugged in (especially in a complex multichannel system in my experience when there are many amps, unbalanced RCA cables, etc...) This is why I prefer balanced XLR gear and cabling through my system when I can. You'll generally know if this is a problem because of audible humming through the system. In any event, I'm rather confident that in another year, the microRendu will be deprecated for much nicer looking boxes with claims of even better sound
.Προσωπικά δεν έχω το τεχνικό υπόβαθρο να κρίνω τη μεθοδολογία του, αλλά τα συμπεράσματα στα οποία καταλήγει, είναι αυτά λίγο ή πολύ ότι πιστεύω και εγώ, έστω και "διαισθητικά".
Ποιά η δική σας γνώμη με βάσει τα παραπάνω; Έχει νόημα τελικά ο πονοκέφαλος για το απόλυτο audio hardware configuration του transport μας;
