Spdif purifier IFiAudio

[nopiano]

Well said, Gazzip!

Trouble is, I imagine if you are wedded to the science you feel it is your duty to correct us mere mortals who think we believe what we hear.

When I go to a live piano recital, for example, I may not be following the score (though some will be), but it will be the interpretation, emotional impact, and structure conveyed that is debated in the interval, not how many wrong notes (unless it goes completely off the rails).

Now, I've yet to hear a dodgy amp or pair of speakers change the notes on the recording, but they certainly can convey the music in a way that gives a reasonable impression of the original performance if they are good enough. Interestingly, some of the most succesful amp designs are deliberately engineered to retain a certain quantity of noise, distortion or impedance, that a purist approach might baulk at. These apparently create a more euphonic result, and that is where the science no longer seems as relevant.

Apologies to the OP for continuing off-topic.

 

[drummerman]

Seriously, do you think we live in a world of magic? All these things were researched years ago. If the manufacturers could explain the science behind their soi-disant discoveries, they'd be lining up for the Nobel prize. They don't, for reasons that should be obvious.

The Jitterbug, as I have stated, has been measured by Miller of HifiNews and the evidence is clear, black on white, scientifically proven. Of course that is still not enough for die hard naysayers.

I have no idea if this new Spdif 'purifier' works or not but someone will likely measure it at some stage. Perhaps I drop HifiNews a line and ask if they can considering there must be quite a few of us that use CCA's and other devices which may or may not benefit from something like that.

 

[shadders]

Seriously, do you think we live in a world of magic? All these things were researched years ago. If the manufacturers could explain the science behind their soi-disant discoveries, they'd be lining up for the Nobel prize. They don't, for reasons that should be obvious.

The Jitterbug, as I have stated, has been measured by Miller of HifiNews and the evidence is clear, black on white, scientifically proven. Of course that is still not enough for die hard naysayers.

I have no idea if this new Spdif 'purifier' works or not but someone will likely measure it at some stage. Perhaps I drop HifiNews a line and ask if they can considering there must be quite a few of us that use CCA's and other devices which may or may not benefit from something like that.

Hi,

For the jitterbug, it does reclock the incoming signal, and present a signal with less jitter, and slightly improved rise and fall times. It has been shown that the isolation between the computer and DAC isnthe cause of the improvement, as per the galvanic isolation aspects of USB connections. The improvements are not stated to be due to the reduced jitter or isolation, hence we have to guess.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[ellisdj]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

 

[Infiniteloop]

Seriously, do you think we live in a world of magic? All these things were researched years ago. If the manufacturers could explain the science behind their soi-disant discoveries, they'd be lining up for the Nobel prize. They don't, for reasons that should be obvious.

Ah, but that's just it. Scientists don't know everything, new theories displace old ones on a regular basis.

For example, isn't the fact that entangled atoms on opposite sides of the universe, that can affect each other instantaneously, entering the realms of magic? By classic scientific theory it's impossible, yet scientists have proved that it happens anyway.

 

[shadders]

The issue for me with debating products like this is that they are nearly always started (or taken further) by non-scientifically minded members (myself included), who get dragged in to a debate by more scientifically minded forum members. The problem is that every single time that debate takes place within the realm of accepted text book electronics. The discussion becomes an exercise in providing or disproving scientific evidence, and let's be honest here, the scientist is ALWAYS going to be on firmer ground in respect of that "proof", and is ALWAYS going to be better versed in putting forth a scientific standpoint/argument. Straying in to a debate we don't fully understand is very good at making us non-scientific people look very, very stupid, very, very quickly, especially when we start Googling for science to support our standpoints.

Those scientists run easy rings around us because the debate is taking place in their realm. It would be really, really nice if just once one or two of these guys stepped out of that realm and said, "you know what, I'm gonna park the science here and try that jitter thingy or that isolating gizmo in my system and see for myself, 'cos you never know, there may be things that science can't explain...". That is my realm FWIW...

Of course this will never happen, not least because quite often these products are backed up by science that can be easily debunked. Of course the only reason that science is being applied to many of these products in many instances is for the reasons stated above - The need to justify the unexplained with scientific evidence because the debate always seems to end up there. Sometimes I wish that the manufacturers of these products would just say they dunno why it works but it does, so try it yourself and see what you think. Take the whole debate away from science and back in to a more personal experience based arena of judgement.

Hi,

The product will work IF the signal on the coaxial cable is as per the provided graphic. I do not have coaxial output on my equipment, so cannot put my oscilloscope scope on the connection to see the signal and copy here for everyone to see.

The signal from the back of a CD player or other, from a coaxial output, should NOT be like the graphic on their website. There is so much noise on that coaxial electrical connection, that in the home environment, there must either be a fault, or you are living near a very powerful radio transmission source.

No where on the website does it state that the graphic is representative of a typical coaxial output. I wonder why.

The product offers galvanic isolation, and this has been shown to remove the RF interference effe ts between equipment produced by electrical connections.

As avole has stated, science can explain this.

As per the Neil Young reference you provided in another thread, he states higher sampling rates can be harmful, but this is the same Neil Young who has provided Pono, claiming that current redbook sampling rates and bit depth is insufficient. Promoting 24bit and 192kHz. Surely whether you are versed in the area or not, we should not suppress free speech and scientific analysis and critique.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[drummerman]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

We've been infiltrated by HDD, formerly AVI, again

 

[Andrewjvt]

Seriously, do you think we live in a world of magic? All these things were researched years ago. If the manufacturers could explain the science behind their soi-disant discoveries, they'd be lining up for the Nobel prize. They don't, for reasons  that should be obvious.

The Jitterbug, as I have stated, has been measured by Miller of HifiNews and the evidence is clear, black on white, scientifically proven. Of course that is still not enough for die hard naysayers.

I have no idea if this new Spdif 'purifier' works or not but someone will likely measure it at some stage. Perhaps I drop HifiNews a line and ask if they can considering there must be quite a few of us that use CCA's and other devices which may or may not benefit from something like that.

Hi,

For the jitterbug, it does reclock the incoming signal, and present a signal with less jitter, and slightly improved rise and fall times. It has been shown that the isolation between the computer and DAC isnthe cause of the improvement, as per the galvanic isolation aspects of USB  connections. The improvements are not stated to be due to the reduced jitter or isolation, hence we have to guess.

Regards,

Shadders.

I asked a chap that has recording equipment(i dont know all the details) but he told me the jitter bug introduced distortion

 

[drummerman]

Seriously, do you think we live in a world of magic? All these things were researched years ago. If the manufacturers could explain the science behind their soi-disant discoveries, they'd be lining up for the Nobel prize. They don't, for reasons that should be obvious.

The Jitterbug, as I have stated, has been measured by Miller of HifiNews and the evidence is clear, black on white, scientifically proven. Of course that is still not enough for die hard naysayers.

I have no idea if this new Spdif 'purifier' works or not but someone will likely measure it at some stage. Perhaps I drop HifiNews a line and ask if they can considering there must be quite a few of us that use CCA's and other devices which may or may not benefit from something like that.

Hi,

For the jitterbug, it does reclock the incoming signal, and present a signal with less jitter, and slightly improved rise and fall times. It has been shown that the isolation between the computer and DAC isnthe cause of the improvement, as per the galvanic isolation aspects of USB connections. The improvements are not stated to be due to the reduced jitter or isolation, hence we have to guess.

Regards,

Shadders.

I asked a chap that has recording equipment(i dont know all the details) but he told me the jitter bug introduced distortion

Fantastic. At least we can all agree it does something.

 

[shadders]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

Hi,

For me, I am happy never to contribute again if that is all that is wanted - subjective statements only. All that is needed is some of the regulars to support you and I will for one, not respond.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[drummerman]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

Hi,

For me, I am happy never to contribute again if that is all that is wanted - subjective statements only. All that is needed is some of the regulars to support you and I will for one, not respond.

Regards,

Shadders.

Is that a trumpian bluff?

 

[avole]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

and affirmation of our faith, because, after all, facts deny faith.

 

[ellisdj]

I dont want to be repsonsible for someone feeling they can post or not (I have probably pushed away my fair share of people already not intended by the way) - however sometimes I think people forget where they are posting and the knock on effects

I have said this all before - but the quick version is this WHF forum - the lead magazine for hifi for subjective reviewing. Why would someone come here. What do you think people would want to disucss

Why are more people not - because there is not enough subjective hifi chat on here - I tried this, I tested that types threads - there are none / hardly any. Ones that do come up on certain topics get shut down by certain people.

This is not productive overall for all topics because it is so negative

So post as you will but I stand by the statement there is not enough hifi chat on here imo

 

[avole]

I dont want to be repsonsible for someone feeling they can post or not (I have probably pushed away my fair share of people already not intended by the way) - however sometimes I think people forget where they are posting and the knock on effects

Yes, you should remember that

Seriously, it's a forum. Topics go whichever way they will. You can't control them, so man up! It isn't all your fault - in fact, in the overall scheme of things, you and I have no importance whatsoever.

 

[luckylion100]

must have an almost perfect system to enjoy and continually fret over and perhaps more importantly absolute perfect sources to be able to hear these minute differences. Although I have a digital aspect to my system, my main source is vinyl with all the pitfalls that are included (like generally shite sound reproduction some may say) ;-) therefore I need not worry about jitter and such like I just enjoy my snap, crackle and pop. ;-)

Edit: Just to be clear, what I meant was... if and when the absolute perfect source that can present a fault free presentation to your components is released I could then understand the need for this level of scrutinisation and attention to what I imagine are inaudiable differences.

 

[ellisdj]

well there you go - thats shows what I was on about right there how funnily apt

 

[shadders]

I dont want to be repsonsible for someone feeling they can post or not (I have probably pushed away my fair share of people already not intended by the way) - however sometimes I think people forget where they are posting and the knock on effects

I have said this all before - but the quick version is this WHF forum - the lead magazine for hifi for subjective reviewing. Why would someone come here. What do you think people would want to disucss

Why are more people not - because there is not enough subjective hifi chat on here - I tried this, I tested that types threads - there are none / hardly any. Ones that do come up on certain topics get shut down by certain people.

This is not productive overall for all topics because it is so negative

So post as you will but I stand by the statement there is not enough hifi chat on here imo

Hi,

For me, hifi will always be objective, and the approach from others is subjective. I am aware of expectation bias, so I could not try something and think it was good or bad (assuming the equipment is well designed).

Others have indicated the same sentiment, so it would not be pushing someone away, just that yourselves only want subjective discussion.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

Hi,

For me, I am happy never to contribute again if that is all that is wanted - subjective statements only. All that is needed is some of the regulars to support you and I will for one, not respond.

Regards,

Shadders.

There is a middle ground to all of this where I believe the truth may well be.

I am a partner in architectural practice and as such I have a pretty schizophrenic viewpoint. In my professional capacity I am half scientist and half artist, and I have to embrace both sides of that disconnect. On the one hand I want to deliver my design architect's vision. On the other I have to enable the project engineers to make that vision deliverable. The number of times I have acted as an intermediary between the two escapes me, but it is pretty much every time a project goes from concept to detailed design that this happens. They never agree. The architect thinks the engineer is non-proactive, and the engineer thinks that the architect is an idiot.

I own my company now but have done this at the highest level with Foster and Partners for nearly a decade amongst others. My point is that there is usually a middle ground between the two that satisfies both standpoints, a middle ground which neither believed was possible but which actually satisfies both parties. This parallels my viewpoint on science vs snake oil. There is a middle ground.

BTW I come from a family of engineers. Sister brother, brother in law and father. Christmas can be hell for me. My father once advised me that if there was one thing in my career I should remember it is that if it doesn't look right then it doesn't work. I took this as gospel when I set out on my professional path, but I now, through experience of making the impossible possible, believe this logic to be flawed.

 

[ellisdj]

Look at the thread title and opening post shadders - Anyone using one of these?

How many posts from people who have tried it? None

Your not as objective as you think because unless you measure the sound in room to the same scrutiny as you measure the electronics then all the work on the electronics, speakers etc is folly and goes straight out the window because your hearing your room as much as anything if not more - the listening your doing is subjective same as everyone else regardless of what goes on before that.

 

[avole]

You haven't understood a word. Same old argument, CD player on endless repeat - but, remember, the more you repeat something, the more that doesn't make it true.

 

[Pedro2]

For all contributions. Some have been more useful to me than others (but that will always be the case). I do appreciate the scientific references although I am not a scientist. Some of the detail goes over my head but that's not to say it's not valid. I have to disagree with the statement about about HiFi being 'always objective'. I think there are too many variables to control, including the equipment, the room and your own brain; listening to music will always be a personal, subjective experience. I find that this can vary from day to day, mood to mood (and volume of alcohol consumed).

I do tend to agree with references to hi fi chat; it's the easy stuff that I like; it's the basic human to human interaction. If you haven't already done so, take a look at audioshark.org; it's a place where the merits of the Nord amplifier are often discussed in a friendly manner. There are some very knowledgeable people on there with some amazing kit but no one ever seems to get their hair off.

Whether I'll buy one of these IFi gizzmos is uncertain at the moment. My ears are not tip top following the royal chest infection I contracted over Christmas. I'll decide in a couple of weeks time. If posters are correct about money back option, I don't see a problem.

Finally, the sound I currently get from my system fed by Spotify is pretty damn good. It's not perfect but what system is? Talking of which, anyone fancy the new Linn Klimax DS (DSM at extra cost!!!)? According to the few reviews out at the moment, it's the dogs b**** of streamers and incorporates a newly developed DAC architecture. I've got to say that I'd love to hear one and then probably love to own one but ........ haven't got that £15000 stuffed down the back of the sofa!

 

[ellisdj]

You haven't understood a word. Same old argument, CD player on endless repeat - but, remember, the more you repeat something, the more that doesn't make it true.

Here Avole - to help you understand - watch this from 10 minutes in.

This is someone who has take an objective standpoint to sound in the room - they have proven with measurement that they not only have a sound they want but also good sound. Its not his use of dsp that I am referring to its his measurement and design of his listening space / the resultant sound.

This might help you understand what I mean

Interesting point made from a chap at 54 minutes in as well but you will need to watch the whole video for it to make sense

 

[iMark]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement

On the contrary. We are inundated with pseudo-science rather than that we talk about electro engineering principles. Less snake oil and more science please. It might educate some people and stop them wasting their money on stuff that can't possibly work.

 

[iMark]

This is someone who has take an objective standpoint to sound in the room - they have proven with measurement that they not only have a sound they want but also good sound. Its not his use of dsp that I am referring to its his measurement and design of his listening space / the resultant sound.

As always you're confusing the argument with acoustics. Noone says that you are wrong when you say that acoustics matter and that acoustics in a room can be improved. In fact, that's stating the bleeding obvious.

The problem starts when you start talking about cables and other voodoo components that at best make a minute difference in sound when the big improvements/changes can be made with acoustic measures. I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp. There are real changes and there is snake oil. This forum is a very good place to discuss these issues.

 

[ellisdj]

too much science talk on this forum not enough hifi talk - thats why its so quiet imo - you dont come here for ideas for better sound just come here to get in an arguement 

On the contrary. We are inundated with pseudo-science rather than that we talk about electro engineering principles. Less snake oil and more science please. It might educate some people and stop them wasting their money on stuff that can't possibly work.

Imark how long has whf been going? How much science is in the mag? So why would someone come here for it? If that is of interest I am sure they would be using another forum probably an engineering type forum.
However for subjective opinions from people that have tried kit this would be a first choice place to visit.