Anyone using one of these? Just bought a google chromecast audio and read that this gizmo can improve sq considerably. Review by Darko who seems to know a thing or two.
Pedro2 said:Will give it some thought and pop over to HeadFi. My problem stems from Linn not having Spotify Connect built into their streamers so I have to work around it. It's especially annoying in that Spotify is now my main music source and I love its convenience, catalogue, and phone app/interface.
Much as I love the quality of Linn streamers (they are very good), the company needs a kick up the a*** over this omission. They only currently support Tidal and Qobuz. I don't know whether its just Linn snobbery or a business reason and they refuse to offer reasons why (a number of complaints on their forum over this one). I also have an Amazon TV stick plugged into the HDMI input on the Linn and this streams as a Spotify Connect device. Will eventually get round to comparing the two but at the moment, just getting over the 'queen's cough' which has left me partially deaf in one ear!
Its highly likely it does something to the signal but I haven't seen a test such as with for the Jitterbug yet.steve_1979 said:They even call themselves 'ifi' audio.
Come on guys, they're taking the piss. Anyone who buys these is the punchline of a bad joke.
drummerman said:Its highly likely it does something to the signal but I haven't seen a test such as with for the Jitterbug yet.
Not necessarily. Audioquests Jitterbug reduced jitter and changed the squarewave. Miller Labs report.iMark said:drummerman said:Its highly likely it does something to the signal but I haven't seen a test such as with for the Jitterbug yet.
If this actually does something to the signal it's faulty.
This alone rings alarm bells "And the music sounded louder, more dynamic—almost startlingly so, as if I'd cranked up my preamp's volume control. Could boosting the digital signal to 5V have such an effect?"Electro said:This product seems like a budget version of what I have been using for many many years, the Monarchy Audio Digital interface Processor or DIP.
http://www.monarchyaudio.com/DIP_Classic_Main_Frame.htm
I have three of them now and believe me they make a significant improvement to any digital source when placed beween source and Dac, and yes I have done a blind test with 100% accuracy as I believe anyone could.
The biggest improvement I have found is between my ipad and Cambridge Audio id100 spidf output to my Electro Dac using spotify premuim .
The MA DIP takes the spidf output and isolates the digital signal then re-clocks and boosts the strength of the signal to the Dac , the Electro Dac then up samples the signal to 24 / 192 and converts to analog at this frequency.
This makes spotify premium a very good quality source indeed.
A Stereophile review.
http://www.stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/339/#HldcGTpwlChoHHOF.97
the Stereophine review is meaningless as it's a) Sam Tellig and b) hasn't been tested in their lab, which JA normally does.ID. said:This alone rings alarm bells "And the music sounded louder, more dynamic—almost startlingly so, as if I'd cranked up my preamp's volume control. Could boosting the digital signal to 5V have such an effect?"
avole said:the Stereophine review is meaningless as it's a) Sam Tellig and b) hasn't been tested in their lab, which JA normally does.ID. said:This alone rings alarm bells "And the music sounded louder, more dynamic—almost startlingly so, as if I'd cranked up my preamp's volume control. Could boosting the digital signal to 5V have such an effect?"
Gazzip said:avole said:the Stereophine review is meaningless as it's a) Sam Tellig and b) hasn't been tested in their lab, which JA normally does.ID. said:This alone rings alarm bells "And the music sounded louder, more dynamic—almost startlingly so, as if I'd cranked up my preamp's volume control. Could boosting the digital signal to 5V have such an effect?"
...and c) reviews by others are evidentially secondary and therefore have no significance other than to act as "signposts" for where to start ones own auditioning/testing. I would recommend the OP buy one and decide for his/her self whether the gizmo actually works for them in their system. If it does then happy days. If not then send it back and exercise your distance selling rights.
and buys something worthwhile. Far too much BS in HiFi, unfortunately, foisted on the credulous.Gazzip said:avole said:the Stereophine review is meaningless as it's a) Sam Tellig and b) hasn't been tested in their lab, which JA normally does.ID. said:This alone rings alarm bells "And the music sounded louder, more dynamic—almost startlingly so, as if I'd cranked up my preamp's volume control. Could boosting the digital signal to 5V have such an effect?"
...and c) reviews by others are evidentially secondary and therefore have no significance other than to act as "signposts" for where to start ones own auditioning/testing. I would recommend the OP buy one and decide for his/her self whether the gizmo actually works for them in their system. If it does then happy days. If not then send it back and exercise your distance selling rights.
Gazzip said: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.