1. WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously.

Uptone ISO Regen Review and Measurements

Discussion in 'Audio Reference Library' started by amirm, Jul 31, 2017.

  1. Thomas savage

    Thomas savage Moderator Moderator The Watchman

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,269
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    uk, taunton
    Umm, the sheepdog that tried to herd a wolf pack ..
     
  2. firedog

    firedog Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    Amir-

    First of all, taking my posts from a different forum in a different context, editing them, and then posting them and responding to them is at best impolite, and I would say with all due respect, sort of immature and even a bit obnoxious in my opinion.
    Other than that, you seem to have missed my point in both cases, which makes it even worse.

    First point, was that trained listeners - at least some individuals - have been shown to be able to differentiate between hi-res and Redbook, and also between moderate and low levels of jitter. In spite of that, it is regularly claimed that both of these are "inaudible differences" and that "science" proves it. Note that I didn't claim that YOU said it or that anyone in this discussion said it. But look around the net and you will see that this claim is regularly made. And when individuals claim to have passed such tests the tests get derided as "improper" - because they "can't be true".
    At CA I said that in response to what was said by another poster who made broad generalizations, about so called "subjectivists" vs "objectivists". My point was that both camps engage in denial, not just subjectivists.

    I wasn't making an excuse for anything or referring to you or your tests. So please stop using my posts elsewhere as a fake straw man argument for you to score points with on your forum.

    Second, your analogy about medical testing "Actually it does -- very much so according to accepted audio science. By your logic we should not prescribe any medicine to anyone because no test shows that it works for people outside of the test."

    is a totally false analogy and doesn't show much understanding of the basics of scientific testing.

    Proper medical testing uses large numbers of people randomly chosen. Control groups. Confirmation by other tests.

    You haven't done any of this, so there is no analogy. If a medicine was tested on 6 not randomly chosen people by one tester, I wouldn't accept the results and neither would you.

    That isn't a criticism of you or your testing. I do understand that you are one of the few doing such testing. But you need to stop giving your results a significance greater than what they have. You can believe them all you want, but they don't rise to the level of "scientific proof". They rise to the level of a "serious indication" or "evidence that needs to be taken into account and disputed" by those who claim otherwise. Not more than that.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2017
  3. Blumlein 88

    Blumlein 88 Major Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    416
    Could you specify or link to those if possible. I don't know of any on jitter.

    On hires vs redbook there are always, in the ones I know, caveats. And that is okay, just wish to know which ones you speak of.

    There is one where hires downsampled was detected vs hires, but not native redbook vs hires. Seems likely the downsampling is what was audible. There are the MQA related results, but they also include poor dither practice and unusually steep filtering, and point to a very weak effect. There was another where DSD was detected vs 48 khz, but not detected vs 44 khz which seems as if something odd must have been going on.

    I don't know of any showing jitter being detectable except at very high levels. Would be most interested in those results.

    As for Amir copying and responding here, he isn't allowed to post at CA. I don't know the full background to that.
     
  4. Thomas savage

    Thomas savage Moderator Moderator The Watchman

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,269
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    uk, taunton
    If you actually read the very first post in this thread you will quickly realise no bogus significance is being claimed .. there's plenty of " in my opinion " and a open invitation to scrutinise the testing.

    Hes tested and given his opinion based on those results, offered complete transparency to make sure the tests are as correct as possible. So amirs test informed his opinion and he's offered both up for challenge.

    I'm not sure why you seem to be creating a issue where non exists in this regard, it seems unnecessarily pedantic tbh .

    lets be sensible, medical trials for drugs to be used on humanoids and testing a PSU for a USB widget are two strikingly different things, the level of jeopardy is very different. again Iv no idea why you seem to want to drill into a perfectly reasonable analogy and get pedantic about it.

    Other than that I can see why taking a post from elsewhere might give a slight grievance, it's a kind of violation in a way just it's not as all content posted publicly like this is just that, public. Still one maintaining a sense of ownership over their words and feeling attached to them as a part of their own self or property is normal.

    How you translate that feeling and prescribe amir to be immature, obnoxious in his actions is again beyond my understanding. Impolite, I can understand but given the context of this being the Internet/social media I'd recommend a more robust sentimentality be considered.

    I used to feel aggrieved when my posts got quoted line by line so multiple quotes in a retort. I found it rather aggressive, like every sentence is under attack and impolite to say the least. I guess over time I just got used to the feeling and now with all the aggravation I get doing this job I long for the days of a simple multi quoted retort. :D
     
  5. firedog

    firedog Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    Answered you at CA as best as I could at the moment. I'm not going to run two parallel conversations and repeat myself constantly at two sites.
     
  6. alfe

    alfe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    22
    Ubiquity is as hard as dry cleaning bits.:)
     
  7. firedog

    firedog Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2016
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm not creating an issue. Amir and others here claim that the tests prove what Amir is saying under the mantle of science. I 100% disagree. He is doing science like tests that don't rise to the level of scientific proof, as he and others claim. He shouldn't make that inaccurate and unscientific claim.

    Amir brought up the medical analogy, not me. Again, I don't think it is a "perfectly reasonable" analogy. It is exactly the kind of false analogy that are used in these kind of forums to prove that one side in a discussion has "science" on its side. Sorry, no, and that analogy certainly doesn't prove the claim.

    I'm not just aggrieved b/c Amir repeatedly has taken posts from elsewhere and quoted them here. I don't know if he can post at CA or not, and I don't think it is relevant. I do take exception to the fact that he does this while taking what I've posted elsewhere, edited it, presented it out of context, and distorted it's meaning, all in order to score debate points. And yes, I think it is childish.
     
  8. Thomas savage

    Thomas savage Moderator Moderator The Watchman

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,269
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    uk, taunton
    Umm, tbh you've completely lost me and I just don't see what your on about but never mind. You are of course welcome to your POV .

    Oh, I appreciate the ' your childish , immature, obnoxious' etc then the " this isn't a criticism of you or your testing" .. that's a classic :D

    No offensive but with the greatest respect and believe me when I say Iv been a devout fan of yours for some time, in fact my first child is named after you.... but your a arsehole :D ( and yes I named by first child arsehole , just in case you were thinking I was disingenuous somehow :D)

    Thanks for the laugh firedog :D

    It's likely the brothers will ask for less rhetoric and more data/evidence don't be offended this is a data/measurement forum .
     
  9. BE718

    BE718 Major Contributor forum experimenter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2016
    Messages:
    1,007
    Likes Received:
    165
    Sorry but unless you have some actual technical rebuttal of the tests you are just blowing hot air. Please feel free to technically challenge the tests. If you don't have the knowledge to do so, then you clearly do not have the knowledge to disagree with the results.

    The floor is open to you to technically challenge the data.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2017
  10. Jinjuku

    Jinjuku Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2016
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    81
    I don't know what you are talking about. AVS had a thread where Scott Wilkinson and Mark Waldrep produced Redbook and 24/192 files. Some could tell the difference. There was one guitar track that I could tell apart the formats but didn't have a preference one way or the other.

    Archimago is doing a blind MQA vs non MQA. Open till September 8th for participation. He'll post there results publicly
     
  11. Jinjuku

    Jinjuku Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2016
    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    81
    ?? It's under the mantle of MEASUREMENT. Feel free to bring your own.
     
  12. alfe

    alfe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2016
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    22
    Dummy question, if they regenerates the bits, how they get rid of the old ones?:oops:
     
  13. amirm

    amirm Founder/Admin CFO (Chief Fun Officer) Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    7,315
    Likes Received:
    906
    Location:
    Seattle Area
    If you look under the device in long term listening, i.e. after a few months, you will find a puddle of discarded bits! :D
     
  14. amirm

    amirm Founder/Admin CFO (Chief Fun Officer) Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    7,315
    Likes Received:
    906
    Location:
    Seattle Area
    Science? No way. We are not making science. I am measuring equipment. That is part of reviewing of a lot of equipment from cameras to computers. It is not about science. We are trying to see if the improvements claimed for product hold water when subjected to objective tools to measure the same. It is verification or disqualification of marketing claims.

    Folks that say devices do things that cannot be measured, explained, etc. are the ones attempting to make new science. Problem is, they only state such things with words. That is the faulty science you want to go after. Not what I and other reviewers world over do day in and day out.
     
    BE718 and Thomas savage like this.
  15. Fitzcaraldo215

    Fitzcaraldo215 Addicted to Fun and Learning

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    131
    The old bits accumulate in the atmosphere causing global warming.
     
  16. amirm

    amirm Founder/Admin CFO (Chief Fun Officer) Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    7,315
    Likes Received:
    906
    Location:
    Seattle Area
    No, let me tell you what you are really doing there with those posts: you are impeding progress. Through FUD and word arguments, you continue to act as the PR person for the product in question, hoping further investigation either doesn't happen, or if it does happen, it is put in doubt. That, I don't appreciate.

    I have done a ton of work here that eventually resulted in consensus with the product manufacturer. Did you take back your statement for a year or more saying I don't know how to test products?

    No, instead another attempt is made to throw yourself in front of the bus, hoping we are not successful in assessing the subjective value of this product. We need to quiz the people who clearly hear such differences. You must not object to this as you did on CA forum.

    So help us figure out what was heard subjectively with this product. I like to see a list of tracks that shows the difference night and day. I like to know if my DAC is good enough to hear that (iFi micro iDSD). And my Stax reference headphones.

    Going and posting more doubt and word arguments will get more arrows thrown at you and calling it for what it is. And whatever it is that you are doing, is the farthest thing from "science." Let's agree on that.
     
    BE718 likes this.
  17. Thomas savage

    Thomas savage Moderator Moderator The Watchman

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,269
    Likes Received:
    561
    Location:
    uk, taunton
    Amir is the kind of scientist you need if your ambition is limited to faking the moon landing and have it made up in a studio , if you actually want to go to the moon best task someone else. :D Probably best look outside of the audiophile world though else you will end up with only a dodgy radio broadcast as evidence of the 'landing' . :D
     
  18. Sal1950

    Sal1950 Major Contributor The Chicago Crusher

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2016
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    314
    Location:
    Central Fl
    He is awful good with the camera though. :)
     
    Thomas savage likes this.
  19. amirm

    amirm Founder/Admin CFO (Chief Fun Officer) Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    7,315
    Likes Received:
    906
    Location:
    Seattle Area
    Looks like the CA discussions continue to go down the direction which has already been covered:
    upload_2017-8-14_11-23-21.png


    "the so called "claims" are general in that regenerating the USB signal and galvanically isolating it CAN/does improve SI, mitigate, noise, etc, to the DAC, which can ultimatley improve the overall sound. "

    What comes "to" the DAC is not important. What comes out of the DAC is. DACs are designed with huge immunity to USB vagaries. High-end designers go to extreme measures to isolate what they know to be a computer interface. Even low-end ones like Behringer are well aware of such things. It is only in the imagination of non-designers that these things are impossible to do well inside the DAC and are in need of external help.

    Our measurements prove what I am saying here, demonstrating that noise did not go down. That in the face of even noisy "SI" the standard DAC actually did better in extracting the USB signal and UpTone Regen.

    There is no evidence that we can verify that any sound was improved. FYI I did listen and did not hear any such improvement. If someone wants to volunteer themselves to show that they can hear improvements with Iso Regen, I am very happy at my expense to come and verify such. Until then, that is an empty claim I am afraid. It is all based on lay assumptions of what these devices can do vs reality of audio electronics.

    "Why did you and Amir single out Uptone? "

    I didn't single them out. I was asked to measure one by a forum member as I have already noted multiple notes here and elsewhere:

    upload_2017-8-14_11-29-34.png

    This was in an email exchange about a completely different topic. This was my answer:

    upload_2017-8-14_11-30-12.png

    And this response:

    upload_2017-8-14_11-31-10.png

    I don't know how anyone could look at this exchange and decide I am out to get UpTone or singling them out.

    BTW, this was also the case with the original Regen which member DallasJustice had purchased and wanted me to measure.

    Folks on CA forum need to stop looking at me through the lenses by which they make decisions. I am not motivated by emotions, revenge, etc. My money does not grow on trees either and I like to apply it to many things other than these audio bits. But when genuine interest is expressed and with me being uniquely situated to make such measurements with professional equipment, I go ahead and do it.

    "What about the 9 other ones? What claims are they making? The claims are very verifiable, tested, and proven to the satisfaction of the 95% who have tested them. These products work."

    I don't know about 9 other ones. But I have tested the Audioquest Jitterbug and reported its ineffectiveness just the same:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    You want me to test any other? My door is open. Send me a PM and I give you the address to ship them to me for testing. And I will pay return postage out of my pocket.

    "The best way to verify what many are conflating these "claims" to be is to "prove" it by subjecting it to RIGOROUS testing which necessitates listening tests. "

    That's where I am but I can't find a single one of you willing to help with it. I can't even get one person to tell me which music track is more revealing. Or what setup they exactly used. Or sit through a controlled testing.

    So please put aside these empty word arguments and continued PR campaign and lay assumptions. They don't work with me. Step up and be constructive and then we have something.

    P.S. I appreciate someone providing this answer to him on CA forum.
     
    Jinjuku likes this.
  20. Johnseye

    Johnseye Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2017
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    5

    Amir, can you please explain the influence of your SMPS's on your tests as described here?



    upload_2017-8-15_8-58-37.png
     

Share This Page