• 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. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Can you review a Synchro-Mesh S/PDIF re-clocker?

Status
Not open for further replies.

solderdude

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
927
Likes
1,453
Location
The Neverlands
Agreed, I think he honestly believes that hearing is superior over measurements and that measurements don't tell the whole story.
There are thousands (wel.. maybe hundreds) of folks believing the same and so he will be in good company.
This reinforces a belief (based on things that appear factual).
Not purpose trolling but genuine belief.

That's why I was surprised he wants measurements confirmed he already had done and perhaps hopes Amirs measurements can perhaps show a relation between what he hears ans measures or 'test' Amir's hearing abilities or wants Amirs AP measurements for free (others are sure to ask money for this) ?
As said many times by my many posters here, it highly depends on the used DAC and what is measured if changes are shown/possible.
He wants the digital signal examined (from what I understand) and validate his measurements.
For this Amir needs to publish and examin the jitter aspect indepth and produce jitter numbers on this about the digital signal only. (so not from a DAC) as where readers are only interested in how 1 or maybe 2 or 3 different DAC's will show improved/equal/worsened analog outputs.

I hope for Steve that he gets what he wants and am very pleased to read Steve's offer and Amir taking him up on this.
I for one am far more interested in that get together than the measurements.
Will one of them change their tune ?
Stay tuned for the next episode of ...
 

FrantzM

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
802
Likes
371
Hi

I have witnessed audiophiles having been presented with "slam-dunk" evidence, waver a bit then calmly revert to their belief.

I don't know how sincere Steve N. is, nor am I able to. I don't know him personally, never met him and don't follow his writings. The following is not a knock on Steve simply that he wins regardless of the outcome of the test. He prepared the field in many ways:
For a while the discussion veered toward the adequacy of the AP. not even subtly.
Then the methodologies that will be employed were questioned.
Then measurements would not correlate with observation.
None of these were presented with any scientific data. IIRC.

I don't expect much from this except that his magical box won't do much to the analog signal. I remember back in middle school reading something of the kind: that a butterfly wings flutter could well affect earth rotation but can we measure it, ever? Would we care to?
I am sure that anything you place in a system must produce "something" ... Is it relevant? Can we hear -115 dB down?
 
Last edited:

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,018
Likes
892
Did anyone take the listening tests based on reclocking by Mutec and their Ref 10 clock?

Previously, I posted this:

https://www.bonedo.de/artikel/einzelansicht/mutec-mc-3-smart-clock-usb-und-ref10-test/2.html

The reviewer, who holds an MSc in electronics and information theory, writes (Google translated):

“Setup 3 and 4 sound the best. However, the differences are not so huge, you have to listen to it for a while. That nevertheless the REF 10 makes another small, but subtle difference, I would not have expected! Whether this is worth the quite high extra charge, everyone must decide for themselves - the MC-3 + USB, however, in my opinion, but worth every euro”.

Is he on with the conspiracy, or do you hear differences too?

NOTE! There’s a link to a zip container with hi-res files too.
 

mansr

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
310
Likes
634
You guys are only feeding the troll by posting in this thread. OF course measurement won't show any imapct on analog audio outputs but he will anyhow keep trolling rejecting any technical facts you present to him.
I'm actually expecting a slight degradation with his device. The jitter is a non-issue for most DACs, but his cheap ASRC chip will have distorted the signal anyway.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2019
Messages
91
Likes
58
Location
Sweden
Agreed, I think he honestly believes that hearing is superior over measurements and that measurements don't tell the whole story.
There are thousands (wel.. maybe hundreds) of folks believing the same and so he will be in good company.
This reinforces a belief (based on things that appear factual).
Not purpose trolling but genuine belief.

That's why I was surprised he wants measurements confirmed he already had done and perhaps hopes Amirs measurements can perhaps show a relation between what he hears ans measures or 'test' Amir's hearing abilities or wants Amirs AP measurements for free (others are sure to ask money for this) ?
As said many times by my many posters here, it highly depends on the used DAC and what is measured if changes are shown/possible.
He wants the digital signal examined (from what I understand) and validate his measurements.
For this Amir needs to publish and examin the jitter aspect indepth and produce jitter numbers on this about the digital signal only. (so not from a DAC) as where readers are only interested in how 1 or maybe 2 or 3 different DAC's will show improved/equal/worsened analog outputs.

I hope for Steve that he gets what he wants and am very pleased to read Steve's offer and Amir taking him up on this.
I for one am far more interested in that get together than the measurements.
Will one of them change their tune ?
Stay tuned for the next episode of ...
I've stacked up lots of popcorn. But I agree with you. Initially I thought that Steve was trolling, or just needed the "proof" for a customer. Now I'm not so sure. I most certain have some misconceptions about audio but trying to learn more. I also can see that Steve is trying to bait the "objectivtists" here on the forum.
Things like ethernet cables making a difference, Jitter at extreme low levels, FLAC vs WAV and so on. Time after time, for several years we (as in the skeptics) we have tried to find measurable things to prove what we think we hear.

Coming from a computer background (MCT, Windows Server) I find it interesting what the brain does to us trying to make sense of the reality.
 

graz_lag

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
825
Likes
602
Location
Le Mans, France
Twenty-six pages of posts in five-days ? Is it the record around here ?

IMWOLAT, Entrepreneurs - Engineers - Technicians, who pursue the objectives of improving existing technologies, are entitled to praise and respect, regardless of the size of improvement, whether the improvement brings audible effects or not.
They are right to be proud of their achievements. We, as consumers, have the freedom to adhere or not to the improvements.

Within the same principle, the sprinter, who - sooner or later, will get the men's world record of 9.58 seconds improved, will be very proud of his performance, regardless whether the improvement will be of 0.01 or 0.1 second ...

Looking forward Caesar will be receiving what is Caesar's if and when @Empirical Audio' claims will have been measured and proven to be true.
 

Frank Dernie

Major Contributor
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
1,180
Likes
1,176
Location
Oxfordshire
been presented with "slam-dunk" evidence, waver a bit then calmly revert to their belief.
I think this is human nature. Brexit has been like that here. One prominent minister who is also a sometime journalist at the Daily Mail, or at least married to a permanent one, said "people are fed up with experts" meaning "my opinion is not supported by facts so I have decided to ignore the facts and not change my opinion.
Ignorance is more dangerous than stupidity IMO.
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,018
Likes
892
Thanks for this! I will listen these samples later tonight. I also bought a used MUTEC MC-3+ USB yesterday and offered it to Amirm for testing.
Congrats!

I wonder how it measures. I tried it, but didn’t find it to give noticeably different sound than my existing digital-to-digital-box. Sighted listening only...

Mutec is well-regarded for build quality and features.
 

jtwrace

Active Member
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
267
Likes
88
Location
Orlando, FL
It is shipped so once it is here, will get scheduled for testing.
Great! I think this needs to get on the bench ASAP! Yep, cut the line. ;)
 

FrantzM

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Patreon Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
802
Likes
371
This is cause for concern when facts are dismissed by those who should use them to govern us toward a better future...
 

Empirical Audio

Active Member
Manufacturer
Joined
Mar 10, 2019
Messages
224
Likes
60
Location
Great Northwest, USA
It does not Steve. That is what people imagine because they think it is a timing issue as far as perception. It is not at all. Our peak detection in time domain is something like 1/4 second. Past that nothing about timing errors comes as such. It is for this reason the IEC curve for Wow and Flutter looks like this:

View attachment 23649

As you see, the highest sensitivity is around 4 Hz. After that, sensitivity drops rapidly.

The actual effect is spectrum sensitive and will be a non-linear change in the sound, not anything to do with haloes, smearing, etc. It is FM modulation which is a way we create new sounds. Not echo boxes.

Heck, we don't hear echoes when sound reflects from walls in our typical listening room. Why on earth do people think jitter that is far, far, smaller in digital audio creates echoes? Have folks not heard of Haas effect?

There is not one piece of research on jitter that says anything about it sounding like echo, smearing, or changing soundstage.
Maybe it's just the semantics. Then I will call it instead "improvement in clarity or focus" as the jitter is lowered.

Let me give you an example that anyone can try: When I first watched the 3-D version of the movie "Gravity" using my Oppo Blu-Ray player, I didn't have the iPurifier in the system, so jitter was higher. I totally missed some of the context of the movie because this is laid-out in the first minute of the movie, with radio chatter between earth and the space shuttle. I could not make out what they were saying in this chatter. It's mostly high-frequency sound.

After adding the iPurifier, I watched the movie again. This chatter was now intelligible and I understood the dialogue immediately, even though this is at very low level. The movie finally made sense to me.

Likewise, there are many old Beatles tracks of which I never understood the lyrics, until I inserted my reclocker in the chain. To me this is an improvement in clarity and focus. The kind of thing that takes a track with a 2 foot wide vocalist image and focuses that to a 3 inch wide image. This is not hard to sense.

What you are telling me is that I'm imagining this or hallucinating. I'm afraid not. If I am cold, you can tell me I'm not cold, but my senses and shivering are telling me that I'm cold. I trust my senses.

Steve N.
 

pkane

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
365
Likes
270
What you are telling me is that I'm imagining this or hallucinating. I'm afraid not. If I am cold, you can tell me I'm not cold, but my senses and shivering are telling me that I'm cold. I trust my senses.
Good thing that's not how science is done. Our table of elements would be a lot shorter: earth, water, wind, and fire.
 

Thomas savage

Retired Sheriff
Moderator
The Watchman
Patreon Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
6,709
Likes
3,419
Location
uk, taunton
Maybe it is virtual science. We have reality 1.0 and virtual reality 2.0 so surely we will need virtual science in that virtual reality. In the past it might have been labeled meta-science as part of meta-reality the metaphysics. So now we'll re-brand it as virtual physics.

In virtual reality, science can be empirical since humans can virtually hear about 3 femto-seconds of virtual jitter. Just wait until we get some virtual instrumentation that out strips human virtual senses. Boy will we go places then at least virtually. At most too.
All I could think of when reading this was virtual arse and virtual boob's...

If jitter can effect these then colour me concerned.
 

SIY

Major Contributor
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
1,492
Likes
2,145
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I added one and my wife, Morgan Fairchild, who I've seen naked, became 30 years younger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom