- Thread Starter
- #421
When I call your name, just say "Ho:"
I don’t know anyone involved but my gut is telling me the toilet attendant at Harrods department store London who I saw a few weeks back is NwAvGuy..I'm nwavguy and so is my wife.
Eric
No, I use my aging I7 machine for everything. If something else is hammering the CPUs (rare) getting roon to do a simple upsample (about 3% max usage) can occasionally stutter, but usually doesn't, that's fair enough by me, computing resources aren't infinite, and it only happens when I've kicked something off that uses a lot of CPU. If I don't upsample CPU usage is very low. The PC is a non-issue.I was going to get a DAC, but not if I can't surf the web and listen to music at the same time. Does everyone have a dedicated audio PC these days?
@amirm
https://superbestaudiofriends.org/i...lies-and-usb-dac-technical-measurements.5770/
I think that post is directed at you.
From my reading of the post by AtomicBomb
1. Differing settings used in the analyzer causes differences. One using WDM and the other using ASIO will cause differences. The same should be used for both. WDM should be avoided.
2. Full documentation is important.
I agree on point 2 because it's useful for when conflicting measurements arise and both people can look at each others settings beforehand. On point 1 it's just duh of course the settings have to be the exactly the same. I don't know if they were for yours amirm but you would know.
Not sure. He shows "manipulated" measurements, riddled with ads and "this space for hire".I think that post is directed at you.
Not sure. He shows "manipulated" measurements, riddled with ads and "this space for hire".
When was the last time you've seen an ad here ?![]()
Thanks for bringing that to my attention. It is a very good effort on their part to show how same equipment can measure differently. We also have our own thread here where we are trying to standardize measurements and source files so that even when using different equipment, results can be compared.@amirm
https://superbestaudiofriends.org/i...lies-and-usb-dac-technical-measurements.5770/
I think that post is directed at you.
From my reading of the post by AtomicBomb
1. Differing settings used in the analyzer causes differences. One using WDM and the other using ASIO will cause differences. The same should be used for both. WDM should be avoided.
2. Full documentation is important.
I agree on point 2 because it's useful for when conflicting measurements arise and both people can look at each others settings beforehand. On point 1 it's just duh of course the settings have to be the exactly the same. I don't know if they were for yours amirm but you would know.
No. The only funding we get are through donations and that amount so far is a tiny fraction of the money I have spent purchasing products.Does AudioScienceReview even have sponsors?
Thanks for bringing that to my attention. It is a very good effort on their part to show how same equipment can measure differently. We also have our own thread here where we are trying to standardize measurements and source files so that even when using different equipment, results can be compared.
The points they make don't apply to my testing though. First, they should know that it was my team and initiative I took to implement the entire new audio stack in Windows. The Windows XP kmixer had to be shot in the head and I made sure that happened in Windows Vista development. Brand new pipeline was put in place and that is what is in use in Windows 10.
Importantly to the points they make, we implemented a new API called WASAPI for direct access to the sound driver bypassing the kernel processing. We wanted to support ASIO but that required licensing and it was cheaper and easier to build WASAPI instead.
What is wonderful in Creator Edition of Windows 10 is that full USB class drivers are now available. Windows not only recognizes all the DACs I am testing but automatically creates WASAPI interfaces for them. This eliminates the hassle of finding and installing ASIO drivers. Reliability has been superb although sometimes event driven does not work.
My testing is all done with Roon in exclusive mode using Wasapi. This is documented in every review I write although sounds like I should expand more on it for newer readers. This is what is in this review for example:
View attachment 10571
Roon only shows the above when WASAPI exclusive mode is used. So the issues they raise with WDM do not apply to my testing. Everything is bit-exact. No testing I do is with Windows processing.
There seems to be a tendency over there to keep assuming incompetence and lack of knowledge because they have not heard of me. All they have to do is click on my signature, do some googling, etc. and not make assumptions about me not knowing the difference between bit exact and not when my team implemented all of this.
On FFT points, my analyzers maxes out at 32K which is a blessing. Folks like Atomicbomb who use Prism Sound Dsound have access to far longer FFT kernels, resulting in a whole bunch of spikes that can be distracting. It also artificially lowers the noise floor that is seen in the graph, giving a highly misleading impression of how low the noise floor of the DAC really is. Even in my measurements there is a 32 dB "FFT gain" (artificial reduction in noise floor). Many people look at those graphs and assume the noise floor is what is shown when it is not at all the case. So if anyone needs to be cautious, is those folks with their large FFT kernels.
It is on my TODO list to write an article on my testing and expand significantly on the above.
Finally, I have done testing using Prism Sound that atomicbomb is using. Here is the article: https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/. As you see there, there is much more documentation on the test setup, mostly because that is an article that was going in print as opposed to me trying to get a review out.
So point taken but there is no smoke here let alone fire as my as errors in my measurements.
Importantly, AtomicBomb's linearity measurements match mine. As do the glitching. What differs is our write-ups is that he closed his eyes and praised the product as being excellent. Whereas I told it as it is.
If they want to telegraph messages back and forth to me, I like them to make a full disclosure as to origins of the products they are testing. Are they free loans or are they purchasing them with their own money?
No. The only funding we get are through donations and that amount so far is a tiny fraction of the money I have spent purchasing products.
Correct, the forum is funded by amir other than the recent initiative asking for member donations.(snip)
So no manufacturer donations?
Yes.Cool response so everything is done via WASAPI exclusive?
It's worth having clarification in each review of what procedure was followed. I find other people just write a single post of all their settings and link to that at the top of the review each time stating that is the measurement procedure followed. Easy to copy/paste each time.
So in the jitter comparison between the Fiio E10K and Modi 2 the same settings were used for both?
Definitely not. I am getting some loaner equipment for review and when so, I am and will be very clear as that occurring. Most manufacturers don't see what I do as good for them so I don't expect that to become common.So no manufacturer donations?
Notice all the documentation I provide on the graphs on what they mean. He doesn't do any of that. Just posts graphs after graphs without anything for the reader to focus on. As a result, back in 2015 people saw poor measurements of Schiit BiFrost Multibit from them but it did not register with anyone. Had he noted the problems as I do, and show comparisons in-situ to other DACs without the problem, we could be sitting here with the problem potentially being resolved.
I thought that was funny considering that Schiit does actually give money to SBAF.
That is very Nobel of you. There should be a prize for that!If this site ever takes on manufacturer sponsorship in any way shape or form you will know because I won’t be here.