Review and Measurements of Empirical Audio Synchro-Mesh

[M00ndancer]

The arrogance you complain about is on full display when you dismiss anything that counters your tests and measures in a predominantly subjective hobby.

Creating transparent and non intrusive equipment have nothing to do with subjectivity. Listening to the music it self is all about subjectivity. ASR have never question the art and pleasure of listening to music. Stay and learn or stay away and troll somewhere else.

 

[WeHaDude]

Creating transparent and non intrusive equipment have nothing to do with subjectivity. Listening to the music it self is all about subjectivity. ASR have never question the art and pleasure of listening to music. Stay and learn or stay away and troll somewhere else.

Ah, yes, the “begone troll” retort for anyone who’d dare challenge the arrogance rampant in a forum where, according to its tagline, “[you] try to impress each other with how much [you] know about audio”. I’ve been in the audio business a long time fellas starting with my initial stint at RogersoundLabs. Consider me unimpressed. But as a student of science I’ll remain to learn something/anything from such distinguished experts as yourselves, thank you. Happy listening!

 

[watchnerd]

The preceding poster was using a Sonos.

Budget gear like that might actually benefit from a jitter re-clocker....

 

[restorer-john]

How do I know if I married a magazine bride?

Is there a double-blind test?

Objective measurements, published 7 page review/photoshoot and a front cover. I gave her 5 stars at the time. That was my first wife...

 

[Ron Party]

But as a student of science

This is not a popularity contest. The ultimate efficacy of this product (or any, for that matter) is never determined solely by anecdotal evidence, e.g., ten people who post at audiogon or WBF claimed deeper soundstage, blacker than black background, etc.

As a student of science, surely you subscribe to the scientific method. And as an attorney, surely you acknowledge the difference in probative value between direct vs. circumstantial evidence. As such, is it really too much to ask for one to request something, anything, that adheres to the scientific method to demonstrate the efficacy of the product in question?

Maybe such evidence exists. I don't know. As a member of the jury, I'm waiting for you to sustain your burden of proof.

 

[dfuller]

On the topic of reclocking...

Coming from the pro audio world, most gear that uses S/PDIF, ADAT, TDIF, AES, etc etc all has a non-disable-able reclocking feature. Hell, a lot of companies advertise their PLLs! Beyond that, generally the advice generally speaking is that unless you're connecting multiple AD/DA devices together, the built-in clock is almost always better than even the expensive ones, because the amount of jitter introduced is generally worse performance.

The first time we saw separate master clocks appear as "this will make your gear sound better" was right around the release of the Digidesign 192 for Pro Tools HD. Because of its shockingly bad internal clock design (extremely high jitter due to a weird implementation of freewheel for the audio-for-video post guys), using an external clock like an Apogee Big Ben actually made clearly audible improvements (even blinded). Of course, once Avid/Digidesign got their act together with the HD I/O, it was too late - people were spending pots of money on clocks that made no difference.

 

[gvl]

PLL isn't reclocking, it's clock extraction.

 

[dfuller]

PLL isn't reclocking, it's clock extraction.

Apologies, I misspoke. Regardless, some companies do brag about jitter reduction.

 

[Thomas savage]

Stick to the OP please , these review threads are not for petty back and forth regarding subjectivity Vs measurements.