Until I solved the isp and wiring/switching infrastructure issues, even a $25k DAC was disappointing. Once I got those sorted, most DACs sound “decent.” A good DAC sounds special. Obviously room + speakers + amp have to be dealt with too, but as was pointed out, you have to sort them out whatever your source.
At my house it was a classic case of garbage in, garbage out. Until the isp fixed their side of my gateway and I went to serious Ethernet on mine, digital was unreliable and mediocre at best.
If you don’t get the “garbage in” part sorted, it won’t matter what else you do.Yes we all have very different experiences! It makes the topic very confusing for a newcomer.
Well, in my case it's the DAC that got the "garbage in" sorted. That's just my experience, I am not denying your experienceIf you don’t get the “garbage in” part sorted, it won’t matter what else you do.
If you don’t have “garbage in” at your installation, that makes it easier. We have all been newcomers.
A DAC is not going to sort out quarter second jitter or 10% packet loss. Unless it has some miracle AI capacity to just know what the file was supposed to be.Well, in my case it's the DAC that got the "garbage in" sorted. That's just my experience, I am not denying your experience
Actually there are many DACs which reclock the source signalA DAC is not going to sort out quarter second jitter or 10% packet loss. Unless it has some miracle AI capacity to just know what the file was supposed to be.
Yes. Do you really believe that reclocking will solve 250 msec jitter and 10% packet loss? Unless you have a HUGE buffer, you’re going to hear it.Actually there are many DACs which reclock the source signal
Yes. Do you really believe that reclocking will solve 250 msec jitter and 10% packet loss? Unless you have a HUGE buffer, you’re going to hear it.
The “experts” who argue that the quality of the input doesn’t matter are obstacles to the solution to the problem. They set me back several years.
In my experience they were right that it didn’t matter for them … because their listening base was computer oriented at the outset. They were used to the problems and the problems sounded normal to them.
Rather than gin you up for another 500 posts on this dead horse, I’ll leave you to your own devices.
Since we can't easily demo this kind of solution, would be great if you could share a YouTube phone video of your systems streaming playback.Yes. Do you really believe that reclocking will solve 250 msec jitter and 10% packet loss? Unless you have a HUGE buffer, you’re going to hear it.
The “experts” who argue that the quality of the input doesn’t matter are obstacles to the solution to the problem. They set me back several years.
In my experience they were right that it didn’t matter for them … because their listening base was computer oriented at the outset. They were used to the problems and the problems sounded normal to them.
Rather than gin you up for another 500 posts on this dead horse, I’ll leave you to your own devices.
Actually there are many DACs which reclock the source signal
Yes, that was my mistake in thinking as well. For a CD transport, mine already has a relatively low jitter of 115 psec, and I thought the reclocking within my DAC would do the rest. Boy, was I wrong. Eventually I put a reclocker between CD transport and DAC that brings jitter down to 8 psec, and voila, much better sound. An internal reclocker to a DAC can only do so much, even if it is advertised as technically competent.
Interestingly, while dCS DACs also have an internal reclocker, improvements in performance with a dCS external clock are common knowledge.
There are many ways of implementing reclocking.
I don't think you can generalize here.
Once again, I am sharing my experience and replying to Another Johnson's comments in which he says: that's impossible. No it's not impossible, and the fact that many fail does not mean a few cannot succeed (or are at the very least worthy of some attention...). Digital audio is a constantly evolving field.
Sure, if you don't want to improve your digital, stay where you are. You may think it's good, but it can always be better.
There's denial everywhere in the audio world. I used to be a huge skeptic of audiophile power cords on false technical grounds, until I implemented great ones in my system, which make all the difference. I recognized my big mistake and moved on.
Why do you and others make things so personal? This audio, were are not comparing the size of our genitals here.
Did I say things could not be improved?
I am making what I think is an interesting suggestion to the question asked - turns out he already has a DAC anyway.
I don't see how your power cord example is relevant to the discussion. Do you think I am a complete moron?
Fine, but it was not my intention to get into a technical discussion before Another Johnson pulled me into it.No, I don't, and apologies for my tone. I am just frustrated with technical arguments that don't hold up once you actually investigate and do the listening -- and the problem then gets dismissed by others anyway. Yes, in that sense I do think my power cord example is relevant to the discussion.
In my experience, where you do benefit hugely is in using audiophile approaches to IT topics. If you are going to use IT equipment and techniques to listen to music and you care about ultimate sound quality as measured by your enjoyment, involvement and sub-conscious emotional response, there’s no such thing as ‘purely IT’ because every step in the IT chain has an effect on the final sound and if you don’t consider that as an audiophile, you will definitely prefer the sound of analog and with good reason.Once again, packet losses is a purely IT topic. You don't need audiophile solutions for this.