Biggest myths in audio that tick you off/General things in audio that tick you off. - Page 31

Pokekevin - I have done comparison for both myself and a friend, foobar is a much cleaner sound. Even when played straight it sounds better, but you will want to install WASAPI plugin to bypass any Windows audio processing. I can't vouch for the sound on a Mac. If you are using Windows it will only take a few minutes to try - foobar does support ALAC playback. Download http://www.foobar2000.org/download, WASAPI component download here.

When I was first getting started with foobar I read in a thread there is a plugin to use itunes as your organizer and foobar as your player, basically the best of both worlds. I know nothing else, if interested you can probably find info.

Going to give it a try tomorrow! Thanks for the help

Here it is, iTunes + Multi-Plugin.

This special release combines the installation the latest versions of iTunes and Multi-Plugin (iTunes 7.0.2 + Multi-Plugin 2.5.1), making it easier than ever to install both.
A great opportunity for new users to try the smartest and easiest-to-use music player for Windows, with the extra functionality provided by Multi-Plugin.
Among the features Multi-Plugin brings to iTunes are skins, Foobar2000 passthrough for better sound quality, greater multimedia keyboard support, and much more:

Fair point. I've seen some of the shootouts from Hi Fi Choice - on the rare occasions I've found the mag in a local bookstore. I like what they do.

I'll preface with putting myself in the objectivists camp....but, the post about electronics burn-in raises a question for me.

Once an amp is "burned-in" past the point of initial quality control failure, what is the mechanism for the eventual failure that will surely occur?

Too many to list, but here are a few. Capacitors have a finite lifetime. They will fail eventually. Repeated heat cold cycles will take their toll on materials. Poor soldering will fail prematurely due to this. Pro amps with fans will wear out.

ICs will fail eventually. There is a phenomenon that occurs within circuits where there is a growth that appears on the metal traces that eventually will lead to failure. I don't remember what it's called nor do I know if it only happens to ICs made under certain processes, but I do know it occurs in computer processors. Probably a higher chance you get struck by lightning ten times before it happens though, but it can happen.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

good answers. My point in asking the question (and maybe it's obvious) is that the changes and deterioration of the circuit elements begins once the component is fabricated. It's performance cannot remain constant. I'm not saying this is burn-in, but that a 1 year old amplifier section does not perform the same as a 10 year old. All of which should be measurable, although possibly not audible.

I do believe that anything audible is easily measured. And I LOL at the notion that the human ear is more sensitive than modern measuring devices.

I spend unhealthy amounts of time looking at other peoples galleries and gear. I guess I just like to drool and judge. I'll be scrolling through their photos and see some really nice equipment that makes me quite envious. The thing that really sets me off is when I see how they are using it! They are proudly showing photos of all their goodies when i happen to see their pre/pro or receiver. I see "Blu-ray player" "All CH stereo". I want to smash my head against the wall! If you are going to use your gear like that, just send it to me...

How can you be sure it wasn't in this mode for some other reason? Perhaps, they were listening to a record or CD and were using all channel stereo to get output from all speakers, then decided to take a pic for their gallery and just never changed the listening mode.

What's wrong with 2-channel modified to multichannel. It's actually more like what you'd hear in live music conditions. Besides which the more front speakers you can get active the better. If the objective is to enjoy the music, it's certainly legit.

"Stereo" is not at all an untouchable standard. It was merely something adopted based on the practical cost restrictions at the time. We humans listen in stereo yes, but the actual sound sources are almost never delivered from two matched direct radiating points in front of you. So why would we consider that artifice to be perfect?

I actually enjoyed using multichannel audio before I discovered PL2x music I don't see how thats a myth though?

Count me in as another one that likes 2ch up-mixed into surroundsound.!

And check out JRiver's JRSS

Or have a look at this article on the subject (even though he is going about it in a funny way) ... http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Watson/watson.htm

Not me. Washes out the imaging.

I'll jump in too. I'll use 5 channel stereo if I am having a party and only listening to music, but its straight 2 channel for me for casual listening. I like to keep things as the recording is done in the first place. I have nothing against changing it around to surround, just prefer it this way. I'm not going to down someone for listening in surround. If its their preference to do so, so be it. No big deal.

If you like this then you definitely need to buy a HK receiver and listen to 2 channel mixed into 5.1 (7.1) surround using the Lexicon Logic7 movie mode. It is surreal and give meaning to the phrase "surround sound".

I'm also guilty. I'll use multichannel stereo if the movie has a mono soundtrack and I'll use it for music if I'm all over the house cleaning, cooking or whatever. But yes, if the soundtrack is discreet 5.1 then no way.

There's a distinction to be made between "all channel stereo" and a matrix/steering surround format such as DPL2 Music.

All channel stereo is basically for if you're throwing a party and want it loud.

I've found that I almost always subjectively prefer 2-channel music in DPL2 Music. The soundstage is deeper and more palpable, and more often than not there's a greater sense of hall space as well. Most of the improvement comes from using a hard center channel, so people who have fundamentally flawed front trios (a center that's different in any way from the mains is flawed) may have a different take. But I can't remember the last time I listened in 2-channel that wasn't on my iPhone or in a car.

What kills me is when they have $10k plus in equipment, then have one of the speakers halfway behind a couch or a chair; or they have one speaker in a corner and one more in the middle of the wall.

Then you had it incorrectly set up. Like in that link I posted above... imaging is very adjustable. You can make it as focused or as spread out as you wish. It's all about how much delay one has on the surround speakers.

Interesting reading:

Driver burn-in:
http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.htm

Vinyl vs CD's
http://www.audioholics.com/education...-vs-cds-part-4

Opinions?


Max

I didn't like Pl 2x till I adjusted width. Awesome now

Not only are the parameters of such DSPs adjustable... but the physical setup of the speaker distances. All AVRs have distance settings for the speakers. How accurately down to a few mm you have that dialled in makes a big difference also. You don't particularly want the sound from the surround speakers reaching you before the sound from the fronts. You can then experiment by increasing the delay from the surrounds and note what it does for imaging.

Just remember that the subwoofer is not always accurate tho. Sometimes I have had my sub 10ft away and the room calibration software sets it to 25ft. Subwoofers always have so many variables to consider and that is why there are numerous threads on just setting up subwoofers.

Sub distance is a different kettle of fish. I'm more talking about 2ch up-mixing to multichannel and how speaker distances settings has a big effect on the results you get.

For example my receiver can change the distance to individual speakers in only 100mm increments. I can help fine-tune that by actually making sure a surround speaker is actually at the same distance, say 1900mm in the receiver settings and physically 1900mm from my ear to the face of the speaker. Then you can go about moving the speaker back another 20 or 30 or 40mm to add some delay. One of the effects on the soundfield from doing so is to keep the soundstage more up front rather than more around you.

There is so much scope to adjust such things. Size of the vocalist, separation between instruments, placement of how wide and/or deep in the soundstage of individual instruments. Focus of size of individual instruments and the total size of the soundstage.

Yes:

1. The burn in debate is absurd
2. Everyone here has a 'burned in system' everyone with a system older than a month that they have done any reasonable amount of listening to has a burned in system whether they like it or not.

My Zaphs are burned in, my Statements are DEFINITELY burned in. My DIY Encore XLS's are burned in. My Polks in the garage are burned in.

The only non-burned in audiophile speaker is one the audiophile never bothered getting out of the box.

They are a game changer. I have had them for over a year now and they still put a big grin on my face. The imaging, sound stage, authority is just amazing. The only commercial offering that I have directly compared them to are some PSB Synchrony 1's. No contest. They image better and simply have more presence.

Sorry but do I know you by another handle on another board?

Sooooo, how much do we need to spend before we're not considered worth belittling for our choices?