Audioholics vs Synergistic Research

[POV]

1 hour ago, Old Man Rubber said:

 

merely a few thousand dollars missing from their bank accounts they may well have wasted on orgone energy crystals or magical boxes of dirt or this thing whatever the hell it is supposed to do.

 

 

 

This is classic, thanks for sharing I laughed so hard I cried when I read the below comment.  I'm at the office just now so i can't listen to my home system.  it's killing me not knowing if have more 'thereness or hereness'  

 

"With a setup comprised of two H2A and two H2B Harmonizers (all running on batteries and mounted on stands at the suggested positions within the room) and the appropriate set of Magic Stones and four Blue Diamonds (also placed at the suggested locations within the room—approximately $5k for complete setup as used here)… simply put, not more thereness, but a startling sense of hereness. One is not so much transported to where the music was (a thereness like you are there), but the music is placed here out into the room… it is now here with you."

[ray4410]

7 minutes ago, POV said:

 

This is classic, thanks for sharing I laughed so hard I cried when I read the below comment.  I'm at the office just now so i can't listen to my home system.  it's killing me not knowing if have more 'thereness or hereness'  

 

"With a setup comprised of two H2A and two H2B Harmonizers (all running on batteries and mounted on stands at the suggested positions within the room) and the appropriate set of Magic Stones and four Blue Diamonds (also placed at the suggested locations within the room—approximately $5k for complete setup as used here)… simply put, not more thereness, but a startling sense of hereness. One is not so much transported to where the music was (a thereness like you are there), but the music is placed here out into the room… it is now here with you."

must be some good dope he's smoking "it is now here with you"

[muon*]

Someone might need a spare.

 

[POV]

16 hours ago, Assisi said:

You say in a previous post

“Facts are important”.

Where are your facts to prove or support your position?  Do you have any experience of "audiophile ethernet" ?

 

If not, when you have time to reflect you may find it a satisfying listening experience to experience a system with a serious implementation of an audio quality network and switches etc.  For some of us with a perspective to explore it is the new frontier with significant SQ benefits.  I am sure that you will be surprised at the outcome if you do explore.

 

 

 

Hi John - I definitely understand the point you are making.  I do however think it can be very challenging for those of us with technical backgrounds to rationalise the subjective experiences folks report with our understanding of conventional electrical theory.   I have spent many years working in the electrical and network design sphere, and I cannot point to any technical explanation for what people are reporting in terms of audible fidelity improvements from ethernet cables. 

 

Note, I am not disputing that people believe they are hearing an improvement, nor am I making any categoric statements about the veracity of these subjective experiences.  Rather I am curious as to what if anything may be happening within the circuit to cause this unlikely phenomena.

 

To your question re facts,  I think it's reasonable for the onus to be on the manufacturers making claims about the audio fidelity improvements from their products, particularly where what they are claiming flys in the face of conventional theory, and the vast amount of peer reviewed papers that exist.

 

What I would love to see is forums such as this remaining open to discuss such issues in respectful and rational manner, and I fully accept this requires both sides of any debate being open and understanding that some folks will place a higher value on measurement based analysis, whilst other will place a higher value on experiential listening.  I remain convinced that all can co-exist and treat each other with respect.

[Steffen]

1 hour ago, POV said:

 

This is classic, thanks for sharing I laughed so hard I cried when I read the below comment.  I'm at the office just now so i can't listen to my home system.  it's killing me not knowing if have more 'thereness or hereness'  

 

The tricky part is choosing the correct number of Blue Suns, otherwise you won’t know whether you’re coming or going…

[POV]

16 minutes ago, Steffen said:

 

The tricky part is choosing the correct number of Blue Suns, otherwise you won’t know whether you’re coming or going…

 

Blue diamonds, magic stones, and magic boxes.  Sounds like something from an Enid Blyton story from when I was a kid 

[tripitaka]

1 hour ago, POV said:

 

Hi John - I definitely understand the point you are making.  I do however think it can be very challenging for those of us with technical backgrounds to rationalise the subjective experiences folks report with our understanding of conventional electrical theory.   I have spent many years working in the electrical and network design sphere, and I cannot point to any technical explanation for what people are reporting in terms of audible fidelity improvements from ethernet cables. 

 

Note, I am not disputing that people believe they are hearing an improvement, nor am I making any categoric statements about the veracity of these subjective experiences.  Rather I am curious as to what if anything may be happening within the circuit to cause this unlikely phenomena.

 

To your question re facts,  I think it's reasonable for the onus to be on the manufacturers making claims about the audio fidelity improvements from their products, particularly where what they are claiming flys in the face of conventional theory, and the vast amount of peer reviewed papers that exist.

 

What I would love to see is forums such as this remaining open to discuss such issues in respectful and rational manner, and I fully accept this requires both sides of any debate being open and understanding that some folks will place a higher value on measurement based analysis, whilst other will place a higher value on experiential listening.  I remain convinced that all can co-exist and treat each other with respect.

 

Agree with all that.

In physics there is the saying 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'.  In this context, an 'extraordinary' claim is one which appears to require a mechanism beyond what is currently understood and accepted within the field.  This doesn't make the claim wrong, but it is not a serious claim in the absence of extraordinary evidence.

[Ittaku]

3 minutes ago, tripitaka said:

In physics there is the saying 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'.  In this context, an 'extraordinary' claim is one which appears to require a mechanism beyond what is currently understood and accepted within the field.  This doesn't make the claim wrong, but it is not a serious claim in the absence of extraordinary evidence.

Nor is it even a claim if they don't even attempt to publish their theories in a respectable journal where they'd be open to the scrutiny of peer review - but of course they'd never do that as they're well aware themselves they'd never get published with their laughable claims, so instead they publish their pseudoscience explanations on their marketing material, making it look like it's a scientific publication. That there is no regulatory body whatsoever for any of these claims to hold them accountable, and that the hifi review magazines and websites are complicit in accepting and even promoting their claims (thanks to advertising revenue) means we are - for the time being - screwed.

[075Congo]

Looking in the Classifieds at a SACD player listed at $12000 . RRP would have to be $40K+. If you afford to drop that much on a single component I'm sure the cost of Blue Diamonds or a $9000 set of Interconnects would be of no consequence. I bought an Audio Magic CE Generator for $150 USD......pretty to look at but does sweet..al!

[andyr]

4 hours ago, POV said:

Hi John - I definitely understand the point you are making.  I do however think it can be very challenging for those of us with technical backgrounds to rationalise the subjective experiences folks report with our understanding of conventional electrical theory.   I have spent many years working in the electrical and network design sphere, and I cannot point to any technical explanation for what people are reporting, in terms of audible fidelity improvements from ethernet cables. 

 

Note, I am not disputing that people believe they are hearing an improvement, nor am I making any categoric statements about the veracity of these subjective experiences.  Rather I am curious as to what if anything may be happening within the circuit to cause this unlikely phenomena.

 

To your question re facts,  I think it's reasonable for the onus to be on the manufacturers making claims about the audio fidelity improvements from their products, particularly where what they are claiming flies in the face of conventional theory, and the vast amount of peer reviewed papers that exist.

 

What I would love to see is forums such as this remaining open to discuss such issues in respectful and rational manner, and I fully accept this requires both sides of any debate being open and understanding that some folks will place a higher value on measurement based analysis, whilst other will place a higher value on experiential listening.  I remain convinced that all can co-exist and treat each other with respect.

 

I'm trying to be 'open', POV and do not wish to attack you - but your statement (which I have put into red text) appears to me to be the same as what electronic engineers were saying in the late 80s, that "all CD players must sound the same - as we're dealing with a string of bits now ... not an analogue groove"!  

 

Andy

 

[MLXXX]

10 minutes ago, andyr said:

 

I'm trying to be 'open', POV and do not wish to attack you - but your statement (which I have put into red text) appears to me to be the same as what electronic engineers were saying in the late 80s, that "all CD players must sound the same - as we're dealing with a string of bits now ... not an analogue groove"!  

 

Andy

 

I don't think they would have said exactly the same or at least they shouldn't have; because a CD player incorporates a DAC and that certainly did have different filtering design approaches available.  At the CD sample rate of 44.1kHz not all conversions sound the same, even today.

 

Mind you the differences would have been quite subtle compared with differences in the analogue domain (e.g. in the cassette decks or open reel machines in use by consumers at the time). 

[Ittaku]

50 minutes ago, 075Congo said:

Looking in the Classifieds at a SACD player listed at $12000 . RRP would have to be $40K+. If you afford to drop that much on a single component I'm sure the cost of Blue Diamonds or a $9000 set of Interconnects would be of no consequence. I bought an Audio Magic CE Generator for $150 USD......pretty to look at but does sweet..al!

Those prices are of no consequence to me, but I use a $15 USB and a $10 ethernet cable on my $250k system since they make no difference. I refuse to support snake oil products "just because I can afford them".

[andyr]

19 minutes ago, MLXXX said:

I don't think they would have said exactly the same or at least they shouldn't have; because a CD player incorporates a DAC and that certainly did have different filtering design approaches available.  At the CD sample rate of 44.1kHz not all conversions sound the same, even today.

 

Mind you the differences would have been quite subtle compared with differences in the analogue domain (e.g. in the cassette decks or open reel machines in use by consumers at the time). 

 

Agreed, MLXXX - if they fancied themselves as thinking people ... they shouldn't have made those claims.

 

But then ... us (non-engineer) punters didn't know they were spouting BS - now, we do!.    After all, we now know even CD transports (no DAC involved) sound different!  But because of the digital engineers' mindset - "perfect sound forever ... because it's a digital bit stream" - it took a while before engineers who had been working in the analogue (TT) space got into designing CD transports.

 

Their innovations improved CD playback.  

 

Andy

 

[Ittaku]

To be fair I don't think it was the engineers that said perfect sound forever, it was Sony and Philips' marketing divisions... Certainly the data itself doesn't deteriorate or wear out over time, but that's all.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Ittaku

[MLXXX]

2 minutes ago, andyr said:

After all, we now know even CD transports (no DAC involved) sound different! 

With a smeared CD perhaps where error correction has to work overtime, or with a very cheap transport clock well below normal performance, leading to excessive jitter (and where the DAC used lacks the capacity to reclock).

 

[Guest Old Man Rubber]

5 minutes ago, MLXXX said:

With a smeared CD perhaps where error correction has to work overtime, or with a very cheap transport clock well below normal performance, leading to excessive jitter (and where the DAC used lacks the capacity to reclock).

 

Cache memory fixed all this stuff a long time ago.  I don't know where the subjective audio crew decided that jitter was anything to worry about post 1988 but I always put it down to the bearded wonders at Stereophile collectively losing their minds once the digital age made all their chin stroking pontifications worthless.

 

It does seem like a strong strain of those heady days has been extended into streaming music where it was never a problem.  I have to admit to finding the idea fascinating that a magazine with a reputation like Stereophile would continue to spout nonsense in the face of reality but they're still at it today.

 

You'll have to excuse me while I go digging in my bottom drawer for an Eberhard Faber Design Art Marker No. 255. 

[MLXXX]

6 minutes ago, Old Man Rubber said:

Cache memory fixed all this stuff a long time ago.

I was giving the benefit of doubt and allowing for very crude design.

 

Anyway there's a danger this thread is dissolving into general discussion. We probably should focus on the main topic!

[POV]

1 hour ago, andyr said:

 

I'm trying to be 'open', POV and do not wish to attack you - but your statement (which I have put into red text) appears to me to be the same as what electronic engineers were saying in the late 80s, that "all CD players must sound the same - as we're dealing with a string of bits now ... not an analogue groove"!  

 

Andy

 

Hi Andy, I’m not really sure who you are referring to or what they said so it’s difficult to comment.  
 

All I will say is that if you read my post again I haven’t used the word must at all, and in the section you have highlighted all I said was “I cannot point to any technical explanation”.  This doesn’t preclude there being one and if one exists I’m keen to understand it!  In fact in the next paragraph after your red section I made it clear that I wasn’t making any categoric statements about the veracity of people reported subjective experience.

 

 

 

[Guest Old Man Rubber]

21 minutes ago, MLXXX said:

I was giving the benefit of doubt and allowing for very crude design.

 

Anyway there's a danger this thread is dissolving into general discussion. We probably should focus on the main topic!

True and the Synergistic online store has many other fine products touting unverifiable claims that are clearly BS.

 

Like this garbage.  Who knew bass had "weight" and that lifting the speaker cable off the axminster would stop it dragging its flabby rear across the floor like a labrador with worms? 

https://www.synergisticresearch.com/accessories/cable-risers/

[Assisi]

8 hours ago, POV said:

 

Hi John - I definitely understand the point you are making.  I do however think it can be very challenging for those of us with technical backgrounds to rationalise the subjective experiences folks report with our understanding of conventional electrical theory.   I have spent many years working in the electrical and network design sphere, and I cannot point to any technical explanation for what people are reporting in terms of audible fidelity improvements from ethernet cables. 

 

Note, I am not disputing that people believe they are hearing an improvement, nor am I making any categoric statements about the veracity of these subjective experiences.  Rather I am curious as to what if anything may be happening within the circuit to cause this unlikely phenomena.

 

To your question re facts,  I think it's reasonable for the onus to be on the manufacturers making claims about the audio fidelity improvements from their products, particularly where what they are claiming flys in the face of conventional theory, and the vast amount of peer reviewed papers that exist.

 

What I would love to see is forums such as this remaining open to discuss such issues in respectful and rational manner, and I fully accept this requires both sides of any debate being open and understanding that some folks will place a higher value on measurement based analysis, whilst other will place a higher value on experiential listening.  I remain convinced that all can co-exist and treat each other with respect.

I have been a way for the day having my hearing tested and so much has been said on this thread.  My hearing is relativity the same as this time last year.  I wasn't sure which post to respond to so it was this one.

 

The matter of the benefit or otherwise of networks, Ethernet and switches etc in the audio context is definitely disputed and has been so for a time on all or most Audio forums and blogs.  Maybe not the "whatsbestforum" based upon the very little I have read on that forum.  The posters there seem to be aficionados.  As well posters who post on that forum that say something that is not coming from their own experience are cautioned.  Once I dared to post on the ROON Forum about a benefit that I perceived from a new NBN Router.  I am still licking my wounds from that encounter.  Never again on ROON. Some posters play it seriously tough.

 

The dispute re Ethernet seems to me to be no different to other topics in audio land such as power cables and isolation strategies for example.  To me the criticism of topics about the benefits of some things in the main tend to come from posters who come from a technical expertise in the subject but with no or little actual experience in the audio context.  It may even be a threat to their technical and or engineering training.  I do not know.  As I have not technical knowledge, I have nothing to prevent me from exploring the possibilities.  I am not overly interested jitter etc.  How does it sound is all that is important to me.

 

There are those who accept the perception of the benefits and those who deny.  That doesn’t mean that criticisms are not justified.  Everything has to be thoroughly questioned as to what is happening and why? 

 

I tend not any more to respond to the deniers as I might have done once.  I responded to the post from @Old Man Rubber      

As I considered the post to be and still do an unnecessary rant that to me served no useful purpose in achieving a balanced dialogue on the topic.  The poster was convinced he is right and everyone else who is of another perspective is just plain wrong.  The rant has continued.  Well for me, the world is not like that.  I am only on SNA to learn and improve my experiences and I hope others also may learn and benefit from my experience.  I definitely do not need to be saved for my own folly.

 

There have been many posts over time from forum members who have been categorically opposed to the benefits of audio quality Ethernet.  How many networking experts have tried audio switches or cables.?  Have they listened to a system that has an Audio network setup?  I know that @BugPowderDust  Craig    has as he a visited me awhile back.  It is time for another visit as the visit rules have changed. 

 

An acquaintance of mine owns and manages a network company.  Awhile ago he visited an Audio shop.  It was suggested that he listen to a Silent Angel N8 switch.  He said no as it would not be a benefit.  Nevertheless, he did listen and he left the shop with not one but two N8s.  He has now gone seriously further with his implementation of Audio Ethernet.  He is on a proverbial mission.

 

The companies that make the components do not have to provide to me the proof or measurements of the performance their products.  To me it is all about the listening.  As well I am in fortunate position that I mostly can borrow, compare and return bits if necessary.  When I cannot borrow my intuition hasn’t significantly let me down yet.

 

All you deniers just suck it up and l have a listen.  You may be surprised.

 

John

 

Edited October 25, 2021 by Assisi

[andyr]

Great post, John!  ( @Assisi ).

 

If I seriously listened to "Internet music" ... I would have to take up your suggestion of acquiring a "Silent Angel N8 switch".  But "Internet music" - ie. radio - for me is background listening; my serious listening is to vinyl - so an Internet switch is irrelevant to this.

 

Andy

 

[MLXXX]

1 hour ago, Old Man Rubber said:

True and the Synergistic online store has many other fine products touting unverifiable claims that are clearly BS.

 

Like this garbage.  Who knew bass had "weight" and that lifting the speaker cable off the axminster would stop it dragging its flabby rear across the floor like a labrador with worms? 

https://www.synergisticresearch.com/accessories/cable-risers/

 

I'm afraid I have to agree.

 

I don't like to criticise just based on wording of marketing but the language used in this case  is so devoid of technical meaning, I have to reject it outright. This sentence for example makes no technical sense at all:  "Ultimately aluminum was chosen for its musicality, neutral tonal balance, low-frequency weight, and high-frequency air."

 

And yet the video linked to in post 1 of this thread shows a spokesman with a straight face who invites objective measurements, and even audio recordings [at 24/96].

 

It is hard to reconcile the reasonable appearing personality projected in the video with the nonsensical wording used in descriptions of the products.

[Esoterica]

9 hours ago, ray4410 said:

must be some good dope he's smoking "it is now here with you"

You jest, but I'd hazard a guess that smoking a doob or partaking in some other mind-altering substances, would be a far cheaper way to enhance the music.

[MLXXX]

2 hours ago, Assisi said:

All you deniers just suck it up and l have a listen.  You may be surprised.

 

I spend my time listening to music, not swapping and auditioning interconnects and routers or switches. 

 

My various devices cache the incoming streams, and then clock out the cache. It makes no difference to the quality of the sound I hear whether the device I'm using accesses the internet through NBN broadband cable and then ethernet or router wi-fi; or uses 4G. (It's very rare for a cache to run dry.  If it does, there is a pause until the cache re-acquires a healthy-sized buffer of error-corrected data.  Clocking out of cached data then resumes.)  A cache running dry will not arise because of any congestion in my home network, but may arise because of congestion further upstream.

 

(I can watch 4K Netflix streaming at around 12Mbps without any apparent glitches in the video, or discontinuities in the audio.  I can watch YouTube videos using computer RAM to cache the stream. The extent of the cache for the YouTube file can be seen on the displayed timeline at the bottom of the video. Of course it is my pc [or TV set] that clocks out the video and the audio, not the incoming stream.  The incoming stream is merely a source of data, which is error checked, and in ample supply to keep replenishing the relevant cache.)

 

Where I do find objection to the sound quality of an audio stream is in relation to limited bitrates  and/or inefficient codecs.  DAB+ radio in Australia is a great disappointment to me in that the bitrate used for the actual audio in the DAB+ transmissions is typically well below 100kbps (after overheads for error correction and pad data are deducted). I find artefacts in the HE-ACC audio codec distracting.

 

The same problem exists with the internet streamed versions of many, if not most, radio stations.

 

My attention on the technical side is devoted to seeking out streamed music that is at a reasonably high bitrate for the codec involved. For example, I can get by on 128kbps AAC , and have no complaint with 256kbps AAC. 

Edited October 25, 2021 by MLXXX

[Southerly]

50 minutes ago, Esoterica said:

You jest, but I'd hazard a guess that smoking a doob or partaking in some other mind-altering substances, would be a far cheaper way to enhance the music.

Absolutely spot on, I wish Ambient music  was around in the 70s' then I could have soared between galaxies and never come back. It's absolutely true that sativa enhances music and indica put's you to sleep - this is gospel and heretics will not be tolerated.