2. digital
  3. 192922-142926

BS meter is pegged!

I was reading about a music streamer from a latest Stereophile review and what was posted in the review had my BS meters pegged. I'm from the high tech industry with friends that work at Intel labs and friends that work for ARM computers and they haven't heard of some of these things that were posted. Maybe we can get clarification on these items so they don't sound so far fetched and the specifics posted in the review tainted the reviewers judgement IMO.

1) The review states this piece uses "a cpu that's highly prioritized for audio playback only ensuring highly optimized sound quality". I asked around if somebody is making a specific CPU for audio playback only. You know the Intel/AMD fabs that make cpu's make millions of them at a time, not 10-1000 custom cpus. Even when you look at the ARM cpus, none of them are built specifically for audio. There are millions of servers in the world that do database work for example that no cpu maker is building a specific cpu for database only applications. If there is a small company that are creating this kind of cpu, what kind of OS will run on it? This piece runs Roon so it has to be a somewhat generic cpu with a generic Linux OS running on it.

2) the review states: this unit "it plays live with no other processes running in parallel. as far as we know, unlike any other streamer on the market, this streamers cpu plays directly and live from the kernel without any processing or lag." Meter is pegged now. NO OS will run only 1 process at a time without hundreds of other system processes running in parallel or in the background. Using Unix/Linux, the OS is always in a flux state moving data around in its caches, in and out of memory, doing read a head, swapping, paging, etc... And these system processes are a good thing to keep the system stable and running efficiently. 

3) this piece uses "new and faster enhanced memory". Meter is pegged again. During the last 2 decades using Linux servers and over 2 decades before that using Sun and IBM UNIX servers, I have never had the option of buying enhanced memory. I made a couple of calls and asked if they had any enhanced memory that they could sell me and they had no clue what I was talking about. Everybody can get fast memory but "enhanced"?

4) "the whole device plays 1 song directly from RAM". All linux OSs do this, you cannot go from any cache or ssd/hdd directly out of the computer, the data has to be read into ram 1st.If the system is paging, this data might be deleted from RAM and then have to reread into RAM before sending to a dac. I used many large PCIE cache cards to hold large amounts of data (used it as a database cache) but that cached data had to be moved from this fast cache to ram before sending out to the dac.

Most of the time, audio reviewers get psyched up when they hear new acronyms or a magical cpu or enhanced memory that taints their judgement. For example, this reviewer at the end stated "never before have I reviewed a stand-alone streamer/server so accomplished in the hardware department". 

Maybe somebody could clarify some of this up for me/us in the audiophile community.

p05129
p05129 OP
516 posts
 

I was a network guy for a short time putting in a token ring/ethernet/appletalk networks 35 years ago and I haven’t heard any big changes in sq when getting these so called audiophile switches. If I want the quietest node, I’d use fiber. 
I also think usb sounds bad even when you apply thousands of dollars of tweaks, but I do hear differences in cables.

squared80's avatar
squared80
140 posts
 

These are the same people who claim expensive cables sound different and better than coat hangers. They don't. Snake oil marketing, and people buy it. Willful ignorance. 

russbutton's avatar
russbutton
442 posts
 

All of these exotic streamers are just mini PCs running Linux and somebodyʻs custom front end.   P.T. Barnum was right.

p05129 OP
516 posts
 

Squared80-I hear differences in cables, whether they are cheap crappy cables to the most expensive. Most cable naysayers have never heard the more expensive cables themselves but they find it easier to jump on the naysayer bandwagon, for example the audiophools website ANA. Since I have demoed the Valhalla’s down to the down to earth $1000 cables in my system, and have been with other audiophiles demoing cables, if you have a resolving system and a decent set of ears, you will hear differences. I never think that the most expensive cables themselves sound the best or they are worth the cost over a different cable, but I as well as my audiophile friends do hear differences in cables. 
In the past I brought in a $100 cable that a bunch of cable naysayers claimed is a giant killer. After several weeks of burn-in, this cable was POS and was sent back. Maybe this cable sounded better than the free in the box cables you get when you buy a piece, but compared to my $1000 cable, it was a piece of sh$t.

moto_man
381 posts
 

It's called "selling the sizzle."  In this day and age, lesser known manufacturers must find something that on paper distinguishes their generic server from the rest of the generic servers.  So they come up with techno-nonsense that usually can't be proven or disproven.  What is a "CPU that is highly prioritized for audio?"  Probably the same CPU as always with maybe a BIOS tweak.  My favorite example is the Shunmook record clamp, made from magical ebony soaked in the mysterious swamps of Africa that is supposed to have magical properties when paying your vinyl. Uh-huh.  It's a record clamp.  It's made of ebony.  Cost of Manufacture:  let's be generous . . . $200.  Retail: $4000.00+. So how does a manufacturer convince someone to pay that kind of money for an ebony record clamp? It's not just "ebony" like the poor folk can get.  It's the magical African swamp ebony.  There is the nonsensical "sizzle."  What about MIT's "poles of articulation"?  The more poles of articulation, the more expensive the cables.  More BS, even though MIT cables are typically good cables.  Time to think critically about the sizzle.  Maybe this server does sound better.  But it is surely not because of the marketing sizzle fed to us by reviewers who are willing to pass it along.

More to discover