XXHighEnd

Got back from the gym this morning, switched the PC on and had a quick look at what was happening on the XX forum. Saw a single post by Peter asking people not to post about 'voodoo'. Seemed totally strange to me. Had some breakfast and cleaned up. Came back and there was an exchange between Peter, Nick and Paul, with a short comment by Joachim at the end. It was then obvious that Paul had posted something that Peter didn't appreciate. And now, the whole 'voodoo' thread has been deleted.

What's going on guys? Well actually maybe this doesn't matter - the thread has been deleted so maybe Peter just wants to move on.

But it leaves me in a difficult position because I posted about Nick's mods a short while ago and what I thought about them. Peter's original post in the voodoo thread mentioned something about not posting your thoughts on anything that comes across as 'voodoo', even if you finish it with "I have no commercial interest in this". Oops!!! I've done this sort of thing for as long as I can remember. Haha... most of it when I've been talking about Phasure products on various other forums.

Peter, or anyone else, I want to be a 'good citizen'. Can you let me know where I may have over-stepped the mark so that I can avoid doing so in the future?

Cheers, Mani.

Ended up with Joachim's remark that it looked like a Kindergarten. And I agree. Contributed to that myself. And especially when that starts to happen it's no(t) good.

Peter

Understood - we can always rely on Joachim to be the sound of reason in any discussion.

But you didn't answer my question:


I'm serious, I'd like an answer because this matters very much to me. Maybe via PM if it's more appropriate?

Mani.

I did not have time to read the last post from Joachim before the conversation about voodoo disappeared. However I have to say that in my opinion it's healthy to discuss all the issues openly, even if they produce some friction.
We are here to talk about whether what we hear is pleasant or not, and, in any case, how to improve it. Some use the technical means to measure and others, like me, use only their ears. With this in mind I have to say that I've never read in this forum anything that goes against the interests of Peter. So, let me humbly recommend calm.

Juan

Hi Peter,

Mani and Paul are listening to a pure Phasure/BertD  audio chain   :) and both are raving over the amazing SQ with a “clock” modified PC (Original built to “Phasure” guidelines/spec’s) 

 :) Both wrote in a favourable intention for this FORUM their impressions of the “new” improved SQ.  :)

I trust Mani’s and Paul’s ears in the same way I trust yours  and to make it short, we WANT to have the same spectacular SQ.

Travel arrangements with a modified PC .................. .

Joachim

When I was young and spending a lot of time in reading some general informations about high fidelity, I remember that "the source" was always of the upmost importance. If I recall correctly, they were often suggesting that for a starting budget, at least half of it should be spent on the source. Then with time, one would progressively upgrade the rest of the audio chain until reaching the loudspeakers.

Now I read the almost exact contrary, because it is said that the speakers are the components that change the sound the most.

But if from the start the signal is not properly treated, it seems to me that a better speaker will just let the listerner hear all the flaws from uphill...

The problem is that the "source" is a computer. A computer was not really designed with "hi-fi" in mind. It can be so noisy as compared to any other audio component that most of what we try is to "silent" it, by attempting to remove it, even if most of the time we try to "tame" it (you can put any other title to this, like "filter" or else). By "it" I mean "noise".

But if, from the start, the computer is silent and I am obviously not talking about the sound of a fan, it seems that eliminating the obvious from the start would help a lot.

Eliminating all switching power supplies from everywhere, isolating different parts of the computer (maybe a "modular" PC without a big motherboard and a ton of DC to DC components), better quality components, better clocks, better this and that... Would help ?

I do not understand all of the money interest aspects of it, but I certainly wish that the cooperation that has taken place here will still prevail over other aspects of things. Of course, I am not into any of this, but I sure would appreciate that any new discovery, may it be empirical or science based, can be of interest for all of us no ?

I am not trying to criticize anyone here, but I know that in some situations, it is important to sometime change our angle of vision to bave a better perception of the "whole".

Peter has offered us so many wonderful things and I will never be able to express all my gratitude for what I hear today. I still have a lot to do here to attain a certain level of SQ, but I also am open to new discoveries and... Well yes, as long as it is affordable and durable.

For now, my final thought is that a computer does not have the same lifespan when compared to a "hi-fi" component. That says a lot about the quality of the components inside a computer. The day a computer will have at least half of the lifespan of any audiophile component, I will be ready to invest a more important amount of money in this "source".

In the meantime, we also have to take in account the distribution, upgrade and repair network...

Regards,

Alain

Great post Alain, I agree with your observations

Regards,
Juan

Thanks Juan :) With all the great minds in "our" forum, I have to work hard when I write :)

Alain

Peter,

Not a good day yesterday. My personal thanks to those who called for sense. I agree with your decision to remove the Voodoo post Peter, it was getting out of hand fuelled by some  mutual misunderstandings which is never good.
Having reflected carefully I think there are a few points that the you as the forum owner and forum community need to consider.

IMHO the forum has changed end evolved over the years. Initially it was very much a community of interest with your software development at its core. Members feeding back on sound quality and actively shared experiences on all other aspects of the replay chain. Discussions roamed without limitation on third party products (PCs PC components, DACs, preamplifiers, amplifiers, speakers, cables). Some were also posting DIY activity, amps, PC tweaks etc. Leading edge and all focused on progress with respect to sound quality wherever it was to be found (and looking back a few places where it wasn’t to be found haha).

Over the years you have developed you replay chain;  PC, DAC, Active Speakers. Things have changed which is fine and sound quality has certainly move on spectacularly. The forum is now more closely aligned with your products Peter, and this means that member developments and third party products are becoming more difficult to discuss. This is probably inevitable nothing stays the same.
As a side point I want to say that posts made by other people regarding my server have been posted because they feel the need to discuss what the server does. This is their decision to do this no voodoo / marketing intention. My personal view is that I am not surprised they feel that the experience is relevant to the forum community but understand why this feels uncomfortable.  I hope you have noticed that since I said that I would develop the server as a product I have made only 3 or so very short posts on the Chronos despite being personally very excited and wanting to discuss it. If discussion of the Chronos is to be banned then the discussion can more to other forums, it does seem a shame however if this happens, this forum has the reputation of leading the way in terms of innovation and SQ developments.
 
I have no intention of breaching the rules of acceptable conduct here, I recognise that this is your back yard we play in. However as /I mentioned above now that you have a complete replay chain it is becoming difficult to discuss some developments. If rules are not to be broken we need to understand them so it would be very helpful for all members to have a policy stated on posting about potentially completing developments / products.  Other forums out there have rules on this and in some cases operate commercial areas to conduct such discussions.

All this is said with upmost respect and good intentions.

Regards,
Nick.

Hey Nick,

With a great thanks for this post I think I have to say that you (all) have it upside down. But it takes some sensors to grasp it and only you and me, plus I'm sure Paul and Mani can have those sensors. So look :

It has not been me anywhere who has been holding back "external" developments. So, no external emails and only forum posts about it. The rubbish from yesterday ? even that can be counted in. What am I saying ? ... quote me for the suggestions you just handed. I'm pretty sure you won't find any. So what seems to be happening really ?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that "you guys" are so much afraid of putting up a strange act yourself that the sense got out of it.
So, true, you only posted a few things about your great stuff (I'm sure) but now tell me why. To me it seems that you are so afraid of a. that it will not be allowed and maybe b. especially that I will have remarks you may not like (so yes, if I have remarks I won't hold back ;)) ... that the whole thing has become a completely illogical act. Yours; not mine that I recall.

I guess you think that I am joking or something when I ask you to lay out what this is (technically) all about. I did that before and did that twice yesterday. Questions from others also remain unanswered and - just saying - might you prefer to deal with that by PM only, that this is behind my back and the worse. Please notice, I am not suggesting this, but not answering simple questions looks strange to begin with.

I just said the same as in the beginning in this post - you apparently don't know how to deal with this because you expect all to be not so much allowed. And so again, quote me.

Also do notice that in addition to the above, there's now posts from Mani and Paul. They too are in defense mode in advance. Why ? because they post instead of you.
Seriously, that doesn't make sense to me. And for Paul, no, it also doesn't make sense that when there is a topic from Mani that he must create a new topic again. It all comes across as way over done, not rational and ... springing from you yourself remaining quiet.
Please recall that I said yesterday twice that you must lay out a couple of things to have a more normal act and that by now as many times you do not respond to that in particular. And so again the "why ??".
I suppose you do not believe me ...

Meanwhile I hope that you, but also others, have twisted this so much around that it by now is my strange policies or the lack of them or whatever. Crazy stuff.

Lastly, and just saying because I am pretty sure it is a lot about that, the whole act as it has been so far, will be like that because you won't be able to cope with my remarks as how you envision them. And *that* will be because you will have some difficulties with the technical merits of it and can only say that listening tells all. This is fine, if you only know that it is good that people may rely on ears but I do not. Not anyone's. Only my own. And I think I cannot help it much that I know a few things about the whole lot and that I *thus* will be able to ask questions which maybe will remain unanswered.

And I never said that it will be wrong whatever it is you have accomplished.


There's one thing that will have made you "weak in your shoes" as how we say it over here - I can't say that I am positive about your development and can only say that I am neutral on it. So this is what I told in the forum and this is because people ask me. Well, I know nothing ...
And it was in that particular post too that I asked.
But Nick, this is the result of putting this forward in this forum which is from all of us (and a bit lead by me) with the emphasis on your suggestion (but maybe also my own) at first that it will be again some kind of co-operation.

Regarding this, but now merely to show you that I never changed a bit, nor implied "(forum) rules" have been changed :
You, and every body knows that I mostly try to be protective for tremendous amounts of wasted $ just because something thinks he has good ears for the day. The examples of this are numerous over the years and at occasions it happened that I spent the $ instead or time at least to find out the real merits (with btw as I recall an outcome of zereo for the better, no matter what the subject has been). Nothing changed.
Yes, your attitude did. So please think about that, OK ?

Good to be on speaking terms, but it really is your turn now. Said the same yesterday but maybe you now trust my honesty on this ?

Best regards and heads up !
Peter

Oh, here :
Chronos PC (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=3130.msg34358#msg34358)

No single reason that I see not to have that in there.

Peter

No question that me, and everyone on this forum totally trusts your honesty on this and everything Peter.