advertisement


Gustard Network Switch... Thoughts?

ricko01 said:
Let it go.... I have.

I have decades of experience with TCP/IP application development (Unix/Linux) in mission critical systems level applications and I used to reply to these types of threads but there is no point.

If someone wants to believe, for example, that we need to reclock a packetized protocol whose signal travels a few metres inside their home then so be it (where in real world, packet [frame] #1234 can travel 1000's of km and take a different route to #1235 and in fact arrive at the end point after #1235 has been received and yet its all reassembled in order)

I can send 10's of terabytes of data from an east coast datacenter to a west coast data center and get essentially zero retries.


Peter
Click to expand...
Next you'll be telling us the data centre doesn't use £1000 Nordost power cables.
 
John Phillips said:
As for noise in particular, I find that modern classical recordings can have extraordinarily noise-free backgrounds via my current kit compared to older recordings. That doesn't trump the quality of the performance, though. Given what I don't hear on superb modern digital audio sources, I suppose I could ask "what network noise is this?"
Click to expand...
I suspect we are talking about different kinds of, and therefore different sonic impacts of, noise. RFI noise doesn't present as a background at all, it pervades the music across all audible frequencies. As others have helpfully suggested, a system can sound fine until you hear it with the problem-that-wasn't-a-problem fixed. It then no longer feels like a problem, it feels like an opportunity! Only the individual can of course then decide if the improvement warrants the outlay. The impact varies hugely from one system to another as you'd expect but I've yet to hear a system in which there wasn't an audible difference between noise-present and noise-mitigated.
 
John Phillips said:
However, until I do notice, there is still no problem to solve. And it isn't part of my version of the hobby to go actively looking for things that annoy me. I won't be persuaded to change that.

As for noise in particular, I find that modern classical recordings can have extraordinarily noise-free backgrounds via my current kit compared to older recordings. That doesn't trump the quality of the performance, though. Given what I don't hear on superb modern digital audio sources, I suppose I could ask "what network noise is this?"
Click to expand...
It's the quiet noise in your ear saying "what can I buy next."
 
John Phillips said:
As for noise in particular, I find that modern classical recordings can have extraordinarily noise-free backgrounds via my current kit compared to older recordings. That doesn't trump the quality of the performance, though. Given what I don't hear on superb modern digital audio sources, I suppose I could ask "what network noise is this?"
Click to expand...
This is not audible as background noise but electrical interference which is harmless to data transmission but can affect clock and D/A stage performance (according to HQPlayer's developer electronics are sensitive to noise that's -140dBFS).
I've posted links to relevant Analog Devices white papers a few times.
 
Can’t believe people are still arguing about this silliness. Would have thought the answer was simple:
If you think the gizmo does something cute to your sounds and you have money to burn - buy one and enjoy.
If you’re not impressed by the whole pantomime and don’t believe a word of the hype - don’t buy one.
 
miktec said:
Can’t believe people are still arguing about this silliness. Would have thought the answer was simple:
If you think the gizmo does something cute to your sounds and you have money to burn - buy one and enjoy.
If you’re not impressed by the whole pantomime and don’t believe a word of the hype - don’t buy one.
Click to expand...
Not much doubt which side of the fence you inhabit, is there!
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Not much doubt which side of the fence you inhabit, is there!
Click to expand...
As you know, I participated in the Insanely long and pointless thread on this topic and read the arguments the ‘pro’ camp put forward (whilst noting how precariously thin the ice under them was becoming)

sorry - pure baloney IMV and a sheer waste of money.
 
miktec said:
As you know, I participated in the Insanely long and pointless thread on this topic
Click to expand...
I wonder if the insanely long and pointless aspect of the thread was mostly down to your participation in it? I regard conversations about football teams as pointless so I do not participate in them. That way everyone is happy. Just sayin’.
 
Fourlegs said:
I wonder if the insanely long and pointless aspect of the thread was mostly down to your participation in it? I regard conversations about football teams as pointless so I do not participate in them. That way everyone is happy. Just sayin’.
Click to expand...
Still not one to miss the opportunity for a personal slur then?

Don’t worry - I’ll leave you to this one ;)
 
AndyU said:
“Q: What is Quantum Science Audio (QSA)?
A: Quantum Science Audio (QSA) is a company that uses proprietary technology to treat their products on a molecular level in order to reduce “bottleneck distortion”.

Fantastic! I want two! Three! You can’t make this stuff up!
Click to expand...
though clearly they have made it up...
  • Metal molecular noise reduction technology provides clearer background noise and more detail
  • Metal molecule alignment technology offers 5 to 30% lower resistance than other brands, with faster transient response
That's clearer noise then.
5 to 30% lower resistance. What is it resisting or apparently not resisting?

Also...

"QSA's Musical Metal Molecule Alignment Technology (MMMAT) drastically increases the charge transfer efficiency between metal and molecules, resulting in an exponential improvement of micro dynamics." WTAF? 😂😂😂😂

They also promise the following:
1. Reduce unwanted noise, interference, and distortion
2. More clarity and detail in the audio.
3. More immersive environment
4. Full range of sounds
5. Easier to distinguish between different instruments and tones.
6. Live feel with every listen
7. Improvement of micro dynamics
8. More vibrant and lively music experience
9. Magical ambiance that will make you want to keep on listening

Why bother with a 10k amp or speakers, just get one of these things, hook it up to the phone and a bluetooth speaker and you should be good to go for that "Live feel with every listen".
 
Fuse bashing is no doubt great fun and also an easy target. But then the same people who take pot shots at fuses also pour scorn on other things where I hear improvements (switches etc) so I attach no merit to what they say about fuses based just on their ‘WTAF’ comments and a few laughing emojii.

I have been lucky in that a friend loaned me half a dozen mid price (think silly money) fuses to try throughout my system. I started by using them in what I considered the best places for any improvement but then got bored and just put them on everything.

I couldn’t hear any difference at all so returned them to my friend with thanks for his generosity in loaning them to me.
 
Oh come on, that is just so preposterous it must make you at least chuckle a little bit. Molecular alignment.
 
the arc said:
Oh come on, that is just so preposterous it must make you at least chuckle a little bit. Molecular alignment.
Click to expand...
I might allow a wry smile I suppose!

I wonder where they might stand in terms of the ASA with all those claims. Even just the first one of “1. Reduce unwanted noise, interference, and distortion” would seem to warrant a letter from the ASA requesting proof but I suppose they can only become involved if someone reports the claims to the ASA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top