Windows vs Linux: round 2 (Off Topic)

by PeterSt. , Netherlands, Monday, August 13, 2007, 12:10 (6098 days ago) @ Eddie
edited by unknown, Monday, August 13, 2007, 12:18

Hi Eddie,

As GC so beautifully expressed it, we had a most fruitful meeting; no matter points for A or B, I could do *much* with what I heard.

Since we were all there in the atmosphere of learning, and what I always provoce(d), I see that you handed out some points anyway, and since you did it with arguments, please allow me to disagree with the arguments here and there. So, only that, nothing about points.

I caNot be sure how (un)prepared this all was, and as you know I was there by kind of accident. Also, I didn't capture the first 1.5 or so hour.
What *I* noticed, is that you were comparing apples and oranges so much (hence explicit as I perceived it) that I really had to ask the question : What are you comparing here ? The answer, luckily, was the only answer that could have been logically given in this situation : Nothing.
So, what happened further, was just interesting. To me, very interesting.

A first thing, that you could not know, was that the things I heard, were already on the phasure forum, from just a few hours before ( http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=159.0 ). Now, although we discussed that in between the lines, it wasn't a subject really, because "you" as the majority put your attentions to somewhere else. But let us not forget that what you call more deep bass and more highs (on Brutus), I called a far too saturated sound with over expressed highs. Lacking of mid all over.
You sure remember the (to my ears) really unbearable women singers and saxophone (of which we could not even guess that it was a sax). This was with Brutus, and not with XXHighEnd (the sax remained a problem, but far far less). You, and maybe others too, went for low lows and high highs. I go for less hurting ears ...

To some extend it wasn't even a subject, because Klaus could prove a 200% different world by leaving out the Django. And I say it in advance ... which we did not try (nor could we) with GC. And still ... it wasn't about comparing, it was about learning. Because of that, again we didn't even discuss what we were hearing, but if *I* am allowed to judge afterwards :
Without Django (to my subjective ears) nothing was right again. You may scream about better transients, and similar to more deep bass and higher highs ... I don't know what to do with that if the balance has (completely !) gone. Without the Django, Brutus showed *no* bass, except for the subwoofer hunking at a lower end. An in fact impossible situation of which I wouldn't even know where to begin thinking what had happened.

Both situations were very wrong to my ears, and somehow with reversed results : with Django too much saturation and too much treble, and without Django no bass but sub low, and a disappeared livelyness because of ? I don't know.

With GC the story was different;

Before I came in you were listening to the TwinDAC+ over the USB connection.
True, the comparison would be more honest (the Brutus laptop couldn't do otherwise) but any judging as such is out of order then. The USB connection is not the best for the TwinDAC+, and under way it converts to SPDIF. A matter of preparation, but I don't think it all was about that. But now stop judging ! grab a beer instead and have an interesting day.

Because of convenience on the Brutus side you started to use SPDIF with GC anyway (a switch now could switch players), and this time we were comparing apples and oranges explicitly.
One has more punch such, the other distorts the voice more so, and personally I really don't know what to do with this. Personally ? nobody should even want to judge, if things are to be taken seriously.

Anyway, again referring to my findings a few hours earlier on phasure.com, I could exactly hear what was going on / wrong with GC, with the nice conveniency of Brutus not performing at all in the same area. Apparently we had found a nice piece of music to test "these" things.
Bert got hold of the 0.9d version of GC which was supposedly to be better (my idea about it), and it was.
What to do with that ? nothing much for the day, but what I did with it in the end is already beautifully expressed by GC.

*If* there would be a conclusion that should be outside of all contexts I mentioned above, it is about the screaming voices and the sax and which player could deal with it in the end.
Mind you, this is about very detailed aspects, which REALLY needs treatment accordingly. This is not about what you say Eddie : trial and error. Not. Oh, I saw it happening, but this was at the Brutus side. The most interesting (I mean that), but trial and error indeed.
I predicted what would happen with the 0.9d version, and I also predicted I could attack the phenomenon. And I did with the 0.9i version. Hahaha, PeterSt is good at predicting ... nope. It is not about that at all. It *is* about paying very very good attention to these things, and I love you for being a witness of the day. Without that, there was nothing to predict nor solve, with an explicit means of testing.

To conclude this for now, it might not have occurred to you Eddie, but all the time I was there, I did not hear GC fail except for the sax. What *you* heard however, was more bass from another player. More highs too.
But what are "we" going to do with that ?
The next time I will personally tweak the xover from the Orphean. I will show you detail you never heard in your life. It's not a promise, but a guarantee. You won't even hear too much highs. Just detail.
But it doesn't work. Never mind the detail apparently is in there, it doesn't work like that. It's over expressed. Like so much spitting Lisa that listening to her becomes unbearable. Or the Mike Oldfield TB-I I wrote about in these forums. The man can't play any instrument because of our beautiful detail.

The moral is balance. To my ears Brutus showed no balance. Not with the setup of Bert, where Brutus had to play over the very same "rotten" USB connection I mentioned. Or via an all over the place colouring Django ... to Brutus. The most interesting. A Django colouring a software player like hell. I can hardly imagine that GC is coloured by it too so much, but possibly it does. But I can tell you in advance : when it does, it does it differently. What to do with that ? I don't know yet. I hope to find it out some day. Just out of interest.
What I do know, however, is that there is no NO *NO* way points can be given to any situation.

If, and only if there is something to judge by me, it can only be the digitally controlled Brutus operation, the wrongish USB connection still being in my mind : this sounded wrong to my ears, and the only thing I can think of afterwards is that possibly we listened to 44K1 -> 48K upsampled material. That would be a satisfactory explanation for me, knowing that these unnatural-like anomalies can come from there (including the sublow honk !).
If so, still no points or prizes to hand out. Just leave out the upsampling and re-listen. Is it worse ? then the digital volume is doing it to you. It was and is just not allowed. No matter it's 2 bits only you lost.
If you're stuck to a preamp because the digital volume destroys otherwise ... then you're apparantly stuck to an over saturated sound with screaming highs.
Then another preamp for a solution ... may be ... but it's not the way to go really.

Well guys, these were my objective votes.
I really enjoyed the day.
Thanks,
Peter

Tags:
0