Dusty Chalk

I distinctly remember being underwhelmed -- it was completely lite on the bass. And it wasn't even detailed -- you know how people believe this myth that bass and detailed are mutually exclusive? It had this fake high frequency sheen, but no detail.

Or, as they call it on Head-Fi, the Xiansheng. Alright, I found the tube compliment as being 1 6N3, 2x 6922, 1 6Z4 and 1 6N1. Meh, the only ones of those that I have are the 6922's...and not even that many of those... My boss just bought one (under my recommendation, so there's a little bit of pressure to do well, here). It's distorting. My first guess would be one of the tubes, but he does have a whole new system (using the MF A308 as transport, to long digital cable to cheap DAC to short ICs to Xiang Sheng to Sony MDR-7506/-V6's [i forget which, but it's actually a nice match]), so there's a possibility that it's something else, but I figure: check the tubes first. Any suggestions on the primarily most likely culprit? I guess I need to break out my tube tester, figure out how it works, and bring it to work, and just go through them all. Hirsch? I know it's been a while, but if you've got anything to add, I'd be grateful. You are, after all, the tube Yoda. Or would you prefer 'Tube Spock'? And no, don't suggest new power cords. That would be the last thing I'd be looking at.

I'm trying to think -- I don't think I've heard a worse amp than the Raptor. (Mints don't count, because they're not commercially available.) Am I forgetting something?

Did you do that yourself?

Sorry, totally screwed up the malapropism -- I meant 'prostate'. Well, no, I meant 'prostrate', but I meant to have misspoke 'prostate'.

Okay, Scully. J/K...I, too, am skeptical.

I'm going to have to get that one that says, "I'm not tardy, I'm just early for tomorrow". I just got in to work. Just got up a couple hours ago. Gonna go get breakfast...Burger King? Yes.

W2002, duh.

You have no idea what you're missing. I mean, can you imagine being a concert penis? I would smirk every time. Reminds me of the Weekend Update sketch about one of the states changing their absolute speed limit ceiling to 69, which was "...championed by <one of the congresspeople or delegates or something> and a bunch of giggling 6th graders..." Once, I saw a girl at work, kneeling in front of her computer because her chair had been stolen. I said, "you don't have to prostrate yourself in front of the computer to get it to work; it's an inanimate object, it doesn't respond to that sort of thing." And no, I was not fired for sexual harassment. Besides, prostrate isn't a verb -- my sentence didn't even make sense. Besides, she had a really good sense of humour. She liked to tell us about her halloween costume, being a cow, anatomically correct (complete with udder and teats). And then she'd just let us imagine what the hell she was talking about.

Link to thread on Slim Devices' forum.

Bartleby "rabbit on"?

In my case, it's because I am one. Oh, wait, I thought you said, "pianist".

Shiny!

"You got a sister?" has got to be my favourite non-pickup-line. And: thanks, now I have Rush stuck in my head.

I thought it was 60 of the first colour being made, then he was going to move on to another colour.

Ooooohhhh!!! It's so cute. Though I could barely fit my wiener in it. click here to see a picture of my wiener No, seriously, I really like the look of that amp. Nice pics!

Technically, you're not decreasing the bit rate until you chop off the top 8 bits.

No, sample rate is frequency response. Resolution...think of it this way -- if you have 24 bits, it doesn't just increase the range of values from the loudest to the softest, it also increases the number of steps between two very close sets of values -- that, to me, is resolution. Literally. Think this hypothetical example through: if you have a 16/44.1 recording, and the same recording at 24/44.1, what have you gained? Your frequency response is going to be exactly the same (best case == brick wall at ~<22kHz). But the waveforms are still going to be able to be more precise. When I listen to a 24/96 recording (e.g. a "DAD" or DVD-Audio), I don't just hear an increase in frequency response, I hear better separation between instruments. I don't hear different dynamics, because if it's the same recording, the dynamics are roughly the same. There might be a better noise floor, but the real improvements are in the microdynamics, not the macrodynamics.

Anyone else have a pair of L3000's? I wouldn't mind if you tried the above test. Please. Mine seem to have "re-burned in". Hirsch, before you get rid of yours, you may want to try using them again. I'm wondering if it's a settling problem. Or perhaps I'm just using the right tubes/amp. (Switched to Singlepower Supra++ w/CBS Hytrons.)

No, actually it affects resolution as well.

Well if they apply their dither post-upsampling, there's nothing stopping them from providing the digital volume control post-upsampling as well, so there's less loss of resolution (try saying that three times real fast). I mean, if you cut the volume in half after you upsample, you've still lost one bit of resolution, but that's after you've added 8. Sort of (you haven't really added any information). But in terms of pure math it's accurate. But it all depends on the gain of the amp you have after it. If that gain is ridiculous (such as the Musical Fidelity A300^CR, which has enough gain to hear a circuit "shifting" [compensating for something -- I don't remember what]), you're still going to have to turn the volume down a lot, which means you're still going to be back down in low res territory. But that might mean that you're back down in 16 bit territory, so -- no loss, no gain. Well, you will gain fidelity, because then you've bypassed the entire preamp stage(s) -- accomplished entirely in the digital arena. This is all hypothetically speaking -- I need to hear the thing, which I haven't.

He needs to have seen the whole series, first. And you know how long that can take. But yeah, I'm up for it. I'm not saying that G'sI is it's primary reference point, it's more of a secondary one, just like Scooby Do is a secondary reference point for the Buffy series. But I like the Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven analogy, and I agree with it. The whole amorphousness to the question of whether or not they're really in it for the money or not can be directly tied to that one character.

Okay, just doing a rough assessment, based on the Bink audio test CD there appears to be a huge suckout somewhere between 5K and 8K (I.E. track 39 was severely attenuated, compared to tracks 38 and 40). I tried EQing it with just the basic WinAmp EQ (played with the 6K slider), and it did nothing. What region does this represent again? I can't seem to find the page that had all those definitions on it. I want to say "definition". Hmmm...

Anyone know of such a device? Or should I DIY one? And should I do it in digital or analog?

Did you even read the first post? Here's another one: They both have a silly theme song.