Yup the trolls came. This should be good. Why don't they use the same clocks that are in the A6 for all of their streamers if that's the case?
How quickly the ignorant use the word ‘troll’ simply for expressing a contrary opinion particularly when it is based on fact. Until you learn, you will remain prey to the snake oil merchants.. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...derstanding-digital-audio-measurements.10523/ Keith
You just proved my point thanks. No one asked you if you thought of they would make a difference or not. You are just trying to push amirs junk science agenda. That's called trolling.
Surely it’s better to have some actual knowledge of the hobby you are clearly interested in? You just propagate nonsense and there is a chance that someone equally technically ignorant might believe you. If you want better sound quality you need to know what actually matters and what does not. Keith
I don't need unsolicited advice. I know what gives me better sound quality because I have actually experimented and have done the blind listening tests. You aren't doing anyone any favors you're just being a jerk. From what I've read of your posts, you have no clue what matters. You only know what someone told you that should matter. You are ruining this message board for people that are actually interested in this product. Nobody needs saving from the snake. They can buy and listen for themselves then decide to return or keep it.
No you haven’t because if you had properly conducted tests with two identical units with only the clocks changed you wouldn’t have been able to discern a difference. The point and i’ll explain one more time, is that if a component is already audibly transparent which the A-6 and A-8 are then swapping to a slightly better measuring component cannot make any audible difference. If they were a poor design with audible distortion and fitting a component lowered that distortion to inaudible levels then that would be worthwhile. Look again at ASRs measurements of the two devices and the ‘understanding digital measurement article I linked to. Spend the effort and cash on things which will bring audible improvement. Keith
So now you know what I have and haven't done and what I've heard?.... They aren't "audibly transparent" though. It's just a made up term. You can't quantify how transparent something is. That article isn't true. Actually A/B them yourself, you'll see. You are just repeating things that you know nothing about.
I think physics would disagree. I think psychoacoustics would disagree. I am interested to understand what your definition of 'transparency' is in this context and how you determine it accurately just by listening, and when the electronics are so well performing (we are not comparing a wax cylinder to a modern digital recording here) how you do this without measuring it against some reference (the input signal)? If two components do sound significantly different you might be able to say which one you prefer, but how can you say which is the most accurate to the signal it is supposed to be reproducing? From a fundamentals point of view I don't disagree that there are many effects that will change a signal, the question is at what point do they become audible. Do you listen in a tightly temperature and humidity controlled environment with no air movement? I am guessing not if you are in it. These things also effect sound waves as they propagate through the air, but because we have a good idea how the human ear works we can discount them as not significant enough to be audible and ignore them.
Is this rack mountable and full width? Does this do Atmos from Tidal/Apple? Wish it had a larger screen (Preferably OLED and still be a touchscreen if they exist in that form factor)
I'm curious to see what a possible DMP-A8 'Master Edition' might inherit from the A10. It was the same with the A6 'Master Edition', wasn't it? That model inherited components from the A8.
So far this seems like basically is like what an A8 ME would be, except with subwoofer outputs and different case. I've seen conflicting info on the power supply. If they aren't doing two versions of it there will certainly be a smps in it so that it can be sold in the EU.
That doesn't seem right. I'm expecting the A10 to cost about 1000 bucks more. The price jump between the A6 and A8 was similar, so I don’t see why it would be different here. Especially since the A10 appears to have way more upgrades compared to the relatively small step from the A6 to the A6 'Master Edition.' So, your statement feels a bit optimistic to me. There’s no way all the features of the A10 are only going to come with a price increase of a few hundred bucks, that's for sure.
I'm just saying that with the current info that we have, that's what it seems like. No idea what else is going to be announced. Hopefully a lot more. I'm sure the room correction and stuff will trickle down to the A8 with software updates. That's what they did with the a6 anyways. If there is even room correction. Seems like a lot of speculation and misinformation so far.
You're really going to try to convince me that there's wild swings in humidity in my listening room from track to track? Why do you even care what I hear. If you don't belive clocks or anything else makes a difference buy a Wiim mini and be done with it. Why are you even on a forum for a some what higher end streamer if they all sound the same? A new streamer will have nothing to offer you. I couldn't care less if you think anything makes a difference or not. It's not going to effect my plans in the slightest, so please stop.
The room correction being introduced is the biggest new feature not the Crystal upgrade. If ever dripped down to A8 then I am sure it will come with an extra license fee. I expect an additional (better) DSP/DAP doing the actual correction profile implementation with A10.? The A10 will also do the subwoofer split optimized by the room correction measurements which with e.g. DIRAC is again an additional license here included with A10 I presume. The same for the essential good microphone being included? There are multiple Zidoo media player models using one or two Linear PSU's. They solved the EU standby power limitation and also the auto 110V - 220V switching with these. I am confident it comes with 2 linear PSU's which may be driven with a single transformer which does not matter really as power consumption will be more or less constant. Yes I do expect a price tag around € 3,000 for this new unit too. The Price/Value ratio will be again lower as happened with A6 => A8 and they will make more margin for sure. I do understand that strategy very well and don't blame them.
I´m afraid it won´t play Atmos, because it´s not mentioned in the specs. If so, I wouldn´t buy it or actually any other streamer. The reason for buying a streamer (in addition to a Fire Cube, a Heos system within a Cinema 30 and two Oppos would be to have one streamer that can do all kind of music formats, which those devices can do. If I listen to Amazon Music, they have really good Atmos music (although quality isn´t as good as from BluRay by far) . And I don´t want to have to switch to a Cube, only because my new several thousand bucks device cannot so it. And please don´t anybody tell me about licence fees, because even cheap devices can do it. Actually I´d prefer a device like a DMP-A6 without DAC, but with Atmos capability and also Auro CX, when this comes out.
I have seen an A10 Output port list with a HDMI Audio/DSD port included. So my guess is that A10 inherits that port from the A6. That will facilitate MCH Audio as a matter of fact MCH is getting momentum regarding popularity. If not they made a big mistake in my view. Always loved it myself. http://forum.zidoo.tv/index.php?thr...ther-knowhow-for-hifi-players-playback.86336/ Just read chapters 3 to 5 for MCH standards. Chapters 9 and 10 for DAC technical details.
I not trying to convince you of anything of the sort, in fact the very opposite. I was giving an analogous example of other measurable but extremely small effects that have no impact on the audible performance. I also didn't say that I 'don't believe in clocks', they are definitely real . The point is that using better clocks will improve the audible performance up to a point, but higher and higher accuracy after that doesn't equate to additional improvement. What happens when the clocks you are using in you playback device are significantly more accurate than the ones used in the studio to encode the music? You do know that this is the manufacturers forum, right? I am on here because I own an A6 and I want to see ongoing improvements in the software for it. You also seem keen to tell me what I should buy (the screen on the A6 is great and it can connect with LMS natively but there are lots of other reasons you might have to get one, and newer devices might do multichannel audio or offer AES outputs) but have taken the incorrect impression that I care what you do. This is a forum, so expressing different views and presenting information to back those up in a polite and respectful manner is sort of the point. The same way that you do with anything else, music is not a special case. You look at the incoming signal and compare it to the outgoing signal to see what has been added or taken away in a measurable way. Comparing one against the other without reference to the original signal might tell you which you prefer, but not which is the closest to the thing you are trying to accurately reproduce.
