Jump to content

bhobba

Members
  • Content Count

    6,021
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

bhobba last won the day on November 30 2014

bhobba had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,006 Superstar

About bhobba

  • Rank
    Seriously DAC Addicted
  • Birthday 17/11/1955

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Redland Bay
  • Country
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi All Mike has a Chord TT2 which has the best sound I have yet heard from a DAC (yes I prefer it to the Grandinote). I have heard it on the ML5 - Mike can certainly check it out on the ML2, Its about $7K but it's DAC and amp combined. It may be what you are after - possible issue is HT Thanks Bill
  2. Could be - I can get carried away with tech. But I really like the HD up-sampling. Thanks Bill
  3. BTW that is only too true - and it is maddening because the cost of proper calibration can be a bit pricey. My installer said something like $1K to have it done properly. But another person said Todds Hi Fi did it for $135.00 but I am not sure how good they are. Manufacturers can't do it because the lighting conditions of the room affect the final outcome of what we see. This needs to be taken into consideration when calibrating a TV – so out-of-the-box perfection just isn’t possible. Besides what's in the showroom is simply to make your eyes pop - it's not even close to correct. I use the natural setting on my TV but even that would be vastly improved by proper calibration - its just that damn cost thing. Added Later: Checked with my installer - $700.00 for calibration. Not cheap but I have seen reviews where once calibrated some high end TV looked identical to a moderately priced one. So maybe its really a bargain. I personally will need to think about it. Thanks Bill
  4. IMHO it is, which is why I got it. But opinions vary. While I love Foxtel HD up-sampled to 8K others have posted they thought Sony OLED up-sampled to 4k better. So please, please do not get carried away with the technology - I do that a lot but its not a good idea - go down and check it out for yourself. My friend that checked it out for me did not compare up-sampled HD or check it - it was simply good luck on my part it turned out so good. Of course its the way of the future and prices will drop fast. Nowadays you can hardly buy a HD TV they are nearly all 4k. In a few years it will be the same for 8K. Will we eventually have 16, 32k etc. I have my doubts about that - on my 65 inch TV you can put your face right next to the TV and see no pixels. But then again they say eventually they will have TV's that cover the whole wall - 16k etc may be of some value then. Thanks Bill
  5. Did you read the link I gave - here it is again: http://www.insightmedia.info/8k-tvs-top-tv-line-ups-for-a-reason/ At normal distances (9 feet) 8k is judged 30% better with 60% better depth. Your claim it's not noticeable is based on the Snellen eyechart - but as explained above that is not the whole story. No digital content is transmitted lossless - but hopefully what is missing is not perceptible. With even more modern codecs than Blue Ray (and even with the same coded HEVC) tricks can be done reduceing it to some very low bit rates: If you think you know more than those doing research in it fine - but I tend to believe them. That may make me a fool - I will let others judge. The new up-scaling techniques do add resolution using AI to guess it - how effective it is is for you to judge - I find it makes genuine HD look better than 4K did on my old TV. But that's me - others have posted they do not like it. SD however is not as good. Its entirely up to the consumer if it will succeed in the market. Netflix doesn't reduce perceived quality in its main trick - dynamic optimization (a form of adaptive bit-rate using AI) - but is 30% more efficient and much more tolerant to changes in bandwidth of the internet connection I however love my 8K TV. Just check it out - you may love it to. If you do not then you can save yourself heaps. Thanks Bill
  6. Don't worry - prices will drop quickly just like 4K's. Thanks Bill
  7. I am very concerned you had trouble getting them to play your content. These TV's are not cheap - any decent store should facilitate you doing what you did. Glad you got to eventually. Strange though you found the opposite of me. I found up-scaled HD better than my previous TV's 4k and my friend preferred the Samsung 8k to the Sony OLED 4K - the opposite of your impressions. But that comparison was done with 4k material rather than HD. Just goes to show you must look at TV's with your own content and make up your own mind. BTW the more I watch my TV the better I like it. Thanks Bill
  8. That's not what I meant. A number of streaming services have genuine 4k material and its increasing. Some of it I even like eg Warrior. What I have noticed is on my 8k TV its up-sampling is much more sophisticated than on 4K TV's, being based on AI, so that its more like 8k restoration than up-sampling. Its so good I prefer it to actual 4k material on my old TV. I forgot to mention for me the situation is not quite as good with SD material. Just watching The Good the Bad and the Ugly transmitted in SD and while good I would say its not as good if it was HD ie the up-sampling is not as effective. But there is still a lot of HD material about to make it worthwhile. The only issue is expense - nearly $6k for a TV is a lot - but like 4k TV's prices will soon drop. However if you are able to spend that sort of dosh it is worth it. My Femur broke and it will take about another year to fully recover, although I can get around a bit now and go to lunch each day etc, I had to get a friend to do the following comparison. It was at Harvey Norman and they got a Sony 4k OLED and the Samsung 8K next to each other for a comparison on 4k material. Up close you could still see pixels on the Sony - but try as you might there was none on the 8k, From a normal viewing distance the blacks and etc were clearly better on the Sony due to the OLED - it would be great in a darkened room. However he preferred the Samsung 8k - the picture, while not as striking as the OLED was more natural, clearer, and with greater depth. Why that is, is explained in the link I gave before. At 8 feet picture quality on the 8k was rated as 30% better and depth 60% better. Combine this with state of the art up-sampling and for me it was the better choice which is why I got it. Now I have it I just love it - best picture I ever experienced. The caveats are of course expense and no actual 8k material. They haven't even figured out a standard way to stream 8k or even at normal viewing distances if it will look better than up-scaled 4k. This is cutting edge stuff with a lot of unknowns. The only thing I can say for sure is the Samsung 8k sure has a great HD and 4K picture. The SD picture, while good is not quite in the same class. Thanks Bill
  9. Hi IMHO no. 4k content is still limited, although some of what is transmitted via streaming I find nice to watch. But for me the main reason is you will mostly be watching up-sampled material. The very best up-samplers are not on 4K TV's but the new 8K models. I have just got one and it blew my 4K TV out of the water - clarity and depth on HD that everyone notices being better than even 4K material. Why is that? See the following: http://www.insightmedia.info/8k-tvs-top-tv-line-ups-for-a-reason/ I can confirm from owning one myself it pretty much what I personally notice: 'As a result of the study, 8K displays performance was rated 35% higher—with perceived image quality increasing by 30% and depth perception increasing 60% from 4K to 8K.' They viewed at 9 feet - I view at about 10-12 feet. Its at a good price right now: https://www.harveynorman.com.au/samsung-65-inch-q900-8k pro-qled-smart-tv.html If its in your price range I would seriously consider it. Be aware however that exactly how 8k will be transmitted or even if it will look any better than 4k up-scaled via the new Artificial Intelligence Algorithms these TV's have is not known at this stage - nor is there any 8k material being transmitted. But, as I said, to me up-scaled to 8K, HD looks better than 4k did on my old 4k TV. My guess for what its worth is they will transmit 8K at lower quality level than 4k and rely on various tricks (eg using AI like used in up-scaling) to make the quality better. Foxtel is already doing it in their 4K - they use an algorithm by a company called Harmonic to transmit parts at lower quality that you will not notice: https://www.harmonicinc.com/video-appliances-software/technologies/pure-compression-engine/ Thanks Bill
  10. Here is the link I posted before and my comments: http://www.insightmedia.info/8k-tvs-top-tv-line-ups-for-a-reason/ What they wrote is pretty much what I noticed: 'As a result of the study, 8K displays performance was rated 35% higher—with perceived image quality increasing by 30% and depth perception increasing 60% from 4K to 8K.' They viewed at 9 feet - I view at about 10-12 feet Thanks Bill
  11. Hi All Got it now. Indeed make sure you see it with your own content. Looking at HD and UHD streamed content everyone, including me says the same thing - its just so clear with greater depth. My suspicion is its not the 8K in and of itself - its the up-sampling that is simply cutting edge. The lack of any actual obvious pixels regardless of how close you are is not something you notice at normal viewing distances, but somehow when combined with the up-scaling clarity and depth is much increased at any distance. So check it out for yourself - the best deal at the moment I have seen is Harvey-Norman: https://www.harveynorman.com.au/samsung-65-inch-q900-8k pro-qled-smart-tv.html Nearly any store will price match - I got mine from video-pro. But again its not the resolution that hits you, it's the seamless clarity and depth. Why when you cant see pixels at normal distances that is I do not know. I think I did post a link at the start of peoples perception of 8K at normal distances. I will try and dig it up again and re-post it with some comments. Thanks Bill
  12. Hi Guys Now I have my Chord TT2 and M-sampler working properly (separate review coming shortly on that) so my final system is nearing completion. I am looking at something better than how I now connect my Mac running Audirvana to the DAC. I use two methods, The first is I use Audirvana to stream it to my DAC via my Oppo and SPDF, the second is a long USB cable from my MAC then into the Uptone Regen with one of Ceiseler Audio's (here after called by the owners name, Clay, for ease of use) power supplies. The regen sounds slightly better, but I do not think either is optimum. I decided on a Rendu of some sort but to my dismay discovered they are no longer sold in Australia (if I am wrong please let me know). Asked some friends who all said get the SOTM SMS 200 instead which is still sold here. Great - rang Clay and he makes a special supply for it. All was looking up. But just to be sure I wanted to ensure it worked with Audirvana. Well that's where the fun started - some say it does eg: https://www.bricasti.com/images/m5/Audirvana3_setup.pdf Others say it does not: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurements-and-review-of-sotm-sms-200-network-player.1846/page-4 'Airplay works via sharepoint in the supplied software package, Audirvana doesn‘t at least to my knowledge. The Sonore Streamers are supported though in Audirvana. I had an UR and still have a MR besides the Sotm - no audible difference if that is your next question So if you want to continue using Audirvana - the Sonore might be your thing.' Can anyone give me the truth about whats going on? Thanks Bill
  13. Hi All Well Clay got over to Mikes - his power supply performed brilliantly. I haven't head it personally, but here is not the place to discuss the actual DAC - I will do a separate thread i the DAC section and on Rob Watt's forum for that. But if anyone wants to hear it and what Clay's power supply does its down at Mikes so you can drop in and hear it and the difference Clay's supply makes. BTW this is to in no way poo-poo the switching supply that comes with the DAC - it the best switching supply Clay has measured, but Clay's supply makes a clear improvement from those that have heard it. Thanks Bill
  14. Yes. Mike, like a lot of speaker designers, was very impressed with the DEQX and got one. It beat his current crossover but he then came up with his PRC crossover. That beat the DEQX, But online discussions with someone from DEQX indicates it has made big strides in transparency so the comparison really needs to be done again. To be fair however you would need the rather pricey DEQX 4 with its DAC outputs so you can use the same DAC in comparison. I would love to do it but it is just a bit to pricey for me to purchase the DEQX. Clay can supply the dual DAC's so that is no problem, its just the cost of the DEQX. Regarding the original query the HDP2 would be a more cost effective choice - no pre or DAC needed: https://www.deqx.com/products/hdp-express-ii/ I could just swing getting one of those for a comparison, but it will be unfair because the passive version will use better quality DAC's. Mike has told me and plenty of others he will build any of his speakers to work with the DEQX. Some have taken him up on the offer so they may like to chime in. I only wish the DEQX guys would make a version with only sub-woofer analogue outputs and the others digital. To me that would be more 'high end' without the expense of all the other stuff that comes with the HDP4 - just me and my priorities. The DEQX guys have their own reasons for the products they make ie it may be the price difference between my suggestion and the HDP4 is not worth a separate product. Thanks Bill
  15. Hi All Don't worry. Mike is building an all out stand for my Magnesium speakers and they will come in versions for all his speakers. They will not be cheap - but from Mike tells me they will be very very good. So if you can wait Mike will have some uber stands for your speakers. Thanks Bill
×
×
  • Create New...