Hans YouTube review from Friday

C

copperhead viper

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2022
Messages
2
Hans basically says wiim is crap
5 out of 10 with the plus vs mini
Blames it on the .25 cent crystal clock
Is ok to the price
But in my 5k to 10k system I want more ! Enjoyment
Anyone compared the eversolo streamer /dac ?
I don't mind paying 895 for upgrading.
Just saying .. but is it ?
 
copperhead viper said:
Hans basically says wiim is crap
5 out of 10 with the plus vs mini
Blames it on the .25 cent crystal clock
Is ok to the price
But in my 5k to 10k system I want more ! Enjoyment
Anyone compared the eversolo streamer /dac ?
I don't mind paying 895 for upgrading.
Just saying .. but is it ?
Click to expand...
haha, i don't think he did! remember in the beginning of the video he was gonna be ruthlessly honest - regardless of price range, but that if you look at affordability, then the WiiM are actually good?? :LOL:

if it's possible for you to trial a higher end streamer in your system, then why not give it a go? i do agree with him that many of the reasons higher end systems perform better stem from using components (such as clock crystals) with wider (less precise) operating tolerances.
 
steadyshot said:
I disagree for the pro plus especially when utilising it as a dac
Click to expand...
you disagree with what exactly? sorry, i'm not being confrontational, just trying to understand your point of view...

in my view there are of course products at different price points that perform differently... (not always proportional btw)
 
So how did he evaluate the quality of these digital outputs? Looks like I missed something.
 
bowsandarrows said:
in my view there are of course products at different price points that perform differently... (not always proportional btw)
Click to expand...
Hello again, Qobuz enthusiast. While you were right to challenge the idea of spending $200 to improve a $100 device, I found that the iFi S/PDIF isolator/regenerator w/5v power included brought the WiiM Pro up closer to my system standard. Cheers.
 
bowsandarrows said:
you disagree with what exactly? sorry, i'm not being confrontational, just trying to understand your point of view...

in my view there are of course products at different price points that perform differently... (not always proportional btw)
Click to expand...
I mean I disagree with Hans . I think Wiim pro plus dac is very good regardless of price and as a transport too.
 
Tweaker said:
Hello again, Qobuz enthusiast. While you were right to challenge the idea of spending $200 to improve a $100 device, I found that the iFi S/PDIF isolator/regenerator w/5v power included brought the WiiM Pro up closer to my system standard. Cheers.
Click to expand...
well, well, well, look what the cat dragged in!! 🤣 how're u keepin man?

yeh i actually ordered the S/PDIF ipurifier last week after our discussions... i figured it would be an easy way to get my hands on a better power SMPS as well as the try out the effect it has on the WiiM Pro's optical output. this way i can test the LPS that's on the way, SMPS, ipurifier, and WLAN repeater isolation cable all in one fell swoop! 🤔
 
onlyoneme said:
So how did he evaluate the quality of these digital outputs? Looks like I missed something.
Click to expand...
He said, he could with all the measuring gear behind his back. He just didn't. :D

Instead he just heard on his "Reference system 3.1.4.1.5.9.2.7b+" that there's"no center image" with the Mini at all. ;)

Well ... 🤡🥳
 
harkpabst said:
He said, he could with all the measuring gear behind his back. He just didn't. :D

Instead he just heard on his "Reference system 3.1.4.1.5.9.2.7b+" that there's"no center image" with the Mini at all. ;)

Well ... 🤡🥳
Click to expand...

Using a NOS DAC could be promising in a way that L7Audiolab mentions here
www.l7audiolab.com

L7Audiolab The Magic Mirror Test - L7Audiolab

访谈、随笔、观点 很久之前，555还没到手的时候我就做过关于抖动的测量。当时是因为对U16不满所以测了一波。其中测量方法就有用到我今天命名为“The Magic Mirror Test"的基本部分。这篇文章是为了让读者能够更好的理解相关测量，并在未来有相关测量结果的时候可以直接进行比较。
www.l7audiolab.com www.l7audiolab.com
and GoldenSound here
www.superbestaudiofriends.org

DDC Measurements - Audio-GD DI-20HE, Pi2AES, ifi Zen Stream

I have an IFI Zen stream + denafrips pontus 2 DAC (linked via USB cable). The IFI has an HDD attached and I play the songs from the HDD. The IFI is...
www.superbestaudiofriends.org www.superbestaudiofriends.org
but at the end nothing interesting happens.
 
onlyoneme said:
So how did he evaluate the quality of these digital outputs? Looks like I missed something.
Click to expand...
Well, you see there are some qualities in sound reproduction that cannot be measured easily or at all. Most are related to issues in the time domain vs the frequency domain - which is a complete blend spot in our Arsenal of measurements.

E.g how can you measure stereo separation? How can you quantify the degree of clarity in imaging? None of these will show up on a frequency response curve/waterfall curve etc. 🤷‍♂️

In my opinion these are clearly aspects of a music reproduction system that can be heard and each system has a sort of character that can be reproduced to an extent.. So just because we have not cone up with the best way to measure/study this - it shouldn't prevent us from talking about the clear differences we can hear. 🤔 Do you not agree?
 
It's like evaluating noise of the resistor using hearing abilities. Talking about overall listening impressions is a different thing than an estimation of causes.
 
harkpabst said:
He said, he could with all the measuring gear behind his back. He just didn't. :D

Instead he just heard on his "Reference system 3.1.4.1.5.9.2.7b+" that there's"no center image" with the Mini at all. ;)

Well ... 🤡🥳
Click to expand...
Yeh I mean not everything that counts can be measured and not everything that can be measured counts...
 
onlyoneme said:
It's like evaluating noise of the resistor using hearing abilities. Talking about overall listening impressions is a different thing than an estimation of causes.
Click to expand...
Well, that's true, I agree. But Hans is just putting forward credible, falsifiable theories for the differences he's hearing. Isn't that the right way?!
 
He is comparing it with a 1500 euro streamer and he has optimized his setups to perform the best they can. That is going to show up differences.
 
bowsandarrows said:
Yeh I mean not everything that counts can be measured and not everything that can be measured counts...
Click to expand...
In the overall consideration, even blood pressure, air temperature and humidity, stress from changing connections and moving gears, weather micro variations, earth's magnetic field and solar wind are parameters to take in count and very hard to measure in a given time. Whilst it's possible to compare bit transfer from same source, on same dac, through two different streamers. I believe that if such bit flow is the same and errorless, if the feeling of differences remains, it has to be searched on other things and definitely it couldn't be a gear fault... 😎
 
merifon said:
In the overall consideration, even blood pressure, air temperature and humidity, stress from changing connections and moving gears, weather micro variations, earth's magnetic field and solar wind are parameters to take in count and very hard to measure in a given time. Whilst it's possible to compare bit transfer from same source, on same dac, through two different streamers. I believe that if such bit flow is the same and errorless, if the feeling of differences remains, it has to be searched on other things and definitely it couldn't be a gear fault... 😎
Click to expand...
fair enough, that's where we disagree, i guess.. 🤷‍♂️

in my statement you are referring to, btw, i was talking about measurable audible differences. my point is we can't measure everything that matters to SQ from just frequency response curves and SINAD measurements etc... there are things like spatial resolution, off-axis performance etc. that are reproducible to the human ear (with modifications like replacing a bit-perfect streamer with another - e.g. grimm audio mu1 vs bluesound node x), but cannot be measured at present times with equipment... 🤯 🤔

in more specific terms: measurements in the timing domain are currently lacking - assessing the timing accuracy of reproduced sound are tests that not widely done (and/or very difficult to perform). in contrast we have many measurements available in the frequency domain such as frequency response curves and waterfall plots etc.

the complexity of what the human ear-brain axis is doing to received information is only partially understood. so i think we should keep an open mind when approaching such discussions... and remember, it's not science without experimentation, and if there are no measurements we can currently perform to explain what we hear, then maybe we should try harder to figure out how to measure what we hear??! (NOT the other way around)
 
That's way too simplistic from my point of view. It's not as easy as if all measurements ever performed would only be taken in the frequency domain and the time domain was totally inaccessible except for human hearing. It's not even true that human hearing works in the time domain, only. There are different processes involved, but one of the most important is the cochlea performing a dispersion of sound waves to separate frequencies spatially. It's performing a kind of frequency analysis.

I'm not saying that finding a good correlation between measurement results and perceived fidelity is as easy as some seem to promote. True, just because a speaker's frequency response is ruler flat on axis doesn't necessarily mean it will sound good. Just because a speaker fails in one specific measurement or the other doesn't mean it won't sound enjoyable and pleasing. And even if all of the many available measurements look as good as possible (which is still pretty bad at the current state of the art) that doesn't mean there is no distortion mechanism, that went unnoticed.

The problem is that what you call experimenting does not meet the requirements of a scientific experiment. As a consequence, there is no real gain in knowledge, even if you will find a bubble sharing your ideas (to some extend). This is not because it's impossible to measure what we are hearing or because everybody's hearing is different. Psychometric measurements are certainly possible, but require a lot of effort and a lot of statistics to get reproducible results. You and me, we simply don't have the means to make it happen.

Now, if you make some modification to your system that I might call obscure, but the result sounds better to you, are you wrong or are you right? The answer is pretty easy: Whatever sounds better to you, is better for you. It might just not be better for anybody else and the true reason for difference might not even be what you think it is.

None of this has had an influence on What Hifi's rating of the Amp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top