I was reading about a music streamer from a latest Stereophile review and what was posted in the review had my BS meters pegged. I'm from the high tech industry with friends that work at Intel labs and friends that work for ARM computers and they haven't heard of some of these things that were posted. Maybe we can get clarification on these items so they don't sound so far fetched and the specifics posted in the review tainted the reviewers judgement IMO.
1) The review states this piece uses "a cpu that's highly prioritized for audio playback only ensuring highly optimized sound quality". I asked around if somebody is making a specific CPU for audio playback only. You know the Intel/AMD fabs that make cpu's make millions of them at a time, not 10-1000 custom cpus. Even when you look at the ARM cpus, none of them are built specifically for audio. There are millions of servers in the world that do database work for example that no cpu maker is building a specific cpu for database only applications. If there is a small company that are creating this kind of cpu, what kind of OS will run on it? This piece runs Roon so it has to be a somewhat generic cpu with a generic Linux OS running on it.
2) the review states: this unit "it plays live with no other processes running in parallel. as far as we know, unlike any other streamer on the market, this streamers cpu plays directly and live from the kernel without any processing or lag." Meter is pegged now. NO OS will run only 1 process at a time without hundreds of other system processes running in parallel or in the background. Using Unix/Linux, the OS is always in a flux state moving data around in its caches, in and out of memory, doing read a head, swapping, paging, etc... And these system processes are a good thing to keep the system stable and running efficiently.
3) this piece uses "new and faster enhanced memory". Meter is pegged again. During the last 2 decades using Linux servers and over 2 decades before that using Sun and IBM UNIX servers, I have never had the option of buying enhanced memory. I made a couple of calls and asked if they had any enhanced memory that they could sell me and they had no clue what I was talking about. Everybody can get fast memory but "enhanced"?
4) "the whole device plays 1 song directly from RAM". All linux OSs do this, you cannot go from any cache or ssd/hdd directly out of the computer, the data has to be read into ram 1st.If the system is paging, this data might be deleted from RAM and then have to reread into RAM before sending to a dac. I used many large PCIE cache cards to hold large amounts of data (used it as a database cache) but that cached data had to be moved from this fast cache to ram before sending out to the dac.
Most of the time, audio reviewers get psyched up when they hear new acronyms or a magical cpu or enhanced memory that taints their judgement. For example, this reviewer at the end stated "never before have I reviewed a stand-alone streamer/server so accomplished in the hardware department".
Maybe somebody could clarify some of this up for me/us in the audiophile community.
Richardbrand-yes and no. What does a turbo do? It boosts power by forcing air into the intake chamber. If you look at the taycan, Porsche claims it uses “overboost” at launch control, so imo Porsche is using the definition of what a turbo does instead of actually deploying a turbo. Again it’s marketing, but since imo anybody looking at a Porsche EV would know you can’t actually put a turbo on an ev, then what was meant by stating turbo, I’m assuming it’s about the boost that is applied.
Which IMO is different than what most audiophiles/reviewers know about computer internal hardware, so when somebody tells you that some manufacturer uses custom/mgical hardware to make better sound quality over its competition that ‘just’ uses off the shelf hardware is wrong, IMO.
At the end of the day, Audiophiles need to be told a soothing story in order to purchase a $14000 streamer that contains $1000 worth of hardware.
The nonsense @p05129 accurately discussed in the original post exists just to support that narrative. Presumably the manufacturer spoon-fed it to the reviewer, of whom it might be best to say that no one can be an expert in all fields, and charitably leave it at that.
I was going to respond from my (somewhat limited) experience with various computer configurations for streaming duty, but I think mswale covered the bases pretty well.
It is a tough sale and yet it exists. I make do with my relatively affordable pile of Pardo linear supplies feeding this n that into a Nucleus > SoTM > Aesthetix Pandora Signature… i put more ( much ) into analog sources, speakers….
I do believe in the old saw “ racing improves the breed “… i’ve a great relationship w Ideon dealer and can borrow the subject stack for a week. What i do wonder about is the sonic differences between the top of their line and the MUCH more affordable gear…. obviously the bling casework goes away…
Don't see dual CPU on that board, so hyperbole about dedicated CPU. Still, depending on software used and implemented it is possible to minimize use of CPU resources. I have 7 cores on my CPU, custom build streamer running Euphony OS and Roon, all cores running at less than 1% at virtually all times. The Ideon may have a fairly nice lps, although I don't see the real estate available for real quality lps, something like my JCAT Optimo ATX lps which looks to be more than double the size the entire Ideon streamer.
OP: I think you’re on to something. This marketing BS. The laundry soap manufacturers on daytime TV promote new & improved detergents every six months. My clothes will feel softer and smell fresher - better than ever - if only I would buy the new & improved Tide instead of yesterday’s Arm & Hammer. Those scoundrels have been doing it since the 1950’s. How do they get away with it? Is Consumer Reports in on this? Are their reviewers on the take? Where are the measurements?
This could become a serious problem. Before you know it, toothpaste manufacturers, car manufacturers and politicians will start doing it too.
Some of it may be BS, some of it just may be out of context, or an exaggeration.
1. It might have more than one CPU, or a multicore CPU, they dedicate a CPU for audio. It has a "dedicated" CPU for Audio.
2. Goes along with #1. With multi-core processing, you can dedicate cores for task in software.
3. There are so many different types of memory, you can call ECC ram "enhanced" or some of the faster MHZ stuff enhanced. Really think they are saying, it uses premium ram, or the fastest out there.
4. This one I feel is mostly BS. It takes a bit to cache an entire song,. With SSD drives, some are just as fast at RAM now. Some devices do not really cache anything anymore. Again, this would be something you put in software, how much cache to provide. Most likely they are trying to cache as much as possible as soon as possible.
On all these type of devices, they use some kind of common OS as a base, mostly just the kernel. Add their software on top of it. Really you do not have a full OS, just the kernel, with the app. It's super stripped down, usually just there to control all the "computer" devices. Sometimes these OS's also run in their own memory space, and are isolated (sandboxed) from the app. That goes back to point 1 & 2.
They are kind of telling the truth, or at least part of the truth. As usually it's misleading marketing. That is rampant in all advertising.
“and in direct comparison w an insane $ WADAX stack… it held ground” @tomic601
The 3 box design at $80K retail, I would expect few to be impressed and others to simply shake their heads in disbelief.
For a product at this price, the market is niche, catering to enthusiasts with the means to prioritize audio performance above all else. While it’s easy to critique a product based on its design, parts and the cost, the true measure lies in whether it delivers something extraordinary. If the 3-box design offers innovation or performance that redefines expectations, it might find its audience though likely a very small one.
Ultimately, the value of such a product depends on the listener’s priorities, resources, and willingness to pay for the perceived gains in sound quality.
@carlsbad2We did that little 'game' in grade school, when it was called:
'Party Line' with reference to how telephones were connected.
The story at the end of the class was generally unlike what began as a single simple sentence with a new context.
"As the world falls apart, some things stay in place."
And apparently AI's can 'forget' in a strangely similar way....
...really *ah* 'reassuring*, that.🤨
@philhyun has made the point of the final arbiter at the end of the digital dance of data is all the process to discern the 'differences', +/-/=/meh the reviewer observes.
The equipment, the space, the particular reviewer felt right for task is most likely different than even 'hard core 'philes' wouldn't find something brow-raising, so it's back to the middle of the maze.
I could consider a multi-core processor being assigned one and only process to handle linked to the fastest memories possible...duplicate that board and stitch those together, although I've noticed boards with 2 cpu mounts...
Whatever...*chuckle* Anyone that has the pocket change to buy one should still insist on a all day demo...even if it's someone else's change. ;)
Fun read. 👍 And any ad copy through a 3d holographic imagery is just to make you buy/lease/rent/steal IT....and we used to use hollow logs....😏
Ultimately, this appears to be just another "objectivist vs subjectivist" thread. While the OP has carefully parsed the reviewer's words based on their own understanding, the real intent is to shed doubt upon the conclusions reached.
I have no interest in the product and its position in any imaginary performance pecking order. However, I do believe that the words of someone that actually used the product are more meaningful than those of someone that merely read the words of someone else that had done so. Neither "market speak" nor "reviewer speak" nor "engineer speak" has any correlation with device sound quality.
The only review that matters is the one that happens in your head when listening to sound. I don't care about measurements. Everyone hears differently and everyone has their own preferences. "Cold" "clinical" "Neutral" "Warm" all subjective. And we all know $$$ does not directly correlate to what we like. I stopped reading Stereophile and the ABS many many years ago.
The picture in the review reveals that it has a ASRock motherboard...so all hardware is plain vanilla, even the LPS is not exotic as an idea. Many others have done that. And an optimized OS, likely linux? Again, what many others do, like PinkFaun or so. On the other hand, not that I would ever spend 7 grand for it, but in this market, this is at least not to much a rip off... ;-)
Last, I am not promoting the Jcat S1 in any way, but that HW is quite unique and very custom....
What a joy to read a comment from a technically competent audiophile.
Perhaps the time has come to acknowledge that in the digital realm virtually all of the product differentiation comes down to casework, reconstruction filter implementation, and analog linestage execution.
and in a previous life, actually 2 now… i was deeply involved in custom small batch ASIC…. they do exist as do pared down operating systems…. in general it’s an accepted “ truth “ that these OS ( even tho they are a pita to keep up to date ) sound better than a heavily burdened PC …. of course ymmv, etc….
It’s a big world where an interested party can and SHOULD reach out directly to the manufacturer…. i’m wondering IF anybody on this thread has actually heard this device… ? especially in the 3 box system it is designed to optimally operate in. I have. And in a very high end resolving room with superb acoustics… and in direct comparison w an insane $ WADAX stack… it held ground… ceding some sonic points, winning others…
Hopefully some of our digital experts will short circuit the review and go to the bit perfect story from IDEON…. or whoever….
Maybe stereophile should clear things up with the manufacturer and then either post a reply here or in an upcoming issue. If the stereophile reviewer is wrong in his understanding of these topics, then he shouldn’t be tasked with something he isn’t familiar with.
Erik- we are both talking about the same thing but it’s different than their statement: “a cpu that’s highly prioritized for audio playback only ensuring highly optimized sound quality". IMO, it sounds they have a magical cpu that no other vender has and that is wrong to say and the reviewer bought off on it. Since this manufacturer could have stated that their programming techniques make their system sound great which is hard to argue about, but they claim they have hardware that no other audio company has and they would have to prove that.
That’s like a car salesman saying the Porsche you are looking at is a boxer 6 twin turbo when it actually has a boxer four non turbo, night and day difference
-you have been able to assign apps to kernels for decades, this is not new.
Do you mean pin a process to a thread/core? Yeah. That’s not how I interpret the statements, but still, I think you are making a mountain out of a mountain which was a molehill. Even with pinned processes they can still be pre-empted by the way.
Nowhere is is ’caveat emptor’ more appropriate than it is in audio, and if some manufacturer wants to turn their use of copper wires and plastic into a romance novel that’s kind of everything.
Speaking as a fairly experienced software engineer/product developer, who has been around for quite awhile, agree most likely the defect is in the reviewer’s ability or willingness to properly relate technical details. Happens all the time, starting as soon as the marketing team becomes involved with a product.
Personally, as an engineer, I believe most important to get facts straight when reporting to others always, so even though it happens all the time, that is not a good excuse when it does. Others may disagree, but that is where BS in general begins.
I also work in high tech manufacturing, and my current position is Global IT Director - Applications for one of the top-tier electronics contract manufacturers on the planet. All that wording perks up my BS meter too, but I can see where the translation from the actual tech-speak to something useful for marketing and explaining to the masses could be the issue. I'm not even good at it, so I will not even try as others have already done that :-)
Erik-you have been able to assign apps to kernels for decades, this is not new. Also, how do you know if Roon or audirvana don’t do this same thing? It could but the developer needs to be sure the kernel version will work.
I disagree with you on limiting processes because the article stated only 1 process is going on while doing its thing and any Linux person would know that’s physically not possible. Over 15 years ago when I was using audirvana, we went thru the he process of limiting any OS tasks that might interfere with audio.
Also, the reviewer stated “fast enhanced” memory. We all put in the fastest memory for the cpu that’s nothing “enhanced”. Even using “ecc” memory isn’t enhanced memory.
Both the OS and the app can process read ahead so multiple tracks are in memory, not new. Over 30 years ago when designing we based apps, you would do read ahead and build pages before the user clicks next for faster processing. Also, audirvana had hog mode in the late 2000’s.
My point in posting this was to point out how reviewers are gullible to synonyms or technology that manufacturers and grow out that taint their reviews. New people to audio look up to these reviewers for help and when the reviewer is clueless about what the manufacturer states, that’s on the reviewer. The reviewer should have either looked into some of these claims to verify them and get clarification from the manufacturer and then if the manufacturer claims these claims are true and if are in deed false, then it’s on both of them.
Maybe the reviewer can clarify these concerns or the manufacturer could explain some of these issues.
I’m not about to defend Fremer or John Atkinson in general for that matter, but I don’t think this is BS so much as mostly inaccurate translation from geek to consumer.
As I would translate it back to geek-speak, I’d believe (maybe inaccurately) they are using something like a real-time OS/kernel which are real things and used in areas where a specific task (like reading a heartbeat, or car sensor) takes priority over user interface actions. The features of a real-time OS is that the response times of certain actions are bounded in time and unaffected by other work done by the CPU, something the standard Unix/Linux/Windows OS can't do.
It sounds like they've reduced the processing as well to the bare minimum required while playing a song, a good thing.
As for enhanced memory, that could be anything like using the latest generation, or fastest possible for the CPU.
Lastly, yes, music data must be read from disk to memory before it is sent back out but it’s not necessarily done 1 entire song at a time. This is closer to the old Parasound CD player which would read the entire song into RAM before decoding. Streaming of data, whether a very large text file, a DB or song is not uncommon.
Overall I’d say they are just describing the care that goes into feeding the DAC. Of course it’s all quite glorious sounding.
There are other instances of objective BS being spouted by audio reviewers. My "favorite" example is Michael Fremer in The Absolute Sound last year, who re-parroted in a TT review with respect to speed accuracy (wow and flutter) that 1 arc second is audible. LOL! An angular distance metric vs speed change over time (dv/dt). And once you start calculating potential audible pitch or frequency changes and required accelerations over distance of 1 arc second, the whole idea collapses as well.
Upshot, I cancelled my subscription to TAS again. When entertainment turns into annoyance, it ain't fun anymore.
Ktown- ps audio does fpga instead of using a typical dac chip, not the cpu, 2 different chips/processors.
Normally, manufacturers or users of computers/streamers/servers use an Intel/Apple arm/AMD CPU’s to build their boxes using Linux/osx/windows. What normally what makes cpus different is if they use the risc or cisc instruction sets, most use risc today, I think Intel still uses the cisc instruction set.
Lalitk- I agree. I think audirvana sounds a little bit better then Roon but you lose so much in user functionality and Roon arc that it’s not worth that little extra sq that audirvana provides, plus Roon always enhances their code so maybe the next release it might leapfrog audirvana in sq.
I wonder how many here would be willing to pay upto $24K for a streamer/server that falls short on one of most important aspect of end user experience…software implementation. And chokes on WAV file playback.
Is audio reviewing a futile pursuit? As much as we reviewers may strive, through subjective observation and objective measurement, to accurately describe how a component looks, sounds, and performs, we frequently find words and numbers inadequate to communicate the mysteries that abound in the transcendent realm of music. How can we fully share what we feel when a component allows us to experience, sometimes afresh, often in a new way, sounds that elicit joy, sorrow, terror, or more subtle emotions? How do we encapsulate in words and measurements the sonic equivalent of the wide-eyed wonder that shines through a baby's eyes as she discovers something new?
I think a lot of the BS is created by non-technical people taking the technically correct system description and converting it to marketing lingo. then it gets converted at least once more as the reviewer restates it. I remember an exercise I did in college, and it is often repeated in business, to take a story and have it retold in private a series of times and then compare the story at the end to the original. It is almost unrecognizable.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
