faileas

In this case, i suppose i'd specifically mean the 'listening' tests, or as loads for measurements. Personally when i look for reviews, i look for people who use similar gear - my own decision to get the udac2 was based off this review and another one i can't remember the location of, which had someone using the udac2 with the same headphones i use. I'm not talking about covering all the bases. I'm talking about measurements with another typical range of headphone impedances, and suggested one that's fairly common - in short, adding another datapoint to better reflect diversity. At the moment, you've proven 1) 1/2 the testers can't tell the difference - with no idea if the bias is their source 2) the udac2 sounds horrible with low impedance phones - with no data on a typical medium or high impedance phone 3) it sounds worse than something that costs 10 times as much, and is a lot bigger.

I'm getting an error message "[#CHAT-03] You do not have access to our chat room" when i try to use the chat. I assumed i got banned for something, but i was told that none of the admins remembered banning me (well, this is the first time i've been banned, ever, if i was). So.. can i have chat access back, if i wasn't banned? If i was banned, its fine, i probably did something i shouldn't have - its the uncertainty that bothers me.

looks like i wasn't one of the chosen ones. Makes me a sad panda - i was rather hoping they'd have a pilot project here too, if i didn't get one ;p

He also has some unrealistic expectations - he's assuming all headphones are ideally designed, and SHOULD sound the same. They don't (he should try measuring it ;p). Occationally you can even throw together two pieces of utterly junky kit, and end up sounding slightly better than you'd expect (while the fiio e3 is junk, and i'm not a fan of the sennheiser HD202, for some bizzare reason, they sound half decent together).

I'm starting to think the only reason nwavguy is still argueing is to get the last word in - especially where, outside one or two folk (one of whom claims to have gone through an inconceivable amount of swaps of faulty gear) - very few people actually seem to be able to find the same issues in normal use, something which he attributes to "People tend to defend what they decided to buy and spent their money on". I actually like the little thing - else i'd have sold it on, or relegated it to being used on the shared system. I'm also tempted to believe he has very solid ideas on how audio gear SHOULD be designed, and will rubbish anything that isn't designed otherwise - and apparently around the use of balanced IEMs (the berenger is exempt tho. cause it measures wonderfully, despite not being suitable for many common headphones without mods) Interestingly he's trying the fiio e5 next... and finding issues in that too - interestingly, he can't blame the channel imbalance on a analogue volume control this time- since its a digital volume control.

there's a few you might wish to take a poke at. I was meaning to try this, but other things came up, so none of these are really tested. sockso is probably the 'simplest' - no install needed, and runs on the big 3 OSes Sockso - Personal Music Server Jinjora is what i'd run, if i did, since i have a linux server with PHP Jinzora - Jinzora :: Free Your Media! there's a bunch of other options too Sockso alternatives for Windows - AlternativeTo.net

One of my lecturers uses it for sound from videos. I don't know if its audiophile grade, but its clear, distortion free and fairly impressively loud, and bloody tiny. For portable use, its pretty awesome. I'd note the standard model is mono, so you'd need to take a look at which one you're getting.