Where has the NDX into Hugo thread gone?

Understand…. i am not trying to tell you otherwise. You have intimated however that your present 'system' exceeded your previous, even before the Hugo.

No, I haven't, but I can't  hear any difference between when the charger is connected and when it isn't. Has anyone managed to hear a difference no matter how small?

Simon

Doesnt look like we are getting the original thread back then. Shame as it had some links on there.

Graeme

Dear Jan

The lowest official musical note is the "C" at the sixteen foot notation, which is the lowest note of the five string double bass, though some double basses tune to a "B" a semitone  lower so as to preserve the consistentent fingering across the finger board.

This profound C is the same pitch as produced by the lowest official note on a pipe organ. The pitch is usually considered 33 Hertz though a half Hertz variation may be found between different organs tuned to different schemes. So let us say 32.5 to 33.5. This is the lowest musical pitch. However there are pipe organs that have notes down to the 32 foot ranks of pipe, which sometimes extend all the way to the "C" at about 17 Hertz, and even some organs [such as Liverpool Cathedral] which have pipes down to the "C" at the 64 foot pipe length and making a fundamental frequency of about half again about 8.5 Hertz!

The 32 foot and 64 foot pipes produce notes with inaudible fundamentals [- the lowest pitch any instrument plays is the fundamental of the note, or the pure note]. The ear only registers the harmonic series of overtones to notes so low as to have inaudible fundamentals. 

Let me say straight away that even quite small and modest speakers will present the low  "C" of the double bass. My Tivoli Radio does this with aplomb. Let us take the opening of Beethoven's Coriolan Overture which starts with the basses playing this [sixteen foot] 33 Hertz note firmly. If it were inaudible then the music would only start on the second note of the piece as the first would not be perceived.

Of course you may counter that the Tivoli is only making a tiny contribution of the fundamental note and relying on the ability of the ear to pitch the fundamental from the associated hormonic series ...

However a 33 Hertz pure sine wave is clearly audible on my ESLs for example. A 17 Hertz pure sine is completely inaudible as would be expected. But a 32 foot organ pedal C is perceived as being an octave below the completely audible [the sixteen foot] C at 33 Hertz even though I cannot hear the fundamental pitch at 17 Hertz, because the ear discerns the fundamental pitch by re-creating it in imagination from the harmonics associated.

Please don't try to explain acoustics to me Jan. And please don't try to blind with science and unheard of spouters of false mythologies. There is no extra Octave. The lowest musical notes are audible even on 78 recordings made as long as 1926 with the introduction of electric recording as I posted before.

To claim otherwise is total nonsense, just as to claim that recording studio noise that is below the lowest notes being played is anything remotely useful.

It is worse than useless and actually positively harmful! Nobody gains for example from having the underground line under the Kingsway Hall in London perfectly re-produced [EMI and Decca recording studio now out of use after nearly seventy years] when these pitches are below the bottom notes that can be played musically. 

ATB from George

I am using the UQ1 (192 version) into the Hugo, 4 days and the results are astonishing.

What strikes me is the bass lines and the depth of the music much better then the UQ into nDac/XPS2 which I owned for a while.

Has anyone changed the wall wart PSU for something better? Mark Grant has handed me SBooster PSU to try which I hope to introduce in the next couple of days.

Pertaining to my reply to Jan two up here.

Absolutely not.

If your contention were true then headphones could never work!

ATB from George

To achieve a music reproduction one needs to excite the air to vibrate with the speaker diaphragms in a line between the diaphragm and the ear. To excite the whole room leads to problems. This is why there is never a need to acoustically  treat  a problem room when using headphones, and is only a real issue in smaller rooms if one insists on driving louder than acoustic instruments actually play in a real performance perspective or try to reproduce electronically amplified music at a level heard in a club or a stadium.

Domestic replay can be full range [in that all the pitches are clearly audible if not precisely flat in response] and achieved in a space where the full range could never be developed by the players without strain in the first place, because recordings allow the illusion of distance from the performers of a real performance in a real concert giving space...

ATB from George

To achieve a music reproduction one needs to excite the air to vibrate with the speaker diaphragms in a line between the diaphragm and the ear. 

 And please don't try to blind with science and unheard of spouters of false mythologies.

Are you referring to Rob Watts?

I understand that drivers excite the air between diaphragms and ear, whatever the distance between the two but if volume of air of the listening room is less than the volume of air of where the recording took place, does that preclude some form of compression? What about loudspeaker driver area compared to the area of the mouth of large acoustic instruments. How can those loudspeakers provide a realistic recreation of the dynamics of real instruments?