What the heck is up with Records -> ADC -> 24/96 or DSD!!!! It is soooooo good.

[bmoura]

We need a standard for provenance descriptions. it is visibly not an easy thing to authenticate, and makes it all the more important. Maybe MQA will help with that for the PCM realm.

 

MQA is fairly mysterious at this point. Some have compared it to the next generation of Meridian's loss-less packing software used for DVD Audio discs.

 

There is more on it here at http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/meridians-mysterious-mqa-site-22575/index3.html

[firedog]

I'm going to write AS and ask them about all this.

 

 

Well I asked AS about the new MFSL KOB DSD, and they said they have no provenance information, only the label can give me that.

[EuroDriver]

Brief comment, more tomorrow. BTW, I found a track I can see on all formats per a comment above and Acoustic Sounds, one of those two guys mentioned above did a DSD transfer of Norah Jones, and I was able to find a vinyl rip 24/96 of the same album, so I can compare those more thoroughly tomorrow and writeup my thoughts.

 

Peter - I appreciate the comments. I think I didn't explain things well on the accuracy aspect. Allow me to try again:

 

Theory A as to why the vinyl rip is so good: It adds distortions that are pleasing - well understood in the analog (tube, vinyl, etc.) world, i.e., 2nd order, 3rd order, etc.

Counter argument to theory A: Not only did I hear the slight smearing that is considered pleasing to many, I *also* heard more resolution, or accuracy. How can both be going on?

 

Okay, so what do I mean by more resolution or accuracy? Take a drumbeat. In a live performance you can hear nuances that tell you exactly how hard it was hit, how much did the top of the drum deflect, etc. Take a Piano, I don't play enough piano to distinguish between brands, but some say on the best recordings they can hear that difference. The piano strike sounds very particular, very singular, that is a particular piano strike with a lot of nuance, with a lot of personality. The humidity, the attitude of the person, that particular night, it is all unique. This is what I mean compared to an Alesis sound file. You can play a generic sound file for a drum beat 10,000 times and it is the same generic drum beat. You can ask a person to hit a drum 1,000 times over several years, and as they age, as they have different attitudes, as the room temp and humidity chnages they will all sound different.

 

That, to me, is accuracy.

 

And that is what I heard on the vinyl rip. It was extraordinarily nuanced to the reality of what could be heard at the recording session.

 

More tomorrow on the Norah Jones, which I will have in at least 4 formats.

 

I was also dying to compare SOTA 45 rpm vinyl with DSD 64 and PCM from the same analog master tape source.

 

For my comparison I chose the Hope album from Hugh Masekela which is available from Acoustic Sounds and mastered in house. I used HQ Player to convert the Redbook to DSD256 and also convert the DSD 64 to DSD 256

 

The vinyl rig was an Italian 4k euro cartridge and turntable combo feeding a Graham Slee phono pre-amp. The DAC was an Exasound E22. Speakers were KEF Blades, amps Hypex NCores. The HQ Player / Exasound combo playing the Redbook, left the 45 RPM vinyl in the dust, there was no sonic advantage to the vinyl in any sonic department. The digital combo playing the DSD 64 was in another league.

 

Three weeks ago I revisited the comparison between the Redbook and DSD 64 tracks of the Hope Album, but this time with HQ Player running under WS2012 R2 Essentials + AO in Minimal Server mode. There was a huge improvement to the Redbook and also an improvement to the DSD 64 but smaller than with the Redbook. The SQ gap compared to vinyl widened ever further, whilst the gap between Redbook and DSD64 narrowed.

[Kelly]

I was also dying to compare SOTA 45 rpm vinyl with DSD 64 and PCM from the same analog master tape source.

 

For my comparison I chose the Hope album from Hugh Masekela which is available from Acoustic Sounds and mastered in house. I used HQ Player to convert the Redbook to DSD256 and also convert the DSD 64 to DSD 256

 

The vinyl rig was an Italian 4k euro cartridge and turntable combo feeding a Graham Slee phono pre-amp. The DAC was an Exasound E22. Speakers were KEF Blades, amps Hypex NCores. The HQ Player / Exasound combo playing the Redbook, left the 45 RPM vinyl in the dust, there was no sonic advantage to the vinyl in any sonic department. The digital combo playing the DSD 64 was in another league.

 

Three weeks ago I revisited the comparison between the Redbook and DSD 64 tracks of the Hope Album, but this time with HQ Player running under WS2012 R2 Essentials + AO in Minimal Server mode. There was a huge improvement to the Redbook and also an improvement to the DSD 64 but smaller than with the Redbook. The SQ gap compared to vinyl widened ever further, whilst the gap between Redbook and DSD64 narrowed.

 

This mirrors my experience in some ways. At first, when hi-res was just becoming available, I was floored by the improvement of high-def pcm vs redbook. As I have gotten better dacs, they difference in playback quality doesn't seem as great as it used to. Overall, the sound quality has gone up as my dacs have gotten better, but the gap doesn't seem quite as wide. It makes me think that, for the most part, the information needed to replicate the signal is there in a redbook file, but it is just a limitation of the dac that makes the information in the high-res files useful.

[lightminer]

Peter, I am interested in sharing files. Just busy at day job.

 

Recent posts - don't forget the distinction of testing Vinyl Rips to studio high rez production vs comparing actual vinyl to high rez.

[PeterSt]

Peter, I am interested in sharing files. Just busy at day job.

 

OK, thanks !

[lightminer]

Okay, I had some time to do some back and forth listening.

 

So..... Keep in mind I really want DSD from the studios to be the best, as that makes all of our lives a ton simpler. I really do.

 

I did listen to my vinyl rip from who knows where - and by the way - this one wasn't done really well. One comment on the site I got it from said 'don't get this, it has problems on some tracks with her highs' and indeed, it was sort of extreme sibilance, not necessary on all highs, but I think it might be a bit of too much info and sibilance not handled perfectly. I actually like that this wasn't a really high quality rip because...

 

sorry... but it was better to these ears.

 

Okay, so the DSD version from Acoustic Sound was really amazing. Quite good, distanced from the 16/44.1 quite a bit. I focused on three tracks, Don't Know Why, Come Away With Me, and Turn Me On.

 

For Don't Know Why, in just the first 40 seconds you can hear a difference between the two tracks. On the Vinyl Rip she is a distinct voice with smaller lips (keep in mind I have Magnepan 3.6qrs, which are sometimes blamed for the '4 foot wide lips problem') and she had walked forward about 6 feet towards me from the AS DSD version. She seemed more like a real person. Also, her voice was sweeter, so there were actual tone differences. I would have to hear her live to say which is more accurate, but I think the Vinyl is the more accurate. Between 1:45 and 2:05 are some strong vocal gymnastics, and you can hear the difference there as well - the vinyl rip again shows some freq's from her voice that aren't there on the DSD.

 

On Come Away With Me I noticed that the bass was stronger in the Vinyl version, and had more impact. Not just louder, but broader so to speak. That also reminded me of some of what impressed me on DSotM, they do that heartbeat thing at the beginning and repeated throughout the album, and the bass is a lot better on these vinyl rips. Again - not just stronger, like what you would do with an EQ, but instead more detail, a more full sound. From 1:45 to 2:30 on Come Away With Me there is this nice very non-Metallica styled guitar solo. Before tonight I had never realized there are at least 4 guitars there! I had always thought it was one. There is the main one, one to the wide/far left, one on the right, and one playing with the guitar soloist, perhaps just behind them. That does come out in both the DSD and the Vinyl Rip. I will say that the DSD version is *extremely* close. And that leads me to an insight about why I got so excited about DSotM, there aren't high-rez versions to compare to. So I think I got the high-rez dose, I got the Vinyl 'pleasant distortions', and this 3rd possible effect I'm describing here where it is even more revealing somehow of the original recording.

 

For the third track the piano at the very beginning has so much character, and I felt like that was stronger on the Vinyl version. This was the track with clear problems with the rip. The stronger/better bass is evident here as well. Not really much to say on this one, the first two were more interesting.

 

So, look, let me be very clear. The DSD is very good. Good enough that I don't know that the extra significant hassle of all that is required for Vinyl Rips, even if you only want to download them, is worth it. But it does seem more musical, and it does seem at the same time to contain those 'pleasant distortions', yet have more nuance and detail around the voices and images that is extremely positive. It is seriously good stuff.

 

(I wonder if the constant light static does something to our hearing? In Jazz, they will lightly hit the snare drum with metal sticks that look like maybe some sort of salad tosser, and that creates essentially static, and some of my favorite tracks have this. Why exactly do they do this? My wife hates it. I don't mind it, but I'd love to hear some of those tracks without it. Is it possible that a light track of noise, perhaps full spectrum white noise at 10 - 20% of the volume of the music somehow does something to the way we perceive auditory information and make it subconsciously more pleasant? I have no idea, just speculating/brainstorming here.)

[PeterSt]

So Wow, lightminer. You certainly got the hang of it. Don't need more help any more either, as it seems.

 

A few words of general caution. And as usual, from the sooo large distance :

 

The only really "quality" thing you seem to talk about, is bass. Ok, good.

The further you (seem to) talk about is distortions. This is also good.

 

What is not so "good" in my view is that for the bass too you do not give distinct descriptions. At least none that would be in my vocabulary. Not that this is about communication and such, but what you imply as good bass to me tells nothing. Say that this is because bass itself can be characterized by a dozen and more properties and it is there where the distinction is made.

 

And now you talk "distortion" in all cases ...

(hey, would be my long distant conclusion)

 

No need to work this out because you and me are not here to work it out. But we could learn something from it. So only one example for fun :

 

If I'd apply a noisy USB interface (not one from which you hear noise through the speakers, but one which measures noisy) ... oh boy, what would YOU have super bass. Bet ?

It is more bass, wider bass, deeper bass. From there you might derive "better" bass.

But besides it is not, you can hear it throughout in the other properties of music, starting with better highs.

Eh

Yes, nice. "Better highs". Why ? because more rolled off. Smoothed by that noise. Better because something else nasty is going on first. But in the end not better at all. And you know what ? way way way more resembling vinyl.

Now that.

 

Confused eh ? Does not matter. What does matter is that at least I see a 1000 times better description from your DSOTM endeavors than the first one - only because someone forced you to listen. So now you've won all pleas in advance.

And I ? I am only happy that one can be forced into going beyond himself. I mean, half of this forum is about the perceived impossibilities of that. But who really tries !?

 

Peter

 

PS: Might you agree that you are so far more working on getting rid of distortions than squeezing out the real thing, then start listening to your speakers with the volume full open. Hear noise (no matter how close by) ? then start with getting rid of that, no matter how. And don't forget removing the preamp (as first cause of it), if you use one.

[YashN]

MQA is fairly mysterious at this point. Some have compared it to the next generation of Meridian's loss-less packing software used for DVD Audio discs.

 

There is more on it here at http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/meridians-mysterious-mqa-site-22575/index3.html

 

I know, I'm in that thread :-)

[YashN]

Well I asked AS about the new MFSL KOB DSD, and they said they have no provenance information, only the label can give me that.

 

I can recollect an RMAF video on Youtube where I believe it's Chad Kassem who says that sometimes even the labels do not really know. Or maybe Cookie says that, or both of them.

 

:-)

[YashN]

Thanks for sharing this extensive comparison, lightminer, very cool!

 

A few questions:

 

1. Do we know of a track that has been done Master Tape -> vinyl and also same Master Tape -> DSD128?

 

2. Is it possible to ask the Mastering Engineer how the vocals to take your example sounded in his room post Mastering? e.g. whether it was very forward as you thought with the vinyl or not?

 

Those could be interesting.

 

I'd rather do these comparisons between vinyl and native DSD128 (not DSD64, and DSD64->DSD128 is passable but not as good as something direct to DSD128 or something direct to a much higher rate than DSD128 and then down-converted to DSD128).

 

The goal would be to get something with the good characteristics of vinyl in digital, but without the bad parts of vinyl and without the bad parts usually associated with 'digital'.

 

Keep it up!

 

 

For Don't Know Why, in just the first 40 seconds you can hear a difference between the two tracks. On the Vinyl Rip she is a distinct voice with smaller lips (keep in mind I have Magnepan 3.6qrs, which are sometimes blamed for the '4 foot wide lips problem') and she had walked forward about 6 feet towards me from the AS DSD version. She seemed more like a real person. Also, her voice was sweeter, so there were actual tone differences. I would have to hear her live to say which is more accurate, but I think the Vinyl is the more accurate. Between 1:45 and 2:05 are some strong vocal gymnastics, and you can hear the difference there as well - the vinyl rip again shows some freq's from her voice that aren't there on the DSD.

 

On Come Away With Me I noticed that the bass was stronger in the Vinyl version, and had more impact. Not just louder, but broader so to speak. That also reminded me of some of what impressed me on DSotM, they do that heartbeat thing at the beginning and repeated throughout the album, and the bass is a lot better on these vinyl rips. Again - not just stronger, like what you would do with an EQ, but instead more detail, a more full sound. From 1:45 to 2:30 on Come Away With Me there is this nice very non-Metallica styled guitar solo. Before tonight I had never realized there are at least 4 guitars there! I had always thought it was one. There is the main one, one to the wide/far left, one on the right, and one playing with the guitar soloist, perhaps just behind them. That does come out in both the DSD and the Vinyl Rip. I will say that the DSD version is *extremely* close. And that leads me to an insight about why I got so excited about DSotM, there aren't high-rez versions to compare to. So I think I got the high-rez dose, I got the Vinyl 'pleasant distortions', and this 3rd possible effect I'm describing here where it is even more revealing somehow of the original recording.

 

For the third track the piano at the very beginning has so much character, and I felt like that was stronger on the Vinyl version. This was the track with clear problems with the rip. The stronger/better bass is evident here as well. Not really much to say on this one, the first two were more interesting.

 

So, look, let me be very clear. The DSD is very good. Good enough that I don't know that the extra significant hassle of all that is required for Vinyl Rips, even if you only want to download them, is worth it. But it does seem more musical, and it does seem at the same time to contain those 'pleasant distortions', yet have more nuance and detail around the voices and images that is extremely positive. It is seriously good stuff.)

[vinylripper]

Hello first post, I'm not one for long or technical postings so I'll simply add my own thought's on this.

 

As my username implies I do a lot of vinyl to digital transfers. I've got 3 tables 3 different flavors of A/D each has it's own strengths, soooo many variables. I'd say about 30 to 40 percent of the transfers I do are saved into "MY" collection. When everything works out nicely they do IMHO sound about as close to the master tape as you can get, or they can just as easily sound like poo.

 

It is a lot of work, a proper cleaning alone is a good 30 minutes or more but that is also most of the time the single most important part of the job. I'm really lucky to get paid for it and a fair wage at that.

 

In the end we all can go on and on about the sound quality the effect of the many possible technical/measurable flaws involved. But for me when they are good I love em'

[EuroDriver]

A few questions

 

What format / sample rate was the Nora Jones vinyl rip ?

 

What playback software are you using for the vinyl rip and DSD 64 playback and on what OS are you running it on

 

What's your PC hardware and does it have a USB card or using mobo USB ?

 

Which DAC are you using for these comparisons ?

[lightminer]

Peter - thank you for lauding my writing capabilities, I appreciated that. btw, link coming tonight for files.

 

 

Yashn -

 

1. Do we know of a track that has been done Master Tape -> vinyl and also same Master Tape -> DSD128?

 

Well, I think that is almost right. What you mention, I think we have with the Nora Jones, despite the somewhat-bad vinyl rip. What we really want is this - just adding to what you have:

 

Master Tape -> Vinyl -> ADC to 128DSD

Master Tape -> 128DSD (64 DSD okay)

 

 

2. Is it possible to ask the Mastering Engineer how the vocals to take your example sounded in his room post Mastering? e.g. whether it was very forward as you thought with the vinyl or not?

 

I tried to find the name of the guy in either case and could not.

 

What is interesting, though, is that the person who did the DSotM conversion actually went through quite a process, I had no idea. I found the following in some notes in the file structure:

 

Technical Notes:

---------------

Turtable:

*VPI TNT-V "Hot Rod" with VPI HRX Dual Motor, VPI HRX Platter (Motor spiked with Starsound Sistrum Brass Audiopoints into VPI MDF Platform)

 

*VPI Turntable Stand with VPI MDF Platform resting on three Symposium Rollerblocks Series 2+ ball bearing vibrational control devices. Symposium Ultra Shelf (constrained layer damping) used under the Rollerblocks and ontop of the VPI Turntable Stand.

 

*JWM 12.5 Unipivot Tonearm

 

*VPI Synchronous Drive System (VPI S.D.S.)

 

*Clearaudio "Accurate" Phono Cartridge

0.6mV Moving Coil (24k Gold internal wiring)

Stylus TRIGON II, diamond tip radius 5x40 µm

Cantilever Clearaudio-boron

Coil array Symmetrical to pivot point (Clearaudio-patent)

Compliance hor./vert. 15/15µ/mN

Recommended tracking force 2.2 grams (Individual)

Electrical Impedance 50 Ohms @ 1000hz

Channel separation >40dB

Channel balance Non measurable

 

Cables:

*Harmonix Golden Performance HS101 RCA (0.75m) from table to Phono Stage

*Furutech Audio Reference III RCA cables from Phonostage to Analog-to-Digital converter

 

Phonostage:

*Einstein "The Turntables Choice" single ended Phono Amp

 

ADC Converter:

*Custom Analog to Digital converter designed and built by yours truly. Solid State device with high quality, minimal hand selected parts and shortest signal paths.

*Recorded at 192kHz, 24bit --> downsampled to 96kHz, 24bit FLAC files through BIAS Peak Pro XT 6.

 

Record Preparation:

*All records cleaned & scrubbed on a VPI 16.5 Wet Vacuum record cleaning machine

*Record cleaning liquid is L'Art du Son

 

 

 

He says 'by yours truly' in making his own ADC, but he doesn't tell us who he is!! With the way the world is these days, maybe someone here will know who he is and perhaps he can even comment.

 

We need some hardcore vinyl rippers (like vinylripper ) to get on the thread and get involved, maybe do a vinyl rip for us to 128DSD and share. Something that is on Acoustic Sounds by one of the two guys mentioned earlier in the thread.

 

 

EuroDriver -

 

What format / sample rate was the Nora Jones vinyl rip ?

24/96 flac

 

What playback software are you using for the vinyl rip and DSD 64 playback and on what OS are you running it on

JRiver, Windows7. I want to eventually have a third partition dual boot for a Windows12 server with the AudioOptimizer thingy but haven't run that yet. I do turn off virus scanning and several services when I do critical listening. There are still several processes (i.e., asus things I can't turn off) that aren't allowed to be turned off that every now and then take up 1% CPU. I raise CPU priority for JRiver to "High".

 

What's your PC hardware and does it have a USB card or using mobo USB ?

While it is a 'noisy' computer (something like 32 GB RAM, 3930k CPU, 3 SSDs, 4 HDDs, massive graphics card (500 cores), etc.), I do have the SOTM USB card with power out set to "off". Belkin Gold USB cable. When I had one SDD I used a SOTM SDD filter, and bought a fan filter as well, but then I had the 7 storage devices, and the case has like 8 fans, so I'd have to spend a lot more money on SOTM filters so I just took the two I had out for now. One of my next experiments is to actually block the power leg of the USB cable.

 

Which DAC are you using for these comparisons ?

The relatively pedestrian Oppo105D. (However, I'll say that it does better than people realize on 64/128DSD and I have a Kimber power cord that new costs around as much as the Oppo itself (that I bought used), and also with vibration platform it actually performs much better than stock, there is an 'oppo105 used as USB...' that I comment in a few times about all of this)

[lightminer]

Peter - when you get the files in a bit here, I'm very curious what your analysis is around the difference in bass, but listen to it first. Try the first three tracks, lots of that heartbeat kind of thing. I will assume you have 16/44.1 DSotM.

[lightminer]

Since people were asking the rest of the system is:

 

USB Cable to Supratek Pre, then Kimber Hero to Pass Labs Amp, then Kimber MonacleXL to Magnepan 3.6qr.

 

I'm thinking of getting a Lampizator soon but also considering a few other options. Lots of interesting DACs coming into play.

[EuroDriver]

That's quite a PC you have there !

 

In my experience with the OPPO 105D is that it is very sensitive to electrical noise from the computer via USB. The most effective way I found to bring the performance of the 105D up was to use SOTM SMS-100, then the SQ performance was in another league, but still a big gap from Exasound and Antelope

 

When it comes to software players Foobar + SACD sounds very noticeably better, and then HQ Player is another jump. WS 2012 helps computationaly heavy PCM to DSD 128 conversion a lot

 

Look forward to your keen observations if you try any of the above

[YashN]

In my experience with the OPPO 105D is that it is very sensitive to electrical noise from the computer via USB. The most effective way I found to bring the performance of the 105D up was to use SOTM SMS-100, then the SQ performance was in another league, but still a big gap from Exasound and Antelope

 

Marantz pushed back the launch of one of their DACs because they had feedback from engineers that having video right next to audio makes it near impossible to do pure audiophile quality well. (i.e. they wanted to make it an AVR initially, but dropped that idea and made it a pure Audio DAC).

 

So I guess the Oppo, despite its very good performance for video, has the audio suffer from interference because it does both.

 

I wonder if there's a way to do a proper isolation from an AVR, maybe by using the Audio pass-through functionality and then sending that to an Audio-only additional DAC.

 

I wonder if this would work well or if we'd have audio-video sync issues.

[PeterSt]

Peter - when you get the files in a bit here, I'm very curious what your analysis is around the difference in bass, but listen to it first. Try the first three tracks, lots of that heartbeat kind of thing. I will assume you have 16/44.1 DSotM.

 

Will be very happy to do it !

I only like to notice that you posted this 12 hours ago and ... nothing yet. But maybe it's ok.

 

Peter

[lightminer]

Don't want to get too sidetracked, but Oppo has a 'Music only' setting and it turns off all of the AV, and there is no HDMI output while in that setting.

[PeterSt]

So lightminer, here goes. Only a few minutes of time for a report so I hope it suffices.

Environmental context : 118dB sensitive speakers which implies "speed" in them.

 

Just in sequence how I played things and made my notes :

 

Nohra Jones :

 

Too much haze in her voice.

Very far away.

Not enough bass.

Track 07 : distorted S'es.

No ticks (which I added after getting to DSOTM).

 

DSOTM :

Many disturbing ticks.

A2 1st notice : Very (very) unbalanced. Nothing evolves to what it should (think cut sounds). I wrote "evolves to 'nothing'".

1st voice appearance : super sibilance.

A3 : the hits on the beats are sheer ticks. Like a cheap drum machine.

One pile of distortion in the highs (I sort of promised that from the graph you provided).

A4: The bells. Here I stopped. Ouch ouch ouch (and sorry).

 

Then back to Nohra Jones RBCD. Nohra wasn't too bad and not played regularly here.

A real bass is playing.

No spur of haze.

Voice is forward (subjective : as should).

05 : Something I can't read, but it must be a positive.

Beautiful piano.

No strange jumping out cymbals.

 

That was it.

But because my son was making the remark that I finally was going to play DSOTM throughout and from the beginning, I am now listening to that since 20 minutes. The MFSL (16/44.1) version I mean. From there my remark right away : punch.

 

I hope this is useful. Was fun for me to do. Thanks a lot.

Now back to making making.

 

Peter

[PeterSt]

05 : Something I can't read, but it must be a positive.

 

Just recalled from memory (finalizing dinner) :

Listen how the strings are being played (is hat Bill Frisell ?)

[Jabs1542]

Marantz pushed back the launch of one of their DACs because they had feedback from engineers that having video right next to audio makes it near impossible to do pure audiophile quality well. (i.e. they wanted to make it an AVR initially, but dropped that idea and made it a pure Audio DAC).

 

So I guess the Oppo, despite its very good performance for video, has the audio suffer from interference because it does both.

 

I wonder if there's a way to do a proper isolation from an AVR, maybe by using the Audio pass-through functionality and then sending that to an Audio-only additional DAC.

 

I wonder if this would work well or if we'd have audio-video sync issues.

 

My Oppo (BDP-95) has a totally separate daughter card for the audio with its own circuitry completely isolated from the rest of the unit. It's like a separate audio playback system shoved inside a video player box.

 

I'm not sure about the video shutting off during audio playback because I can access the onscreen menus (you have to in order to change the audio settings).

[lightminer]

Jabs - you can hit "Pure Audio" if its on your remote control at the beginning and end of tracks for critical listening. It switches over immediately.

 

Peter - so that is interesting. I'm curious what Wisnon thinks. I loved the bells in particular. There is a point where some of this is taste, perhaps. I've heard those bells on many, many systems. On the Norah Jones one you indicate that she is more forward in the reverse places compared to my listening. And you had the exact opposite experience of the bass on the Norah Jones CD vs Vinyl Rip where to me it is clear there is more bass and punch on the VinylRip. It could be that the full chain is extremely important and we are actually both hearing what we are saying we are hearing, but the rest of the system matters a lot. You mention 118 db efficient speakers, and mine are 86 or 87 . Both a bit on the extreme side, though I just helped a friend into an 84/85 speaker, even less sensitive.

 

Specifically what did you think of the 'heartbeat' bass notes that it starts with and goes back to every now and then? To me is was much more profound than the 16/44.1. Huge improvement.

 

I have Magnepan 3.6qr, which are sometimes criticized as not having 'hit you in the gut' dynamics compared to the best come speakers unless you put a kilowatt behind them. I like Von Schweikert for example, and they definitely 'hit you in the gut'. I felt that for the first time in my system this VinylRip of DSotM had that punch through the Maggies. Play the heartbeat thing back to back and see what you think.

 

Totally 100% agreed on the ticks/clicks.

 

Curious what Wisnon says, any comment there?

[PeterSt]

I loved the bells in particular. There is a point where some of this is taste, perhaps. I've heard those bells on many, many systems.

 

I think I did too, but possibly I forgot how bad they sounded everywhere.

But no, this is sheer distortion and of the worst kind. Really.

 

On the Norah Jones one you indicate that she is more forward in the reverse places compared to my listening.

 

I'm afraid that I can't understand what you're saying here. "reverse places" ?

(please notice that I may have not written all from my notes because my paper was quite messy)

All I said was that all was way in the back (flat I forgot to note, but sure true also).

Next on the CD version het voice was forward as should (in my perception).

PS: Reading back, you may mean that on LP she is more forward while I say that happens on CD ...

 

And you had the exact opposite experience of the bass on the Norah Jones CD vs Vinyl Rip where to me it is clear there is more bass and punch on the VinylRip.

 

Yes, but there is a difference between bass and a bass. Notice that I wrote the latter. This means a real bass (upright one, double) and not a bass sound. The LP shows bass sound = nothing but that.

 

It could be that the full chain is extremely important and we are actually both hearing what we are saying we are hearing,

 

But of course. The difference could be in not knowing what to look for, like looking for that "a" bass example. So say that my system is super duper and it enables the real instrument to show, while you listen to PC speakers, then we both hear what we hear and it is not even much subjective to experience. However, you will say "less bass" from those speakers and I will say "no bass" from the same PC speakers because there's no real instrument coming from it.

 

Specifically what did you think of the 'heartbeat' bass notes that it starts with and goes back to every now and then? To me is was much more profound than the 16/44.1. Huge improvement.

 

Yes, funny. Funny that when I put up the real thing (ok, sorry, the CD ) I told my son, "no, *now* we are going to play it in full because the other was super sh*t". Right after that I told him "look, you can FEEL the difference". He : sounds completely different anyway !

And that from a stupid heart beat thing.

The LP shows it much longer. More with embraced fluid. CD short and deep. And .. with punch. Net softer (!) but that is how it always goes with poor bass. That booms.

If you listen to bass sound, opposite to a real bass, try to sort out what actually happens. Ok, hard to do of course when the real thing won't show, but it is all about the better rendition. So, LP smears all anyway, especially because it can't even bare low frequencies (say up to 30Hz and there it stops). Now envision the flattening of the waves because of that, and you can envision smear just the same. And flat (Norah Jones). And no channel separation. And more.

 

Please don't take my theorizing as a truth of any kind. I only try to explain what I hear and how it can be so logically that I perceive it as I do.

 

Peter