IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?

[sandyk]

17 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Just to note, that paralleling capacitors should not be done lightly - there are precise combinations of values and types that should be fine, and others that can get you into trouble. The reasons are purely technical - the parasitic characteristics of the caps' constructions, such as ESR, and how they're mounted can mean there is a resonant impedance - the combo will ring, and this will most likely degrade the SQ.

Ceramic capacitors are particularly troublesome in this respect.

I don't use extremely low ESR types specifically designed for Motherboard use .

Neither do I use Panasonic FM types that John Swenson appears to like. I don't have a problem with Panasonic FC, just not 2 FCs in parallel.

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

OMG!! LOL!!!! No, no, no!  Waveforms are not stored on the hard drive. All files are stored as a bunch of bits on the hard drive and whether the bits are ones or zeros is controlled by whether or not they are magnetized.

 

Are you really that ignorant of how data is stored?

 

 

You are deliberately misrepresenting what I have said about the e.e times link that I posted. The illustration shows the RECOVERED electrical waveform before being processed.

Did you even  bother to read the link that I provided ?

 

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, davide256 said:

Sandyk, magnetic tape can be analog but a HDD has no mechanism to capture an analog signal... data is always binary when recorded on a HDD, has to be decoded for time domain and amplitude

I am not disputing that. I am talking about the RECOVERED electrical waveform before processing.

Low battery warning.

[sandyk]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

.... I'm not quite sure what the issue with the FM caps would be - in past efforts the FCs have done their job, and I note in the current catalogue that we're up to FS! FC, FM, etc, electros in parallel should be fine - did you find a specific problem with the FM?

Frank

 The Panasonic FM are VERY low ESR, and wherever I have used them ikn an analogue area they have resulted in a "hardening"  of the sound.

 Neither are they a good choice at the  output of some types of voltage regulators which don't like to see a low ESR capacitor at their output.

 

Alex

[sandyk]

4 hours ago, sandyk said:

4 hours ago, davide256 said:

Sandyk, magnetic tape can be analog but a HDD has no mechanism to capture an analog signal... data is always binary when recorded on a HDD, has to be decoded for time domain and amplitude

I am not disputing that. I am talking about the RECOVERED electrical waveform before processing.

Low battery warning.

 

I was going to add before my mobile gave me a low battery warning, and I had to shut it down, that primitive magnetic stores were used with the Processors (O.M.P. -  Operations and Maintenance Processor and T.C.P. - Traffic Control Processor) in the L.M.E ARE-11 Processor Controlled, Crossbar Telephone Exchanges initially.

I was well aware of how the data was stored magnetically, as we were taught this at Training School, complete with diagrams . Any resemblance between the 1s and 0s going in , to the pattern saved magnetically, and later recovered via the Read Heads is purely coincidental !

[sandyk]

1 minute ago, fas42 said:

did you directly try FM compared with FC - same rating, same capacitance, like for like?

 

 Yes. I have tried both in a JLH PSU add-on as well as at the output of LM317T voltage regulators.

The LM317T does not like very low ESR capacitors at it's output, which may result in spikes with sudden changes in load.

 I have seen published info on the subject, but doubt that I could readily find it again.

[sandyk]

36 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Have never used LM317, my experience is with LM338 devices, and I gave the output an extremely low ESR, using multiple paralleled electro's - no issues. Every circumstance is different - so, something I'll keep in mind ...

 

 Hi Frank

 I found the info. It may be of interest to some other members too.

Regards

Alex

 

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/regulators_noise1_e.html

[sandyk]

14 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Most of the stuff was transferred from Reel-to-Reel tape onto DAT and I don't see any way to get it into the computer without first burning it to a CDR

 

 

 Hi George

 I don't suppose that your computer has an SPDIF input ?

 I used to be able to connect the Sony DAT player I had at the time, to my PC via Coax SPDIF.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, gmgraves said:

I still maintain, that if you want to hear either analog or digital where full advantage has been taken of either format's potential, you have to "roll your own". Not even so-called "audiophile labels" have ever produced a CD, SACD, DVD-A or Blu-ray-A release that sounded anything even close to being as good as the master. I must tell you now that a well recorded 16-bit/44.1 KHz master will sound so good that most audiophiles will wonder why anybody would have felt that there was a need for High-Res! It's just that something is lost in the commercialization of master tapes during their journey to the silver disc!

This loss of quality is so profound, that many, after hearing these modern (and expensive) 1-to-1 1/2 track 15ips copies of master tapes from companies like The Tape Project and others, have come away profoundly changed. They mis-perceive what they have heard as proof that analog is better than digital, when what they have actually heard is the difference between the quality captured by the master, and what they got when they bought that same title on either vinyl, some commercial silver disc format or downloaded file. 

Hi George

Perhaps much of the loss is at the mixing stage where the more tracks you mix in , the poorer the S/N becomes. I have a CD-r with quite a few tracks copied from the original master. Peggy Lee-Fever is a  real standout before they mixed more stuff in.

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

16 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

You're right, it shouldn't make any difference whatsoever if the master is transferred directly to whatever digital medium, it should sound just like the master and the check-sums should be the same. Here's the rub, what you get is NOT a direct copy of the master. It's a copy of a modified copy of the master that has been diddled with by the record company. Why, you ask? The short and dirty answer is because audiophiles are not the record company's primary market and most ordinary* people don't want recordings with full dynamic range and deep bass that will make their cheap speakers double, or highs that cause cheap amplifiers to clip. 

 

*Ordinary People = NON-audiophiles.  

 

 Agreed.

 Barry Diament also found that CDs from different replication plants often sounded a little different despite identical binary content. 

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Now, as a recording engineer myself, I have made bit-for-bit CDs directly from masters and I have transferred analog master tapes through decent ADCs direct to digital and then transferred them to CD, and DVD-A without any gain riding, compression, or EQ of any kind, and I can assure you thatches digital transmission and storage mediums are certainly capable of exactly mirroring the most demanding of programing material. 

 George

 I presume that you are talking here about CDs that have been ripped again to HDD/SSD for playback ?

If not, have you ever tried burning them to a BR disc using the Blue Laser, and playing them from a decent BR player ?

I tried this and was surprised to find just how good they sounded.

Alfe put this down to much less Read Jitter due to the greater precision of the Blue Laser and it's Optical block.

The real reason though for me doing this, was for Archival purposes after the failure of 2 HDDs in 12 months.

It doesn't hurt either to have quite a few of your favourite albums on the one disc.

 

Regards

Alex

[sandyk]

6 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

And that those differences disappeared when the CDs were ripped to his HDD.

 

And that those differences disappeared when the CDs were ripped to his HDD.

 Nevertheless, it didn't prevent he and his wife from both hearing differences with the Comparison CD-Rs that I sent him !!!

 

Barry wasn't using improved non SMPS PSUs etc. with his Mac computer as verified by others to improve SQ.

 I often wonder just how much better Barry's high res recordings could have sounded if he had used techniques and products with his Mac as described in the Uptone Forum which many members have verified to result in lower noise floors, improved transparency  etc. No SMPS for example.

 

Of course you have NEVER tried such things based on purely IDEOLOGICAL grounds !

 

[sandyk]

10 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Did he test his hypothesis? Seems downright implausible to me.

 

 If you knew what his daytime job and qualifications were, perhaps you wouldn't find it so implausible ! 

Alfe has several Patents in the Optical device area, as well as previously having designed the internal LG GGW H20L BR writer that I use.

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I have a compulsive personality disorder with strong perfectionist tendencies so I'm deeply afraid that if I start down this road I will end up like this poor lost soul:

 

 

 And considerably poorer as well ?

[sandyk]

Just now, Ralf11 said:

 

irrelevant  

 

 the question is whether a positive result was obtained by guessing correctly or not - not likely that someone would guess directly 19 out of 20 times (assuming it was a double-blinded test)

 

 

 EVERYTHING is irrelevant to you unless you have personally experienced it !

 

You also know full well that the cost of organising the kinds of testing that you insist on is prohibitive and takes a great deal of time ,  thus you are highly unlikely to be proved wrong for this reason alone.

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, mansr said:

What model CD player did he use. I'd like to know so I can avoid gear from that clearly incompetent manufacturer.

 

 Given that back then, with a format that Philips and Sony claimed was perfect, I doubt that even the flag ship products  from most manufacturers of the time wouldn't  be considered less than competent these days !

Many players were 14 bit back then too.(Nakamichi included)

We have learned a lot since the days when Barry Mastered and Engineered his numerous well respected commercial recordings, many of which are in a lot of C.A. members collections.

 

Of course, we all know that you could have designed a much better CD player back then too!

[sandyk]

58 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

wrong on both counts

 

 I will let other members judge that for themselves.

You have a habit of demanding the same kind of proof in other threads and subjects too, not just to my posts.

[sandyk]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

 

IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?

 

 It sometimes appears to be mass-debatable here !

Shouldn't you be terminating more USB plugs ?

 

[sandyk]

15 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Makes zero difference. The implausibility was due to me not being aware of a plausible mechanism - do you know of one or does Alfie? Given his expertise level seems he'd be well placed to test his hypothesis - I note you've not answered that question so I take it the answer is 'no' ?

 

Who cares if you aren't aware of a plausible mechanism  ?  Certainly not me.

Alfe has strict NDA's to abide by , so you will not be getting a reply from him about his ongoing research in this area.

 He has previously confirmed other issues, as well as posting quite a few Tutorials in another area of the forum.

Try using the Search Facility and you will find some of them.

[sandyk]

 

Quote

Feeling defensive perchance Alex?

 

Not in the least. Alfe is a good online friend of mine.

 This is a link to just one of Alfe's articles.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/24776-optical-drive/?tab=comments#comment-450174

 

[sandyk]

4 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

Please then explain the deflection onto personalities. Science as I understand it is quite impersonal?

 

 I have better things to do than get into another useless discussion with a yet another hard line Objectivist.

 I have been doing that for > 9 years already in this forum , and no longer give a rat's rear end whether some of your crowd believe me or not.  

[sandyk]

"The defense mechanism hypothesis looks to be the best one then."

 

Believe what you want. 

I don't know you from a bar of soap, so why should it bother me what you think ?

BYE !

 

[sandyk]

Just now, fas42 said:

Hey, Alex, don't get too fussed about Richard's, opus101, style - he's a Pom, can't help himself

 Hi Frank

 I don't intend to get too fussed about him.

As I said , I have better things to do such as more experimentation with the JLH PSU add-on which I recently upgraded to around 4 FARADS simulated capacitance instead of the approx. 0.7FARADS of the original published design.

 This will soon be trialled at the output of a friend's 12V rail on his HDPlex.

 He has already had good results using the JLH design with a voltage regulator in front of it, as an add-on with this supply to power a USB Regen, but he would like to try powering a JS1 Ultracap supply from the HDPlex with the JLH further cleaning up the HDPlex +12V before going into the JS1

 

Regards

Alex 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

here is a plausible mechanism:

 

 

 

Experienced DIY people are able to negate most of such problems by extensive listening over a period of time and becoming quite used to the sound, then reversing the modification to it's previous state, where any differences will usually be noticed immediately, and not always in favour of the modified version.

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

wrong - you obviously don't understand confirmation bias

 

 My bad. I answered for Expectation Bias, NOT Confirmation Bias.

I had a pile of quotes to reply to, and was in too much of a hurry.