Lies about vinyl vs digital

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

The correct settings will render all skin tones accurately, not just whites.

Unless the source has had extensive colour grading applied. The teal and orange scourge is the film industry equivalent of the loudness war.

[Teresa]

16 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

 

The correct settings will render all skin tones accurately, not just whites.

 

Agreed. White people, whose skin tones have a large range of colors, non of which are not anywhere close to the color white. White people having skin unnaturally red was one of the reasons I rejected "Vivid". I was just saying that on my HDTV the "Movie" setting looked more natural with everything, including outdoor scenes.

 

I don't doubt many people select "Vivid" because it is very bright and looks spectacular, however IMHO it doesn't look real. I am quite satisfied with the "Movie" setting.

[lucretius]

5 hours ago, alfe said:

 

Actually you are building noise after each shot during the moulding process.

 

 

 

You mean "stamping" process? And if the pressed CDs can be read back bit-perfect, what does it matter?

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, marce said:

I set all my monitors using a colormunki, TV's using a DVD and with direct comparison to a calibrated monitor. I also use one of these

https://www.datacolor.com/photography-design/product-overview/spyder-checkr-family/

Having a photo of one on a calibrated monitor as well as showing it on the TV gives me more chance of getting the colours as realistic as possible. Doing it by eye looking at grass outside your window is not the best way, your eyes adjust white balance automatically.

 

Why not use the ColorMonki for the TV's?  But then if your TVs are anything like my old Sony, it's too difficult to type in values in the service menu while using ColorMonki.

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, Teresa said:

I tried all the settings on my HDTV and actually prefer the "Movie" setting. I did a custom setting by eyes only and it was very close to the movie setting, however the movie setting still looked the best to me after watching a few Blu-ray's. I found "Vivid" too bright, for example the skin tone of white people was far too red. With the "Movie" setting skin tone looked more like the white people I see in real life, pink to light red to light brown.

 

The problem with many HDTVs is that you can't get the accuracy with only the user controls -- one needs to go into the service settings.  But then for most people, professional calibration isn't worth it, i.e.the result one gets with the user controls is "good enough".

[The_K-Man]

 

13 minutes ago, lucretius said:

The problem with many HDTVs is that you can't get the accuracy with only the user controls -

 

The same held true for standard def/tube sets.

 

Fortunately, manufacturers like Samsung have moved the grayscale settings(bias & drive) out of service mode and into the advance submenu of the picture settings.  That extra mile is thus attainable by anyone with the proper tools - the puck style sensor, a laptop, and patterns(off Blu Ray or a generator).

[alfe]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

You mean "stamping" process? And if the pressed CDs can be read back bit-perfect, what does it matter?

You said you can't trap noise in the polycarbonate and  my answer is: you always built noise at every shot , that 's why a stamper is limited to a certain number of copies.

And there is no such" read back bit perfect", there is error correction.

By stamping process you mean Galvanic.

[kumakuma]

5 hours ago, alfe said:

 

Actually you are building noise after each shot during the moulding process.

 

 

 

Fortunately this noise isn't contained in the ripped data. 

[alfe]

8 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Fortunately this noise isn't contained in the ripped data. 

You are right, and that explain why Barry can hear a difference between two CD copies and no difference after ripping.

[STC]

2 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

Agreed. White people, whose skin tones have a large range of colors, non of which are not anywhere close to the color white. White people having skin unnaturally red was one of the reasons I rejected "Vivid". I was just saying that on my HDTV the "Movie" setting looked more natural with everything, including outdoor scenes.

 

I don't doubt many people select "Vivid" because it is very bright and looks spectacular, however IMHO it doesn't look real. I am quite satisfied with the "Movie" setting.

 

I have always used standard or natural with slight adjustments. Skin tones are the hardest to reproduce accurately. Photographers can confirm that. 

 

Don’t expect the skin color to be natural as all of them would have painted their skin to look good on screen. I mostly watch documentaries relating to nature and that gives a nice reference for accurate adjustment. For movies, my preference is not shared by daughter. My son and wife don’t care. 

 

But the adjustments is always going on depending on movies. 

[Paul R]

6 hours ago, sandyk said:

 I.M.E. that is incorrect, as demonstrated by Barry with the comparison CD-Rs that I sent him.

 

As far as I remember , Barry listened to the CDs. The differences vanished when the CDs were ripped. 

 

Of course, my memory and ancient notes about it could be wrong. 

 

[The_K-Man]

25 minutes ago, STC said:

 

I have always used standard or natural with slight adjustments. Skin tones are the hardest to reproduce accurately. Photographers can confirm that. 

 

Don’t expect the skin color to be natural as all of them would have painted their skin to look good on screen. I mostly watch documentaries relating to nature and that gives a nice reference for accurate adjustment. For movies, my preference is not shared by daughter. My son and wife don’t care. 

 

But the adjustments is always going on depending on movies. 

 

If one must eyeball tv picture settings, do so while tuned to PBS News Hour or any other content on PBS with human hosts.  PBS has the 'flattest' - not over produced - image of any broadcast channel or network

[Paul R]

7 hours ago, alfe said:

It will vanish only if  noise  and jitter are limited.

 

That is exactly what happens - in this case noise and jitter are mostly artifacts from the CD player, especially if the CD player has trouble reading a bit of the physical CD. Most CD players will simply skip that data and never send it to their internal DAC, which will simply play silence if no data is received, or it may hold over and play the last sample it received until it gets a new sample. Either way, it isn’t playing the music is is supposed to be playing at that instant in time. 

 

When ripped, that data is read - perfectly, without errors - from a much easier to read media.  On top of that, even if noise and jitter still exist, it is different noise and jitter. Best of all, it pretty much only matters at the DAC. That’s the magic place where those digital music files are turned into actual music. And in this case, you have a lot more choices. I think that even modestly priced DACs these days, like the $99 iFI iDSD Nano will sound better than the DAC in all but the most expensive CD players. 

 

There is of course, more to the story,  it the upshot of it is, ripping the disk removes the issues that are caused by the CD media. The same issues that cause people to spend $40 on a special edition CD that has the same music as the original normal CD, but is on higher quality media. You effectively do the same thing when you rip the normal  CD to disk, but for fractions of a cent. 

 

At least, I have found this to be true in every case where I compared CD to ripped files.

 

-Paul

[kumakuma]

18 minutes ago, Paul R said:

 

That is exactly what happens - in this case noise and jitter are mostly artifacts from the CD player, especially if the CD player has trouble reading a bit of the physical CD. Most CD players will simply skip that data and never send it to their internal DAC, which will simply play silence if no data is received, or it may hold over and play the last sample it received until it gets a new sample. Either way, it isn’t playing the music is is supposed to be playing at that instant in time. 

 

When ripped, that data is read - perfectly, without errors - from a much easier to read media.  On top of that, even if noise and jitter still exist, it is different noise and jitter. Best of all, it pretty much only matters at the DAC. That’s the magic place where those digital music files are turned into actual music. And in this case, you have a lot more choices. I think that even modestly priced DACs these days, like the $99 iFI iDSD Nano will sound better than the DAC in all but the most expensive CD players. 

 

There is of course, more to the story,  it the upshot of it is, ripping the disk removes the issues that are caused by the CD media. The same issues that cause people to spend $40 on a special edition CD that has the same music as the original normal CD, but is on higher quality media. You effectively do the same thing when you rip the normal  CD to disk, but for fractions of a cent. 

 

At least, I have found this to be true in every case where I compared CD to ripped files.

 

-Paul

 

This from Barry says essentially the same thing:

 

Quote

What I've found over the years, without a single exception so far, is that a properly burned CD-R on a decent blank will *always* sound more like the CD master than even the best replicated discs I've heard from any of dozens of plants around the world. And *none* of these sounds indistinguishable from the master used to make it. On the other hand, when properly ripped to hard drive in a raw PCM format (such as .aif or .wav), the results *are* to my ears, indistinguishable from the master used to make the disc from which the files were ripped--even with that pit structure revealed by the AFMs. I haven't found any exceptions to this yet in over 30 years of comparisons.

 

 

Source:

 

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/24129-how-to-get-the-best-sq-from-cd/page/2/

[Paul R]

4 hours ago, mansr said:

The filesystem timestamp is not part of the file data and doesn't contribute to the checksum.

 

I thought RIFF headers (since Alex likes to use WAV files) had both a file size  and a time stamp in them that would be included in the file checksum. 

Guess not though, just a file size. 

 

Sorry, I was wrong there, thanks for correcting that! 

 

Yours,

-Paul

[alfe]

Sorry to contradict you Paul, but Noise and Jitter are part of the physical media.

[Paul R]

13 minutes ago, alfe said:

Sorry to contradict you Paul, but Noise and Jitter are part of the physical media.

 

Must be a crossed connection. Yes, that is true. But noise in the physical media is not in any way part of the digital data contained on the media. When you read that data off the CD, the noise does not come with it.

 

Or to say it another way, the noise on the media makes reading the data more difficult, but makes no changes in the data itself.

 

 

 

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, alfe said:

You said you can't trap noise in the polycarbonate and  my answer is: you always built noise at every shot , that 's why a stamper is limited to a certain number of copies.

And there is no such" read back bit perfect", there is error correction.

By stamping process you mean Galvanic.

 

You're putting words in my mouth.

 

I asked the questions:

 

1. If there is degradation from each generation copy, does that not imply the process is not bit-perfect?
2. If no, then how is the "inherent electrical noise" encapsulated in the polycarbonate?

 

Still waiting for an answer to the latter question.

 

Error correction is irrelevant to the end user, if he can get the intended bit-perfect data stream. In fact, the error correction ensures that the user gets the bit-perfect data intended.

 

Obviously, there's a point where too many errors are unacceptable  (where there's a chance the intended data is affected).  Irrelevant.

 

By 'stamping process', I was referring to replication with CD moulding machines. And it was a question asking what you were referring to.

 

Nonetheless, I take it you maintain there is noise captured in the CD Masters as well as the replicated CD's.

 

I don't have any CD Masters but I have many replicated CDs. Whereabouts within these replicated CDs will I find the noise?

 

[marce]

5 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

Why not use the ColorMonki for the TV's?  But then if your TVs are anything like my old Sony, it's too difficult to type in values in the service menu while using ColorMonki.

They are Samsung's, never tried a service menu, would be nice to do it properly. Will have a play on one. Cheers.

[alfe]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

You're putting words in my mouth.

 

I asked the questions:

 

1. If there is degradation from each generation copy, does that not imply the process is not bit-perfect?
2. If no, then how is the "inherent electrical noise" encapsulated in the polycarbonate?

 

Still waiting for an answer to the latter question.

 

Error correction is irrelevant to the end user, if he can get the intended bit-perfect data stream. In fact, the error correction ensures that the user gets the bit-perfect data intended.

 

Obviously, there's a point where too many errors are unacceptable  (where there's a chance the intended data is affected).  Irrelevant.

 

By 'stamping process', I was referring to replication with CD moulding machines. And it was a question asking what you were referring to.

 

Nonetheless, I take it you maintain there is noise captured in the CD Masters as well as the replicated CD's.

 

I don't have any CD Masters but I have many replicated CDs. Whereabouts within these replicated CDs will I find the noise?

 

You will find attached two test, the first one is test disc and the second is 2000 copies later.

Look at the radial noise and the BLER.

Error correction is part of the reading process and  allow to get rid of the noise and jitter or BLER call the way you want, without it the disc will not even play.

In CD replication there is moulding or galvanic no"stamping process"

Yes I maintain there is noise and jitter during glass mastering , galvanic and moulding

The noise is the shape of the pits.

 

Datarius report for Al.pdf

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, alfe said:

You will find attached two test, the first one is test disc and the second is 2000 copies later.

Look at the radial noise and the BLER.

Error correction is part of the reading process and  allow to get rid of the noise and jitter or BLER call the way you want, without it the disc will not even play.

In CD replication there is moulding or galvanic no"stamping process"

Yes I maintain there is noise and jitter during glass mastering , galvanic and moulding

The noise is the shape of the pits.

 

Datarius report for Al.pdf 15.28 MB · 1 download

 

Interesting information. Thankfully, I stopped playing physical CDs years ago.

[The_K-Man]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

Thankfully, I stopped playing physical CDs years ago.

 

I don't understand the mentality behind this statement, but you're not the only one I've heard or read it from.

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, The_K-Man said:

 

I don't understand the mentality behind this statement, but you're not the only one I've heard or read it from.

 

It means I haven't owned a CD player for years. I buy a CD, rip it, and play the ripped files.

[The_K-Man]

17 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

It means I haven't owned a CD player for years. 

I'm sorry to hear that.

 

 

18 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I buy a CD, rip it, and play the ripped files.

So do I. And.... 😮.. I also keep the CDs, for playing at home or in my car! 

[mansr]

The Red Book (IEC 60908) has a section on defects. For a disc to be considered valid, the block error rate at the input of the CIRC decoder shall be less than 3e-2 averaged over 10 seconds. Furthermore, no more than 7 successive blocks may have C1-uncorrectable errors. Each block encodes 6 stereo samples.

 

Jitter is covered as well:

«Unintentional frequency modulation of the channel bit frequency during mastering may cause clock regeneration problems in CD players. The maximum time error of the channel bit frequency as a function of the modulation frequency shall be below the values given in figure 18. This time error is measured with a constant linear velocity.»