Lies about vinyl vs digital

[Allan F]

Semente:

You should be ashamed of yourself for polluting the forum with that disgusting image.

[fas42]

1 hour ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Could it be said that some amount of Fremer's notoriety comes from his disdain for CDs?  I think even if he heard a CD he liked that he would be reluctant to taint his legacy.

 

 

The local hifi guru, who reigned over the whole Blue Mountains a couple of decades ago, had The Shop to go to locally, absolutely despised CDs. To the point where the silver platters were just thrown on the floor, lying in corners covered with scratches and dirt - you were almost treated with contempt if you said you wanted good sound from digital ... "What sort of fool are you ??!!" ...

 

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The local hifi guru, who reigned over the whole Blue Mountains a couple of decades ago, had The Shop to go to locally, absolutely despised CDs. To the point where the silver platters were just thrown on the floor, lying in corners covered with scratches and dirt - you were almost treated with contempt if you said you wanted good sound from digital ... "What sort of fool are you ??!!" …

 

 

Which suggests that some living in those higher altitudes not far from Sydney may be suffering from Oxygen deprivation to their brains

[fas42]

1 minute ago, sandyk said:

 

Which suggests that some living in those higher altitudes not far from Sydney may be suffering from Oxygen deprivation to their brains

 

He was reacting from the clear losses in SQ that typical digital replay, especially back then, delivered. Once you tune into the characteristic distortion that less than optimum digital produces, then "you always hear it" - expect it to be there, will ferret it out in every track that gets played - anyone for snap, crackle, pop in vinyl, 😝? ... in the later years, he developed the symptoms of a hoarder; it was known that he had mental issues towards the end.

 

 

[kumakuma]

38 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Have a good handle on what he has to say - like most in the field, he rates the quality of the playback as being of low importance; so I spend a lot of the time shaking my head when I read what he has written.

 

I'm sure he'd have a similar reaction to most of your posts.

[Ralf11]

39 minutes ago, Allan F said:

Semente:

You should be ashamed of yourself for polluting the forum with that disgusting image.

 

 

Yes, Let's also exclude Brexit Boy and the Aussie Coal-powered PM.

 

- makes you wonder if there is something wrong with the English language...

 

No, wait there is that hot looking PM in NZ...

[Allan F]

16 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I'm sure he'd have a similar reaction to most of your posts.

 

As I expect do many, if not most of us .

[fas42]

"Most of us" appear to be people who delight in the flavour of their rigs, rather than wanting to extract everything that exists on a recording - if one's ego is tied up in the investment of money, especially, in developing The Flavour of what they use, then what I talk about would make little sense.Those who are interested in The Flavour of the recording, and the experience that it can deliver, however, may find value in my posts. Especially because you now have thousands of flavours, rather than the single one, of your rig alone ...

[JoeWhip]

2 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

If you could afford the astronomical cost of MF's turntable, arm, cartridge and phono preamp combination (assuming that, like me, you couldn't), you might view vinyl somewhat differently. And, as Firedog points out, MF has recently been considerably less harsh in his criticism of digital, while he still prefers vinyl.

I would never spend that kind of money on audio products. I much prefer travel and food. 

[fas42]

5 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

And yet it is very difficult to distinguish between CD and HiRes.  We know this because of numerous blind listening tests.

 

The confusing of "special qualities" of certain formats, with the ability of a particular setup to do a better job when replaying from a certain format, is constantly "muddying the waters" - the answer is remarkably simple: if your system makes nicer noises when replaying from a certain format, convert everything you have to the other format. Can be done for minimal cost, just takes time, and a person to do it.

 

People complain about "my laptop" ... from my POV, hi-res vs. redbook is as "dumb" as how many people think of my using this cheap playback device ... 😝

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

The full dis was "flat-earther bits is bits fools", which I find ironic because a "flat-earther" would be someone who rejects science.

 

LOL! The "bits is bits fools" refers to anyone who claims that playing back a bit perfect file will sound the same each time (on the same equipment).

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, John Dyson said:

*Sometimes the voluntary distortion in a CD helps to mitigate quality problems in poorer equipment -- but most audiophiles primary equipment would not fall into that category.

 

The non-audiophile has a simple, inexpensive system and doesn't hear the distortion.  The audiophile has a brilliant, expensive system and must suffer the distortion.  Life isn't fair.  ☺️ 

[sandyk]

32 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

LOL! The "bits is bits fools" refers to anyone who claims that playing back a bit perfect file will sound the same each time (on the same equipment).

 That isn't correct. A bit perfect file should sound the same each time on the same equipment, when played from and to the same location using the same playback S/W.

The disputed claim from the "bits is bits" brigade is that bit perfect files created on different types of equipment,

and saved to different storage media such as internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory, whether using Linear or SMPS PSUs, and using different Operating Systems and different ripping S/W, internal or external CD/DVD Roms  etc. MUST all sound identical.

[lucretius]

49 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 That isn't correct. A bit perfect file should sound the same each time on the same equipment, when played from and to the same location using the same playback S/W.

The disputed claim from the "bits is bits" brigade is that bit perfect files created on different types of equipment,

and saved to different storage media such as internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory, whether using Linear or SMPS PSUs, and using different Operating Systems and different ripping S/W, internal or external CD/DVD Roms  etc. MUST all sound identical.

 

You got a lot going on there. Let me enumerate it:

1. Music files created on different equipment
2. Files played from different storage media (internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory)
3. Linear vs SMPS PSUs
4. Different operating systems

5. Different ripping software

6. Ripped from internal vs. external optical drives
   
   You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
    
7. Different playback software

The "bits is bits brigade" is saying bit perfect files (delivered that way to the DAC) sound identical (same DAC, amp, speakers, room, etc.) even if 1,2,4,5,6,7 are the case.  I remember that #2 has been discussed and although there can indeed be different levels of noise generated from these different storage media, it is generally inaudible/negligible.  As for #3, any different power supply (it's not just linear vs SMPS) may pollute the output of the DAC; however, this is not always the case and I would hope that for a "good" DAC, the effect is inaudible -- yes, there are some really bad SMPS PSU's that should never be used, while many others will have no audible effect on a good DAC.

[sandyk]

12 minutes ago, lucretius said:

• You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
• 7.     Different playback software

 

Yes, that is their claim too, provided that the S/W results in a " Bit perfect" output to the DAC.

 

Mani  has already demonstrated to a reasonable degree of confidence, (depending on which side of the great divide you come from) that simply changing a  setting in XXHE can result in an audible difference without altering the actual Binary Output

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

The non-audiophile has a simple, inexpensive system and doesn't hear the distortion.  The audiophile has a brilliant, expensive system and must suffer the distortion.  Life isn't fair.  ☺️ 

 

 

how good does the system have to be??

 

 

[fas42]

3 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

I'm sure he'd have a similar reaction to most of your posts.

 

When I read the material produced by these people, I see the same sort of mistakes being perpetrated as was famously discredited by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_F._Olson , in the High Fidelity Demonstration. Oh, not as bad, not by a long shot 🙂 - but enough to largely cancel out the value of what they are supposedly measuring.

 

IOW, the controls on what they are trying to test are nowhere near good enough, to truly assess what counts towards optimum SQ...

[kumakuma]

1 hour ago, lucretius said:

 

You got a lot going on there. Let me enumerate it:

1. Music files created on different equipment
2. Files played from different storage media (internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory)
3. Linear vs SMPS PSUs
4. Different operating systems

5. Different ripping software

6. Ripped from internal vs. external optical drives
   
   You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
    
7. Different playback software

The "bits is bits brigade" is saying bit perfect files (delivered that way to the DAC) sound identical (same DAC, amp, speakers, room, etc.) even if 1,2,4,5,6,7 are the case.  I remember that #2 has been discussed and although there can indeed be different levels of noise generated from these different storage media, it is generally inaudible/negligible.  As for #3, any different power supply (it's not just linear vs SMPS) may pollute the output of the DAC; however, this is not always the case and I would hope that for a "good" DAC, the effect is inaudible -- yes, there are some really bad SMPS PSU's that should never be used, while many others will have no audible effect on a good DAC.

 

Considering that the "bits is bits brigade" is a stereotype created entirely by subjectivists, I'm not sure that you can define what claims it makes.

[firedog]

9 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Could it be said that some amount of Fremer's notoriety comes from his disdain for CDs?  I think even if he heard a CD he liked that he would be reluctant to taint his legacy.

 

He has CD's he likes. But I think he always will say the vinyl version sounds better. Even if it is from a digital source.

[mansr]

9 hours ago, lucretius said:

You got a lot going on there. Let me enumerate it:

1. Music files created on different equipment
2. Files played from different storage media (internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory)
3. Linear vs SMPS PSUs
4. Different operating systems

5. Different ripping software

6. Ripped from internal vs. external optical drives
   
   You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
    
7. Different playback software

The "bits is bits brigade" is saying bit perfect files (delivered that way to the DAC) sound identical (same DAC, amp, speakers, room, etc.) even if 1,2,4,5,6,7 are the case.  I remember that #2 has been discussed and although there can indeed be different levels of noise generated from these different storage media, it is generally inaudible/negligible.  As for #3, any different power supply (it's not just linear vs SMPS) may pollute the output of the DAC; however, this is not always the case and I would hope that for a "good" DAC, the effect is inaudible -- yes, there are some really bad SMPS PSU's that should never be used, while many others will have no audible effect on a good DAC.

Remember that Alex claims an SMPS used while ripping a CD (or more generally writing a file to storage) will poison that file such that it can be heard when played back regardless of what power supply is used then. I think most half-way reasonable people would disagree with that.

[John Dyson]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

Remember that Alex claims an SMPS used while ripping a CD (or more generally writing a file to storage) will poison that file such that it can be heard when played back regardless of what power supply is used then. I think most half-way reasonable people would disagree with that.

There are two mechanisms where the idea of SMPS problems could manifest -- not likely significant nowadays...  The only way that the file could be poisoned would be if there was an analog *electronics* stage (that is, a true analog signal) in the process.  In some cases, that MIGHT be true, but very unlikely in today's equipment.  (I am thinking of a case where an external CDrom burner with analog input might be used to copy a previous digital signal, therefore allowing some encroachment of noise.)  There is one other possiblity that the naturally analog process of burning the CDrom (the lowest levels ARE analog) might have a disruption which increases the likelihood of errors in signal recovery -- also unlikely significance nowadays.

 

Sometimes, when an overly strong or unqualified claim is made, then it is sometimes a good thing for a little thought experiment to figure out those edge conditions where the claimed situation might occur.   Sometimes, those claimed situations might be unlikely, and the cause might not be exactly as claimed (e.g. the SMPS might have had problems causing the voltage to be out of tolerance, or have poor regulation.)  The source of the information might be making a 'true' statement from their standpoint, but the entire context of the claim might be missing, and confusion or disagreement might ensue.   Egos don't help either.

 

John

 

[marce]

11 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

LOL! The "bits is bits fools" refers to anyone who claims that playing back a bit perfect file will sound the same each time (on the same equipment).

I'd get some new gear If  you have such a problem...

[marce]

10 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

You got a lot going on there. Let me enumerate it:

1. Music files created on different equipment
2. Files played from different storage media (internal or external SSD, HDD or USB memory)
3. Linear vs SMPS PSUs
4. Different operating systems

5. Different ripping software

6. Ripped from internal vs. external optical drives
   
   You left out different playback software, so let's add that:
    
7. Different playback software

The "bits is bits brigade" is saying bit perfect files (delivered that way to the DAC) sound identical (same DAC, amp, speakers, room, etc.) even if 1,2,4,5,6,7 are the case.  I remember that #2 has been discussed and although there can indeed be different levels of noise generated from these different storage media, it is generally inaudible/negligible.  As for #3, any different power supply (it's not just linear vs SMPS) may pollute the output of the DAC; however, this is not always the case and I would hope that for a "good" DAC, the effect is inaudible -- yes, there are some really bad SMPS PSU's that should never be used, while many others will have no audible effect on a good DAC.

You said the same gear, are your goalposts on wheels?

[marce]

1 hour ago, John Dyson said:

There are two mechanisms where the idea of SMPS problems could manifest -- not likely significant nowadays...  The only way that the file could be poisoned would be if there was an analog *electronics* stage (that is, a true analog signal) in the process.  In some cases, that MIGHT be true, but very unlikely in today's equipment.  (I am thinking of a case where an external CDrom burner with analog input might be used to copy a previous digital signal, therefore allowing some encroachment of noise.)  There is one other possiblity that the naturally analog process of burning the CDrom (the lowest levels ARE analog) might have a disruption which increases the likelihood of errors in signal recovery -- also unlikely significance nowadays.

 

Sometimes, when an overly strong or unqualified claim is made, then it is sometimes a good thing for a little thought experiment to figure out those edge conditions where the claimed situation might occur.   Sometimes, those claimed situations might be unlikely, and the cause might not be exactly as claimed (e.g. the SMPS might have had problems causing the voltage to be out of tolerance, or have poor regulation.)  The source of the information might be making a 'true' statement from their standpoint, but the entire context of the claim might be missing, and confusion or disagreement might ensue.   Egos don't help either.

 

John

 

The same could be said for linear supplies as well... So how would the differences be stored with BIT PERFECT data?

[John Dyson]

11 minutes ago, marce said:

The same could be said for linear supplies as well... So how would the differences be stored with BIT PERFECT data?

If you are talking about the CD recording stability/quality (not audio signal itself.) It is all about the strength and timing of the recorded signal on the CD itself.  So, if there are larger variations in the timing or variations in the strength, there can be different errors.  This is definitely manifested on a larger scale basis using entirely different media and different recorders.   When a voltage or noise level varies, the resulting behavior of the record electronics (naturally analog, even if in a digital circuit) can vary.   Powering a laser diode is based upon an analog voltage and a driver with analog requirements.

 

I am not claiming that this effect is all that common, but that keeping an open mind about how things REALLY work can help to explain the exceptional occurances that are often anecdotally reported.

 

John