fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 12 minutes ago, sandyk said: John's DHNRDS S/W does NOT remaster recordings. It is used to correct for non decoded , or incorrectly performed Dolby-A decoding. The present use of John's OFFSHOOT freeware is being used by members to correct for stuff ups in CDs in their possession. The latest I heard is that nearly every CD ever released has been "stuffed up", 😉 ... I'll take my chances with with the original version, thanks. A good example of something really "stuffed up" - this sort of track is still a challenge for the Edifiers; the acoustic depths captured, and overall mastering of this shows the weaknesses in the actives rig at the moment, very distinctly, Link to comment
daverich4 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 2 hours ago, sandyk said: You have already made it abundantly clear by your reactions to many posts that you are an Objectivist, so why not post something in the Objective sub forum that meets the requirements ? Your declaration that I have one view or another is based on ignorance. sandyk 1 Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 8 hours ago, Summit said: I've never said or suggested that Frank can't say what he hears. I have done the opposite and asked him over and over again to explain what he has done to make his budget equipment sound much better than 99% of all hi-fi systems. As I said in my last post, I have no desire to discuss with anyone who tries to ridicule my choices of devices and who distorts what I write. I don't think I've ridiculed your device choices in this thread at all. Other than Frank, I don't think I named anyone, so I don't get your statement that I "ridicule your choice of devices". You can be certain that I don't believe AC cords make an audible difference worth discussing, having tested and measured a number of them, and having a background in electronics. But that wasn't my point at all and not what I said. Yet, you still decided to get offended and argue the point that I didn't make. -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
sandyk Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, pkane2001 said: You can be certain that I don't believe AC cords make an audible difference worth discussing, having tested and measured a number of them, and having a background in electronics. That doesn't mean that they can't be heard under non sighted conditions , as 5 people including myself and Audiophile Neuroscience verified . However, the gear used cost around $100K and the differences were very small, but in favour of the expensive mains cables. How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
John Dyson Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 2 hours ago, fas42 said: Actually, I can a give a very specific causal chain ... you know John's infamous "FeralA" unpleasantness? - get all the connections right, and that problem will very likely completely disappear. Listen to the comparison -- 'decoded' being 'unpleasant', and 'CD' being 'good'. Frankly, 'unpleasant' sounds a lot prettier to me. Note that I did NOT even define the process, only reverse engineering a 'cock-up' (hope I don't get in trouble for this usage) by the distributors. I did ZERO modifications after decoding. I added ZERO love, EQ, or anything like that after decoding. This is 100% vanilla output. (well, rate conversion, trimmiing to snippet length, and APPARENT level matching.) The levels MIGHT be a little low by a few dB, but should be able to mostly hear the results. The work has taken a long time, but the distributors have been keeping very intricate secrets, and there is a REAL algorithm, MUCH MUCH simpler than my previous attempts -- because it doesn't just 'improve' the recordings a little, but it finally acts per my original goal... Other people can REALLY experience these results, and I open up totally transparently (other than source code -- but now much simplifed and less hackery since it is now working super well.) Just take a listen, and keep your mind open... Two example snippets, look for 'decoded' and 'CD' in the names. PS: I do sometimes fail at decoding -- found out that the Al Stewart recordings that I was trying to work on have 11 DolbyA compression passes on them. The decoder starts getting a little iffy at about 5-6 passes, but still works. The Al Stewart results started getting a dB or so of freq response imbalance. The scheme is very intricate, but uses very simple steps. The ABBA stuff is 3 passes at different calibration levels, and Linda's was 5 passes. The decoder is VERY accurate for a gain control device. John ABBA-Eagle-CD.flac ABBA-Eagle-decoded.flac LindaRonstadt-HeatWave-CD.flac LindaRonstadt-HeatWave-decoded.flac Link to comment
sandyk Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 28 minutes ago, fas42 said: The latest I heard is that nearly every CD ever released has been "stuffed up", The fact is that very few mainstream recordings are able to take full advantage of the CD medium due to various shortcomings in their production, especially where other tracks are mixed in. The opamps commonly used in mixers in the early days were lacklustre at best as well. How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Popular Post Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 56 minutes ago, fas42 said: Yes, nearly all the tweaks have been tried by various people, many times.The difference is that I keep trying tweaks until the SQ slips into place - if you stop tweaking, "because that's all that's needed", then it's highly likely you won't succeed. So we are back to your self aggrandizing god like tweaking talents that you cannot share but which insults other members lack of talent, knowledge and experience to do the same.People can and do tweak competently, I dare say with equal to superior skillets to yours. What sets them apart is that they don't make absurd claims or grandiose claims about the results. gmgraves, Summit and Teresa 2 1 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 56 minutes ago, fas42 said: No, they won't. The audio industry would go nuts if every speaker was super massive - the freight costs would be greater than that of the unit itself, 😁 ! Speaker designers use a variety of techniques to reduce vibration and back waves affecting cone movement etc. If all that was required was to fill them full of sand or lead to achieve greatness, that's what they would do, or provide a way for you to do it. To suggest freight costs would be an issue is nuts unless the speakers in question are so cheap and nasty they cost less than postage.Such low quality speakers wouldn't come up to par no matter how much you loaded them. 56 minutes ago, fas42 said: The bad recording is a test of competence, of the playback chain - if all of the positive aspects of the track are not clear, irrespective of any negative ones, than it doesn't get a pass mark. Good quality gear will reveal "the positives aspects of the track" far better than modified low end gear. It will also reveal the flaws which is what you seem now to conveniently ignore. Teresa 1 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
John Dyson Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 9 minutes ago, sandyk said: The fact is that very few mainstream recordings are unable to take full advantage of the CD medium due to various shortcomings in their production, especially where other tracks are mixed in. The opamps commonly used in mixers in the early days were lacklustre at best as well. Definitely, your two points are correct. The opamps are often the typical production op-amps of the '80s, and the compression is extreme. The DolbyA units that are so common (even today) in producing CDs have simple two transistor discrete amplifier circuits -- you know, the npn/pnp pair type circuit, with the feedback between the PNP collector and NPN base, through a voltage divider? R Dolby even used the jFET input equivalent to the NPN/PNP combo, and I did an analysis of his circuit, and I am amazed what a good designer he was. On the jFET design, he was very good at choosing an optimum bias point for low distortion. However, that old circuitry does worry me. Not all designers are as genius as Mr Dolby. MODIFICATION -- brain fart in the message: The feedback is between the PNP collector and the NPN *emitter*. Geesh -- what I mentioned, with two common emitter transistors, would most likely oscillate.. I wish I didn't make mistakes all of the time... John Link to comment
Popular Post Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 48 minutes ago, fas42 said: Sorry, I don't do pics! You know the photos of the engineer's desk, with stuff piled everywhere? Visually, it's a mess, and won't tell you anything - the neatness freaks will have a field day, and if someone thinks copying bits and pieces that are positioned well enough to do the job, but are in every other sense pretty silly, is a good idea ... well ... 🤪. It's a Work In Progress, and not fit for public consumption, 😁. "I don't do pics" haha Right! 'Aint that a surprise 🤣Too messy eh? Pull the other one Frank. 48 minutes ago, fas42 said: I'm happy to answer questions, so fire away ... That 'method' has never worked which is why members asked for pics !🤷♂️🙄 Teresa and gmgraves 2 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Popular Post Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 3 hours ago, gmgraves said: What you do is to post the same “nothing” over and over and over again, ad nauseam! IOW, you never actually say anything. ...Because you recount nothing. What you do is to post the same “nothing” over and over and over again, ad nauseam! IOW, you never actually say anything. George, just "fire away" with your questions, Frank is "happy to answer" them all.😂 gmgraves, Summit, Teresa and 1 other 4 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 14 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said: So we are back to your self aggrandizing god like tweaking talents that you cannot share but which insults other members lack of talent, knowledge and experience to do the same.People can and do tweak competently, I dare say with equal to superior skillets to yours. What sets them apart is that they don't make absurd claims or grandiose claims about the results. Okay, let's settle down a bit ... @ray-dude talks of the sort of listening qualities that one can extract from recordings if everything is set up correctly - all that I do is apply enough tweaks such that that the rig that I'm working on does the same thing. The result is, that you don't hear the characteristics of the playback chain - only those of the recording. \ Anyone else who applies the same methods would get the same results - it's up to them to decide to do this. Link to comment
Popular Post Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: Okay, let's settle down a bit ... I was never unsettled 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: @ray-dude talks of the sort of listening qualities that one can extract from recordings if everything is set up correctly So do I and most other members 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: - all that I do is apply enough tweaks such that that the rig that I'm working on does the same thing. Yes, we know the claim Frank, the results are in question ( in truth, there is very little question). 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: The result is, that you don't hear the characteristics of the playback chain - only those of the recording. Yep, that's one of the results that are in question ( in truth, there is very little question) 8 minutes ago, fas42 said: \ Anyone else who applies the same methods would get the same results - it's up to them to decide to do this. They have, they don't and the vast majority of responses to your posts tell you so. Pics please ! Teresa, kumakuma and Racerxnet 3 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
Popular Post gmgraves Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 6 hours ago, fas42 said: It's impossible to get through to you, George - the equipment may work fine when hooked up, and therefore there's no need to do anything. But most likely, various recordings will come across poorly; then, the precise way they sound off is the data you work with, and you choose the next step depending upon that data. Get through about what, Frank? You never offer anything. Just a bunch of vague references to your “magical method” which turns mediocre equipment into better than the finest gear available. Such improvements and at such a level as to be so utterly impossible that nobody; subjectivist, objectivists, or those in between believe you. Yet, you keep repeating your nonsense over and over again, never adding anything, but often changing your story and backpedaling when caught. 6 hours ago, fas42 said: You can't come out of the Adding Goodness mindset; the desire to hotrod - therefore, you will never understand ... Heeelllp ... !!! There is nothing to understand, Frank. You want help. It’s easy. Just stop writing this nonsense and it will go away. Just write about something else. Summit, Teresa and Audiophile Neuroscience 2 1 George Link to comment
Popular Post gmgraves Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 3 hours ago, fas42 said: Okay, let's settle down a bit ... @ray-dude talks of the sort of listening qualities that one can extract from recordings if everything is set up correctly - all that I do is apply enough tweaks such that that the rig that I'm working on does the same thing. The result is, that you don't hear the characteristics of the playback chain - only those of the recording. \ Anyone else who applies the same methods would get the same results - it's up to them to decide to do this. What methods, Frank? You have never told anyone what your methods actually are. Teresa and Audiophile Neuroscience 1 1 George Link to comment
Popular Post Audiophile Neuroscience Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 1 hour ago, gmgraves said: What methods, Frank? You have never told anyone what your methods actually are. 8 hours ago, gmgraves said: Frank will NEVER tell you what he has done to make his budget equipment sound “much better” than 99% of all hi-Fi systems, because he has done nothing. I managed to a few shots of the method, interesting, see below.... and and Audiophile Neuroscience, Teresa and gmgraves 3 Sound Minds Mind Sound Link to comment
fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 1 hour ago, gmgraves said: What methods, Frank? You have never told anyone what your methods actually are. @kumakuma has already spelt them out - here, The rig I had 30 years ago had a power supply problem in the amplifier - poor choice of smoothing caps - fixed by assembling a far more effective array of smaller caps, having much lower parastic resistance, better construction. The current active speakers have a sensitivity to mains noise - which I'm currently working out a solution for. This is known as: Find a Problem; Fix the Problem - very obscure approach, usually taught only to car mechanics and similar ... Link to comment
Summit Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 Ok am out here and this meningless debate... Audiophile Neuroscience 1 Link to comment
Racerxnet Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 4 hours ago, Summit said: Ok am out here and this meningless debate... Yep, 2 weeks later and the hamster is still on the wheel. Same crap......Different day. I'm surprised Chris allows this to continue. Everyone is much better off finding useful things to accomplish, than responding to someone who needs mental help. Pathological lying is a mental disorder in which the person habitually or compulsively lies. Proverbs 12:22 ESV / 246 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who act faithfully are his delight. Have fun guys...... Teresa 1 Link to comment
Popular Post kumakuma Posted August 3, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted August 3, 2020 8 hours ago, fas42 said: The rig I had 30 years ago had a power supply problem in the amplifier - poor choice of smoothing caps - fixed by assembling a far more effective array of smaller caps, having much lower parastic resistance, better construction. The current active speakers have a sensitivity to mains noise - which I'm currently working out a solution for. This is known as: Find a Problem; Fix the Problem - very obscure approach, usually taught only to car mechanics and similar ... jabbr and Audiophile Neuroscience 2 Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley Through the middle of my skull Link to comment
fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 6 hours ago, kumakuma said: Yes, it might seem obvious, but that's not how most people think ... if your amplifier erupts in a cloud of sparks, and a cloud of smoke fills the room, you have a faulty amplifier ...if you're not getting the best possible SQ, and a good selection of "bad recordings", you also have a faulty amplifier. In my space, the thinking is the same - the levels of "obviousness" are very different - but the fundamentals are identical. That's also part of, my "method" - which people work desperately hard at trying not to understand - even invoking The Big Guy, 😁. Link to comment
fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 Just note here how the industry has dug a hole for itself, One buys very expensive equipment, which makes listening to a lot of recordings an unpleasant exercise. It's a loss, loss - plenty of money has disappeared, and you don't enjoy the music that you used to get a kick out off. Doesn't have to be that way ... which is the reason I keep posting my take on the matter, 😉. Audiophile Neuroscience 1 Link to comment
sandyk Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 15 hours ago, fas42 said: The rig I had 30 years ago had a power supply problem in the amplifier - poor choice of smoothing caps - fixed by assembling a far more effective array of smaller caps, having much lower parastic resistance, better construction. Frank When you parallel a group of lower value capacitors of the same value you are accentuating their normal resonant dip in frequency, but at a higher frequency, resulting in a marked impedance dip around that resonant frequency which will be audible when compared with a flat and low PSU impedance e.g. ( from John Linsley Hood) A typical 470uF 25V electrolytic capacitor , with a typical 3.3uH internal series inductance. offers the sort of impedance vs. frequency response shown in the figure whose lowest impedance is .87 ohms at 400Hz and has risen to some 10 ohms at 35Hz. It's not really practical, but if you want a more even PSU impedance you need to have electros of varying values ,starting with a large value and successive lower value capacitors such as perhaps 10,000uF, 1,000uF , 100uF ,1uF,100nF, or perhaps with more intermediate values The other alternative is to use voltage regulation with a very low output impedance that is as flat as possible from almost DC to >100kHz. Yes, I tried that years ago and it resulted in a natural sound, but as I said previously it's not normally practical, and there are better ways to achieve this. How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
gmgraves Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 15 hours ago, Summit said: Ok am out here and this meningless debate... Can’t say that I blame you. This thread is only for masochists. Audiophile Neuroscience 1 George Link to comment
fas42 Posted August 3, 2020 Share Posted August 3, 2020 13 minutes ago, sandyk said: Frank You are showing your lack of knowledge in this area. When you parallel a group of lower value capacitors of the same value you are accentuating their normal resonant dip in frequency, but at a higher frequency, resulting in a marked impedance dip around that resonant frequency which will be audible when compared with a flat and low PSU impedance e.g. ( from John Linsley Hood) A typical 470uF 25V electrolytic capacitor , with a typical 3.3uH internal series inductance. offers the sort of impedance vs. frequency response shown in the figure whose lowest impedance is .87 ohms at 400Hz and has risen to some 10 ohms at 35Hz. It's not really practical, but if you want a more even PSU impedance you need to have electros of varying values ,starting with a large value and successive lower value capacitors such as perhaps 10,000uF, 1,000uF , 100uF ,1uF,100nF, or perhaps with more intermediate values The other alternative is to use voltage regulation with a very low output impedance that is as flat as possible from almost DC to >100kHz. Yes, I tried that years ago and it resulted in a natural sound, but as I said previously it's not normally practical, and there are better ways to achieve this. It's more complex than that, Alex - I understood the behaviours of capacitors 30 years ago, courtesy of Ben Duncan's excellent set of articles in HiFi News. When using electrolytic capacitors one can be quite relaxed in how the values are used, because no resonant peak is emphasised. The well known local brand of ME Sound used the technique of huge numbers of paralleled caps to do the job, and I don't hear too many people complaining about their sound ... There is a bit of an Art to getting capacitor values "just right" - and the mains filter of my own design exploits this, very carefully. Link to comment
Recommended Posts