The problem with subjective impressions

[Rexp]

20 minutes ago, Kimo said:

 

Well, it was the guy who mastered it who called out the loss at 16 bits. 

 

The alternative is that someone added reverb to the SACD, which would make Mr. Hoffman, or some audio sneak, a bit of a mischief maker at best.

Are there any (non MQA) versions on Tidal you like? 

[Kimo]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Getting confusing ... it's a call and response pattern - the left piano calls, "da dum", the right one responds "dum, dum" - subjectively it's two tracks, in the mix ...

Sorry for confusion, but you got it, the response.  

 

I have to believe this is pretty easy to hear on most systems.  I could pop in the tube amp tomorrow for comparison.

[Kimo]

Just now, Rexp said:

Are there any versions on Tidal you like? 

Sorry, I don't do Tidal.  

 

I actually like the DCC CD, but the decay is lost a bit.  I believe he mastered this with a tube based system, so maybe it was lost in a 12ax7 somewhere?

 

I guess I could track down a non DCC CD to see if it is closer to the DCC or the high resolution.

[sandyk]

5 minutes ago, Kimo said:

Sorry for confusion, but you got it, the response.  

 

I have to believe this is pretty easy to hear on most systems.  I could pop in the tube amp tomorrow for comparison.

 Perhaps Frank could UL his rip of that 1985 track for a few interested members via say Dropbox and a PM ?

[fas42]

What's with people swapping left and right channels, on uploaded YouTube?? 😨 ... Found a few dodgy versions, but this one, gets pretty close to what I'm hearing,

 

 

Is this good enough to say that the right piano isn't up to it? Or is the decay OK?

[Kimo]

7 hours ago, fas42 said:

What's with people swapping left and right channels, on uploaded YouTube?? 😨 ... Found a few dodgy versions, but this one, gets pretty close to what I'm hearing,

 

 

Is this good enough to say that the right piano isn't up to it? Or is the decay OK?

 

Actually, the DCC might even be worse than this one, but I am comparing this on my computer with my system, which isn't that easy.  That being said, either high res version on HD tracks sounds different.  

 

The overall effect is a hardening of the notes being struck.  No warble.  

[John Dyson]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

What's with people swapping left and right channels, on uploaded YouTube?? 😨 ... Found a few dodgy versions, but this one, gets pretty close to what I'm hearing,

 

 

Is this good enough to say that the right piano isn't up to it? Or is the decay OK?

All three of the copies that I have are different from the YouTube version.   One of mine is similar, but has more highs even when decoded -- I am speaking of the piano has more middle highs, a little more crisp.  I might have to help someone to hospital today, and currently working on LindaR decode/remastering, but will present all three versions some time today (in decoded or original state, depending on what is more 'correct' for the recording.)

 

John

 

[davide256]

17 hours ago, gmgraves said:

I thought that was what heavy, rim-weighted platters were for; to smooth out the cogs? Of course, my vintage Thorens TD-160, MK-II, doesn’t cog, because it’s belt-drive, but I’ve a friend with a JVC high-end direct drive ‘table, and it sounds very good with its SME 3009 arm and Koetsu cartridge, thank you.

I'm pretty certain that your Thorens if maintained will make the JVC eat dust in a bass and dynamic range comparision...

[John Dyson]

2 hours ago, Kimo said:

 

Actually, the DCC might even be worse than this one, but I am comparing this on my computer with my system, which isn't that easy.  That being said, either high res version on HD tracks sounds different.  

 

The overall effect is a hardening of the notes being struck.  No warble.  

Here is the 'best match' of my 3 copies for the You Tube example.  It was a bit of a hasty decode, and only had the single cut from the album, so could onlly make the compenstaing EQ based on the single cut off the album.

From the apparently early CD copy that I have, in feral DolbyA format, I had to do the following EQ before decoding:

 

bass -3 2250 0.50q bass +3 250 0.50q treble +3 2250 0.50q

bass -6 2750 0.50q bass +6 750 0.50q treble +6 2750 0.50q

treble -9 6k 0.50q treble 0 12k 0.50q

(The fact that the gain at 12k was '0' or '-3' is a good sign that the EQ is correct.)

The calibration level was -12.45dB (a totally expected value),

decoded in MS mode.   LR mode resulted in things shifting around.

 

Sorry that this is a limited length snippet.  The fact that it is the 'A' version means that it is the second full attempt after finding the correct MF eq (MF eq is the 2250 and 2750 EQ for the needed dip in the midrange.)

 

12 - The Doors - Moonlight Drive-A-snippet.mp3

[Kimo]

49 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Here is the 'best match' of my 3 copies for the You Tube example.  It was a bit of a hasty decode, and only had the single cut from the album, so could onlly make the compenstaing EQ based on the single cut off the album.

From the apparently early CD copy that I have, in feral DolbyA format, I had to do the following EQ before decoding:

 

bass -3 2250 0.50q bass +3 250 0.50q treble +3 2250 0.50q

bass -6 2750 0.50q bass +6 750 0.50q treble +6 2750 0.50q

treble -9 6k 0.50q treble 0 12k 0.50q

(The fact that the gain at 12k was '0' or '-3' is a good sign that the EQ is correct.)

The calibration level was -12.45dB (a totally expected value),

decoded in MS mode.   LR mode resulted in things shifting around.

 

Sorry that this is a limited length snippet.  The fact that it is the 'A' version means that it is the second full attempt after finding the correct MF eq (MF eq is the 2250 and 2750 EQ for the needed dip in the midrange.)

 

12 - The Doors - Moonlight Drive-A-snippet.mp3 2.1 MB · 0 downloads

This pretty much sounds completely different from anything else with the drum rolls being noticeably snappier.  

[John Dyson]

9 minutes ago, Kimo said:

This pretty much sounds completely different from anything else with the drum rolls being noticeably snappier.  

I'll keep on looking.  I have vast contacts for info...  Might take a fw days.

Each copy that I have is TOTALLY different -- one appears to be a demo.

I am sure that there are more versions out there!!!

 

John

 

[fas42]

Where "The problem with subjective impressions" can really come into its own, is history ... of the gear ... in the preceding hours. Warmup, conditioning is so important, especially of cheaper stuff ... and this was so obvious with the Moonlight Drive track: listen to one version, early in the piece, and it sounds truly dreadful; go through a number of further listenings - and then go back to that first version ... Huhhh?!! It's now sounding pretty decent! - well, it's benefiting from the circuitry, and speaker suspensions having been nicely exercised in the interim; and so the treble, especially, is starting to come together.

 

If one doesn't realise what's going on, a completely incorrect conclusion will be reached- I always hammer gear for at least an hour or so before I take serious notice of what "it sounds like".

[gmgraves]

7 hours ago, davide256 said:

I'm pretty certain that your Thorens if maintained will make the JVC eat dust in a bass and dynamic range comparision...

Maybe, I‘ve never heard them together. I do know that the combination of my TD-160 Mk II and my Mayware Formula 4 unipivot arm (a present from J. Gordon Holt, BTW) with my Sumiko Blackbird cartridge (re-tipped with a line-contact stylus and new cantilever) is the best vinyl playback I’ve ever owned. 

[gmgraves]

44 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Where "The problem with subjective impressions" can really come into its own, is history ... of the gear ... in the preceding hours. Warmup, conditioning is so important, especially of cheaper stuff ... and this was so obvious with the Moonlight Drive track: listen to one version, early in the piece, and it sounds truly dreadful; go through a number of further listenings - and then go back to that first version ... Huhhh?!! It's now sounding pretty decent! - well, it's benefiting from the circuitry, and speaker suspensions having been nicely exercised in the interim; and so the treble, especially, is starting to come together.

 

If one doesn't realise what's going on, a completely incorrect conclusion will be reached- I always hammer gear for at least an hour or so before I take serious notice of what "it sounds like".

Yes, letting electronics “warm-up” before serious evaluation is always a good idea. I leave things like headphone amps, preamps, and DACs on all the time, if it is practical to do so.

[sandyk]

7 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I leave things like headphone amps, preamps, and DACs on all the time, if it is practical to do so.

George

 If you need to do that then the products are poorly designed. 

Well engineered products should reach optimum performance within 15 minutes or so after switch on unless they haven't been used for some time.

 

Regards

Alex

[Ralf11]

ARC claims 1 hour for their tube products

 

or maybe they are poorly designed...

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

George

 If you need to do that then the products are poorly designed. 

Well engineered products should reach optimum performance within 15 minutes or so after switch on unless they haven't been used for some time.

 

Regards

Alex

I agree, but I didn’t say I had to leave low power things on all the time, I just do it because it’s convenient and cheap to do so. But some manufacturers do recommend that their products be warmed-up for at least an hour before attempting any serious listening. Frankly, it probably doesn’t make a lot of difference, it just becomes another of those dubious audiophile rituals, and I admit to adhering to some of them, including the 1 hour warm-up when I’m actually listening to something I’m reviewing (but I don’t do it so much when listening for pleasure).

[gmgraves]

46 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

ARC claims 1 hour for their tube products

 

or maybe they are poorly designed...

Yeah, and Nordost recommends that you equip your entire system with Valhalla II interconnects for best sound.🙄

[Ralf11]

but consider that ARC makes no $$ from the 1 hr thing...

[Allan F]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

George

 If you need to do that then the products are poorly designed. 

Well engineered products should reach optimum performance within 15 minutes or so after switch on unless they haven't been used for some time.

 

I could be wrong but I believe it was someone no less knowledgeable than John Swenson who said that, not only does he leave his DAC on all the time, but also that running music through it continually achieves optimum performance. And tube gear often requires far more than 15 minutes after being turned on to sound anywhere near its best.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, Allan F said:

 

I could be wrong but I believe it was someone no less knowledgeable than John Swenson who said that, not only does he leave his DAC on all the time, but also running music through it continually achieves optimum performance.

Wonder if the type of music changes the sound quality?

[Allan F]

11 minutes ago, esldude said:

Wonder if the type of music changes the sound quality?

 

Yes. In particular, rock music containing electric guitar driving a guitar amp into distortion tends to make the sound quite distorted on playback.

[sandyk]

20 minutes ago, Allan F said:

but also that running music through it continually achieves optimum performance

 

I would love to see John Swenson come up with a good explanation for that, other than it helps to achieve thermal equilibrium quicker.

 Some earlier amplifiers etc. needed time to reach thermal equilibrium, but these days there are suitable techniques to help compensate for the warming up cycle, such as inbuilt Bias diodes in some Power Transistors etc.

[semente]

What about this? (DAC specs)

 

• Critical electronic components are thermally stabilized for consistently accurate conversion
• Automatic calibration internally adjusts to aging components, maintaining unit performance over time

[mansr]

10 hours ago, sandyk said:

George

 If you need to do that then the products are poorly designed. 

Well engineered products should reach optimum performance within 15 minutes or so after switch on

Agreed.

 

10 hours ago, sandyk said:

unless they haven't been used for some time.

Disagreed. Long-term changes (e.g. electrolytic caps drying out) won't be undone by any duration of operation.