sandyk Posted January 12, 2021 Share Posted January 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, fas42 said: Turns out that the 'immature' recording technology doesn't matter, ultimately - it just means that the playback side has to be on its best behaviour for these to 'work'. Which takes effort to achieve - sometimes, it's simpler to "blame the recording!" 😜 I disagree. Add to that the damage done to the quality of the original masters at the later , mixing and mastering stages as evidenced by some of the tantalisingly good corrected versions from John Dyson. It's very hard though to reverse engineer the damage done to many, when many mastering engineers used different methods although some impressive results can be obtained . e.g. https://www.dropbox.com/s/oimvnljlx9c2p6p/School .wav?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y5pcu42hwu2sclt/02-Bloody Well Right.wav?dl=0 Compare these with your own CD . I will remove the links in several hours time . Teresa 1 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
fas42 Posted January 12, 2021 Share Posted January 12, 2021 26 minutes ago, hopkins said: Its not a question of mindset. The facts are there - and the people who actually manufacture the equipment you listen to know it and say so! Your method, whatever it is, is not going to tranform a digital system into an analog system - if you think so you need to spend more time listening carefully to a vinyl source. Have heard plenty of vinyl. Including one which was a copy of Harry Pearson's original Absolute Sound setup - this was 3 decades ago. That was exceptional - but not better. In fact, recent vinyl has gone backwards - last audio show was disappointing, on every LP setup. Have an audio friend up the road, who does both vinyl and digital; who I visit often. His vinyl, at its best, is way ahead of most TT systems I've heard - which is better? His digital, or his vinyl? ... The answer depends upon which visit I care to recall ... 🙂. 26 minutes ago, hopkins said: Digital certainly has many advantages. But I perfectly understand why many people enjoy vinyl as well. Serious audiophiles should have both. You can then easily remind yourself, when testing new digital gear, what is achieved and remains to be accomplished. You don't "test new digital gear"- you debug it! Most audio rigs are the equivalent of car lemons - they need attention to bring them up to scratch; because they have so many obvious flaws in the sound, that need to be sorted. Link to comment
fas42 Posted January 12, 2021 Share Posted January 12, 2021 34 minutes ago, sandyk said: I disagree. Add to that the damage done to the quality of the original masters at the later , mixing and mastering stages as evidenced by some of the tantalisingly good corrected versions from John Dyson. It's very hard though to reverse engineer the damage done to many, when many mastering engineers used different methods although some impressive results can be obtained . e.g. https://www.dropbox.com/s/oimvnljlx9c2p6p/School .wav?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/y5pcu42hwu2sclt/02-Bloody Well Right.wav?dl=0 Compare these with your own CD . I will remove the links in several hours time . We've been here plenty of times, Alex 🤪 ... in car terms, I want a vehicle that when I see an interesting road on the map, that I can just drive along it, and enjoy what's to be discovered. If I need to send out a road repair and resurfacing crew every other time, or fear that my car will be shaken to bits, etc - then I lose interest in doing such, very fast ... so, I put my energy into making my conveyance capable of handling anything - vastly better expenditure of time and money, in my book 😉. Link to comment
Qhwoeprktiyns Posted January 12, 2021 Share Posted January 12, 2021 21 minutes ago, fas42 said: Have heard plenty of vinyl. Including one which was a copy of Harry Pearson's original Absolute Sound setup - this was 3 decades ago. That was exceptional - but not better. In fact, recent vinyl has gone backwards - last audio show was disappointing, on every LP setup. Have an audio friend up the road, who does both vinyl and digital; who I visit often. His vinyl, at its best, is way ahead of most TT systems I've heard - which is better? His digital, or his vinyl? ... The answer depends upon which visit I care to recall ... 🙂. You don't "test new digital gear"- you debug it! Most audio rigs are the equivalent of car lemons - they need attention to bring them up to scratch; because they have so many obvious flaws in the sound, that need to be sorted. Yes, I am aware that you are on a crusade to convince everyone on this forum that you can get great sound from basic components with your secret recipes. I enjoy listening to Spotify on my phone with a pair of Koss PortaPro. So what? We can't do better? The fact that digital has some flaws does not mean we have to completely give up and listen to music using a DVD player (as your profile suggests). Link to comment
fas42 Posted January 12, 2021 Share Posted January 12, 2021 40 minutes ago, hopkins said: Yes, I am aware that you are on a crusade to convince everyone on this forum that you can get great sound from basic components with your secret recipes. I enjoy listening to Spotify on my phone with a pair of Koss PortaPro. So what? We can't do better? The fact that digital has some flaws does not mean we have to completely give up and listen to music using a DVD player (as your profile suggests). The "crusade" is to make people aware that highly satisfying playback is available from most audio systems - but which fail to deliver because of weaknesses in the overall integrity of the chain; something which is only rarely solved by throwing money, and a high churn rate of bits, at the situation. If it were otherwise, I would be blown away by how magnificent the exceedingly expensive rigs I've come across the years sound - unfortunately, my usual thought is, how long will I have to put up with the highly irritating nature of what I'm listening to ... 😉. The "secret sauce" is, attention to detail - worked 35 years ago, and still works. Most people want to play with expensive kit, for the sake of doing that - that's a separate hobby, and has not much to do with getting best SQ, unfortunately. Most people can't understand that using a $100 DVD player, versus a $30,000 CD transport, is not what matters - you see, in audio, money isn't that important - it might help you feel better about the rig; but only plays a minor role in getting the best out of recordings ... Link to comment
Qhwoeprktiyns Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 50 minutes ago, fas42 said: The "crusade" is to make people aware that highly satisfying playback is available from most audio systems - but which fail to deliver because of weaknesses in the overall integrity of the chain; something which is only rarely solved by throwing money, and a high churn rate of bits, at the situation. If it were otherwise, I would be blown away by how magnificent the exceedingly expensive rigs I've come across the years sound - unfortunately, my usual thought is, how long will I have to put up with the highly irritating nature of what I'm listening to ... 😉. The "secret sauce" is, attention to detail - worked 35 years ago, and still works. Most people want to play with expensive kit, for the sake of doing that - that's a separate hobby, and has not much to do with getting best SQ, unfortunately. Most people can't understand that using a $100 DVD player, versus a $30,000 CD transport, is not what matters - you see, in audio, money isn't that important - it might help you feel better about the rig; but only plays a minor role in getting the best out of recordings ... It is certainly a refreshing viewpoint, and I am all for thinking outside the box, but this topic here is analog versus digital. You cannot make abstraction of the limits/issues of digital, which are well known, and think that you can transform a digital system into an analog system. It is as simple as that. Nothing more to add in this thread... Edit: attention to detail is something everyone does, I hope, and therefore not meaningful in itself. I pay attention to details, and many others certainly do, yet our systems are all different! You'll have to be more specific (in your other threads) if you want to be convincing. Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 1 hour ago, hopkins said: this topic here is analog versus digital. You cannot make abstraction of the limits/issues of digital, which are well known, and think that you can transform a digital system into an analog system. Who would want to, other than a blinkered vinyl person ? 😜 For starters, you are also dismissing the high res formats such as 24/192 LPCM and DSD as a waste of time, even though some may have genuine musical content to >57kHz . How many vinyl recordings in your collection have much more than a top frequency response of >22kHz , and will still have that high a response after being played quite a few times? Yes, some vinyl half speed recordings available mainly at Hi Fi shows had HF detail to around 30kHz when new, but how many cartridges are able to do this justice, let alone the poor channel separation right across the recorded frequency spectrum ? Very few cartridges even have 35 dB separation, which results in the larger than life ,diffused, rarely pinpoint centre image that so many appear to prefer P.S. Do they even make multi channel vinyl recordings these days ? I used to have a great logic controlled SQ vinyl set up until a nearby lightning strike fried the I.C.s . 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
firedog Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 7 hours ago, hopkins said: The base for the claim is that every serious DAC manufacturer will admit that digital sources/digital cables matter when theoretically they should not! And they will also admit that they do not know why! You can read about this in interviews with a number of engineers from high end brands such as Mola Mola, CH Precision and others. Do your homework... P. S. I use both digital and analog. The point is just to be realistic and informed (not delusional) about the limitations. More tendentious nonsense, sorry. I don't need to "do my homework". You need to stop a silly argument based on nothing more than your personal taste, and stop falsely pretending that some monolithic/mythical group of engineers backs you up. Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three . Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
Rexp Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 3 hours ago, hopkins said: Serious audiophiles should have both. You can then easily remind yourself, when testing new digital gear, what is achieved and remains to be accomplished. Agreed, most audiophiles know that its the quality of the recording/mastering that determines the SQ, obviously there are alot of snake oil salesmen that disagree. Teresa 1 Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 15 minutes ago, Rexp said: Agreed, most audiophiles know that its the quality of the recording/mastering that determines the SQ, obviously there are alot of snake oil salesmen that disagree. Given the same attention to detail with the mastering and manufacturing of both vinyl and CD, and a high quality vinyl and Digital playback system , the digital version is not only more accurate , but technically superior, as well as audibly superior. What the guys in the Music Server section of the forum are doing is only akin to what many Vinyl addicts do with their choices of cartridge, TT, RIAA Phono Preamp, mechanical tweaks and cleaning rituals in a never ending quest for perfection. . 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 Rexp Posted January 13, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted January 13, 2021 5 minutes ago, sandyk said: Given the same attention to detail with the mastering and manufacturing of both vinyl and CD, and a high quality vinyl and Digital playback system , the digital version is not only more accurate , but technically superior, as well as audibly superior. What the guys in the Music Server section of the forum are doing is only akin to what many Vinyl addicts do with their choices of cartridge, TT, RIAA Phono Preamp, mechanical tweaks and cleaning rituals . Going round and round trying to polish turds has led to vast amount of money wasted on digital tweaks when all that was needed was the record labels to improve the SQ of their recordings. Teresa and Confused 1 1 Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 11 minutes ago, Rexp said: Going round and round trying to polish turds has led to vast amount of money wasted on digital tweaks when all that was needed was the record labels to improve the SQ of their recordings. We need both, as Digital is nowhere nearly as mature yet as Vinyl, which for most people has been around as long as they have. 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
EvilTed Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 6 hours ago, sandyk said: They don't come even close to the S/N of a very good Solid State RIAA phono Preamp, and by this I don't mean a typical modern I.C. implementation. As for heaps of valve "goodness" A.K.A. , Euphony or warmth as distinct from accuracy . . . . .. If you want those qualities you could have used a F.E.T based Phono Preamp and achieved an even better S/N as well. P.S. Unfortunately, many of our favourite recordings in Digital were created using an immature technology, compared with an existing mature technology @sandyk Description: Tubed stereo preamplifier. Tube complement: five 7DJ8/PCC88. Phono inputs: 2. Line inputs: 2 balanced, 3 unbalanced. Tape loops: 1. Outputs: 1 balanced, 1 unbalanced. Input impedances, phono: 47k ohms, moving-magnet; 3, 6, 12, or 40 ohms, moving-coil. Output impedance: 600 ohms. Line-stage gain: 14dB. Phono-stage gain: 50–80dB. Signal/noise ratio: 68dB phono (ref. 2.4mV), 90dB line (ref. 1V). Frequency response: 20Hz–20kHz, –0.3dB. Distortion: <0.1% at 1kHz, 3V output. Phase-inverting: No. No, no, no. The EAR 912 is famous for being one of the best, class A phono preamps available. It is transformer coupled from phono stage to line stage and from line stage to output. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ By comparison, the moving coil S/N of 7 Stereophile A and A+ phono preamps are reviewed here: http://lkvresearch.blogspot.com/2015/02/updated-comparison-of-sn-ratio-in-7.html 2 are slightly better than the EAR 912 and 5 are worse. However, since EAR use SUTs internally there is no noise background noise, even with very high gain. EAR amplifiers are not euphonic or warm sounding. They are very clean and more akin to solid state than a traditional warm tube sound. From Stereophile's review, even better measurements that use the same 0.5mV input volume as the tests above. With these measurements, the EAR 912 is the quietest. "The 912’s phono-stage signal/noise ratios were excellent. In MM mode, the Aweighted ratio was 81dB (ref. 1kHz at 5mV), this decreasing to a still good 67.7dB, wideband, unweighted. Due to the 912’s use of a transformer to provide the additional gain required, the MC mode’s S/N ratios were not appreciably different, at 79.7dB and 66.7dB, respectively (both figures referred to 1kHz at 500µV). This is a superbly quiet preamp." http://www.evalitec.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/912-Stereophile.pdf Wash that foot before you put it in your mouth :) Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 2 hours ago, EvilTed said: Wash that foot before you put it in your mouth :) I suggest that you wash yours. 😜 Those measurements are pretty pathetic compared with what CD specs are. Those figures are far worse again when used in conjunction with a typical cartridge ,which as I said is unlikely to have >35dB separation, and even then not right across the bandwidth of 20HZ to 20kHz , and probably in the vicinity of > + and -2.5dB which is quite audible. Add to that Wow and Flutter from your TT as well . Even the 90dB Line S/N is around >30dB lower than can be attained with a good SS Preamplifier these days. <.1% distortion ? ! It would severely degrade any high quality high level input such as CD,DVD-A, analogue tape etc. My own DIY SS Preamplifier is <.0006%, with a Bandwidth of -3dB @ 1.5MHZ and a S/N around >30dB better. Even an old Magnavox MDVD50 DVD player has an SNR of -118dB from 10HZ to 22kHz with .006% distortion No expensive 7DJ8/PCC88 etc. to replace on a regular basis either, as they lose emission. 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
fas42 Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 6 hours ago, hopkins said: It is certainly a refreshing viewpoint, and I am all for thinking outside the box, but this topic here is analog versus digital. You cannot make abstraction of the limits/issues of digital, which are well known, and think that you can transform a digital system into an analog system. It is as simple as that. Nothing more to add in this thread... My interest is in, as the OP stated, "MUCH more life-like sound" - it's been generalised that analogue does this better than digital, which I assume is the point of you saying "think that you can transform a digital system into an analog system" ... well, digital can do this - but it just turns out to be harder. There are no meaningful limits with digital - but typically, plenty of issues. 6 hours ago, hopkins said: Edit: attention to detail is something everyone does, I hope, and therefore not meaningful in itself. I pay attention to details, and many others certainly do, yet our systems are all different! You'll have to be more specific (in your other threads) if you want to be convincing. Attention to detail has to be primary, not secondary - a way of explaining what this means in real life is to consider acquiring some new component, with a great reputation, or specs - most people will look forward to there being "something special" about it, from the moment it's plugged in; my approach is to listen for what it's doing wrong, and immediately start experimenting with the setup, to work out where the issues may be. Yes, systems are different - because the weaknesses will vary, depending upon what components are used. Meaning solutions for each are most likely quite different; but, the end result should be that they all "sound the same" - because their individual signatures are attenuated enough so the only thing you're aware of are the qualities of the recording. Link to comment
Popular Post sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted January 13, 2021 18 minutes ago, fas42 said: the end result should be that they all "sound the same" - because their individual signatures are attenuated enough so the only thing you're aware of are the qualities of the recording. Pull the other leg. It whistles 🤣 Not even all analogue sources sound exactly the same ,due in part to the PSU area etc. as well as with Vinyl where almost all cartridges sound a little different Teresa and Calvin & Hobbes 2 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
Qhwoeprktiyns Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 8 hours ago, sandyk said: Who would want to, other than a blinkered vinyl person ? 😜 For starters, you are also dismissing the high res formats such as 24/192 LPCM and DSD as a waste of time, even though some may have genuine musical content to >57kHz . How many vinyl recordings in your collection have much more than a top frequency response of >22kHz , and will still have that high a response after being played quite a few times? Yes, some vinyl half speed recordings available mainly at Hi Fi shows had HF detail to around 30kHz when new, but how many cartridges are able to do this justice, let alone the poor channel separation right across the recorded frequency spectrum ? Very few cartridges even have 35 dB separation, which results in the larger than life ,diffused, rarely pinpoint centre image that so many appear to prefer P.S. Do they even make multi channel vinyl recordings these days ? I used to have a great logic controlled SQ vinyl set up until a nearby lightning strike fried the I.C.s . Once again I use both analog and digital. There are limits to both. How these limitations translate in terms of musical enjoyment is for everyone to figure out - I have my opinion, and don't expect everyone to agree with me! As you mentioned, digital is not a "mature" technology (and I fully agree with that) so there is hope... When well respected engineers in digital audio admit that they don't understand everything, i don't think we can argue with them... That being said, I don't believe high resolution solves any of the issues of digital - but am willing to keep an open mind. I never said it was a "waste of time". I will admit I have never listened to DSD, simply because there is little music that interests me that is available in this format. Link to comment
fas42 Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 2 hours ago, sandyk said: Pull the other leg. It whistles 🤣 Not even all analogue sources sound exactly the same ,due in part to the PSU area etc. as well as with Vinyl where almost all cartridges sound a little different Yes. Normal playback injects too many distortion characteristics - and the signature of various parts of the chain holds sway. The goal is to eliminate that happening - and the Absolute Sound results. The satisfaction in what I do, is pushing a particular combo of components to the point where this happens - the inherent sound of a recording track emerges, to match what it has sounded in the past when at a peak - on a completely different system ... this must happen, if a replay setup has any claims to "accuracy". Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 37 minutes ago, fas42 said: Yes. Normal playback injects too many distortion characteristics - and the signature of various parts of the chain holds sway. The goal is to eliminate that happening - and the Absolute Sound results. That is not possible with Vinyl, as Cartridges for example all have different characteristics, especially in variations of frequency response, as well as variations in how their Phono Preamps RIAA EQ is implemented, it's accuracy, and even the type of preamp used such as Vacuum tube, I.C or discrete semiconductors. The same applies to digital to a certain extent dependent on the type of DAC used, even the type of DAC chips used. The DSD 179x family for example, sounds noticeably different to say the Sabre ES9018 etc. as an example. Then as you are now well aware, the PSU area matters too. 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
semente Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 On 1/12/2021 at 5:13 PM, hopkins said: I have a modest vinyl source (cost: around 700 euro) and am floored by the sound quality it provides in my system. "Sounds good" is subjective, a matter of preference, it depends on the listener. For every audiophile who prefers vinyl there is another one who is "floored" by digital. LP sound is not analogue sound: vinyl playback adds quite a bit of its own set of mostly signal-correled distortions, things like surface noise, static, channel bleeding, monaural low-bass, high-passed sub-bass, high-frequency roll-off in inner groovers, off-centered records, speed stability, arm and cartige resonances, airborne and platter vibration pickup, RIAA filter, cartridge transduction, etc. And whilst CD can sound almost indistinguishable from the master tape it cannot sound like an LP unless it has been digitalised from one (I have some very old jazz and blues digital recordings which where made by the Bibliothèque nationale de France which sound like the shellac records they were made from, warts-n-all). Teresa 1 "Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256) Link to comment
Qhwoeprktiyns Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 33 minutes ago, semente said: "Sounds good" is subjective, a matter of preference, it depends on the listener. For every audiophile who prefers vinyl there is another one who is "floored" by digital. LP sound is not analogue sound: vinyl playback adds quite a bit of its own set of mostly signal-correled distortions, things like surface noise, static, channel bleeding, monaural low-bass, high-passed sub-bass, high-frequency roll-off in inner groovers, off-centered records, speed stability, arm and cartige resonances, airborne and platter vibration pickup, RIAA filter, cartridge transduction, etc. And whilst CD can sound almost indistinguishable from the master tape it cannot sound like an LP unless it has been digitalised from one (I have some very old jazz and blues digital recordings which where made by the Bibliothèque nationale de France which sound like the shellac records they were made from, warts-n-all). Yes, I have some of those as well. I have very bad sounding vinyl (ex: Lester Young broadcasts from the 1940s, bad sound but fantastic music). In my system, with my ears, I am just surprised how good a relatively modest vinyl rig can sound. So the only explanation I have is that these flaws are maybe not so important for musical enjoyment? It seems to me that vinyl is doing something right that even the most sophisticated digital systems fail to achieve, still today, some decades after the introduction of the CD. Don't get me wrong, I love listening to digital as well, but I think it can improve further (just not with tinkering). Teresa 1 Link to comment
fas42 Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 11 hours ago, sandyk said: That is not possible with Vinyl, as Cartridges for example all have different characteristics, especially in variations of frequency response, as well as variations in how their Phono Preamps RIAA EQ is implemented, it's accuracy, and even the type of preamp used such as Vacuum tube, I.C or discrete semiconductors. The same applies to digital to a certain extent dependent on the type of DAC used, even the type of DAC chips used. The DSD 179x family for example, sounds noticeably different to say the Sabre ES9018 etc. as an example. Then as you are now well aware, the PSU area matters too. Ummm, 'magic' happens when SQ reaches a certain standard - the mind takes over, and compensates for all those millions of fiddly things you mention; especially those that relate to FR. Most audio people have probably never experienced this, but it's quite remarkable when it happens - even when you are fully aware that the sound is being manipulated, subjectively it doesn't register - as a simple example, wind the treble control all the way from minimum to maximum - the sound "doesn't change". Impossible!! ... I can hear many people yelling. But that is indeed what happens - and the reason is obvious: in real life, the FR of sounds we are familiar with dramatically swings, crazily so, as soon as we move even slightly ... this can be demonstrated, as a measurable thing, exceedingly easily. And we would go mad if this was indeed also the subjective impression - the sense of whatever was being listened to would be going nuts, inside our skull, as we moved even a tiny bit. To stop such insanity, our minds constantly equalise what we hear, so it "sounds the same" ... which is precisely what should be aimed for as the experience when listening to audio playback ... Link to comment
fas42 Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 31 minutes ago, hopkins said: Yes, I have some of those as well. I have very bad sounding vinyl (ex: Lester Young broadcasts from the 1940s, bad sound but fantastic music). In my system, with my ears, I am just surprised how good a relatively modest vinyl rig can sound. So the only explanation I have is that these flaws are maybe not so important for musical enjoyment? It seems to me that vinyl is doing something right that even the most sophisticated digital systems fail to achieve, still today, sole decades after the introduction of the CD. Which means that you're not so far from intuitively understanding what's going on ... the vinyl playback is not highlighting the deficiencies of the recording, by exaggerating them with the wrong type of added playback chain distortion. Something that digital systems often have troubles with. What you seem intent on confirming, to yourself, is that digital is inherently incapable of "getting it right" - this was wrong thinking, over 3 decades; and is even more wrong these days. Which means you will probably unconsciously always sabotage every listening session you're at - because it's more important for you, to hang onto that belief as compared to being able to hear competent digital sound. Link to comment
sandyk Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 57 minutes ago, fas42 said: as a simple example, wind the treble control all the way from minimum to maximum - the sound "doesn't change". Your brain must be wired very differently from most people. Are you an extraterrestrial ? 😵 Teresa 1 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
fas42 Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 Just now, sandyk said: Your brain must be wired very differently from most people. Are you an extraterrestrial ? 😵 Nothing to do with it ... if a system is sub-par, then fiddling with tone controls is very obvious; one of the markers of convincing SQ is that the FR stops being important. If you have a capable system which you can sabotage and restore the SQ of, repeatably, it's easy to hear what happens: wind the treble up high; if below par it becomes screechy, unlistenable to; if of the necessary standard, you just get the sense of it becoming more intense - think of moving more into the direct line of fire of a live trumpet, as a comparison. Teresa and sandyk 2 Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now