Jump to content

firedog

  • Content Count

    8779
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About firedog

  • Rank
    Masters Level Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. how come these qobuz links never open the album page for me? Even if I'm logged in to Qobuz, the links just open the sign in page?
  2. I understand that, but getting the standalone network streamer (M5) to do that shouldn’t be a big issue, and they also haven’t done that. Their DACs can also do DSD through a standard chip-they don’t rely solely on the one bit topography (user chooses which topography to use), so that also shouldn’t be an issue. I’m not putting their products down. But they have a few rough edges (there are a few others) that are surprising for products at these types of prices and don’t match up with the extreme attention to detail and high level of execution of most aspects of their products-and all of those seem to be details that are dealt with in software, not hardware.
  3. Well, a few of us asked Bricasti about adding the HQP NAA to their networked products and were told it wouldn’t happen. As I noted, apparently the programming is totally outsourced and a closed issue for them. No adding features to the OS unless they decide to contract for an expensive major update: At least that’s what was implied. I’d assume similar issues explain why they are “stuck” at supporting DSD 128.
  4. There was a Hong kong based review of the M5 network player (https://personalaudio.hk/2017/12/15/bricasti-m5-streamer-networkplayer/) ; it said they succeeded in playing back DSD 512 via the M5. I asked Bricasti about it and they said it was possible, but that they don't support it/haven't fully tested it. With my M5 can't get anything above DSD 128 to work on it. I get the impression that the software side of things is part of the issue, and this doesn't seem to be Bricasti's strong point. Apparently they get all their software from an outside supplier, and don't have the ability to do much in terms of upgrades.
  5. Interesting site. Good to see quality Indian music being well recorded and also sold as hires. Noticed that they also sell some interesting audio equipment from the site.
  6. I would suggest that by participating in this forum you are on social media.
  7. Probably. In '89 they came out with a noise reduction version that has " RE-1 " appended to the number. https://www.discogs.com/sell/item/291654320
  8. The 80's Reprise CDs sound very good. And they aren't volume compressed. Simply, they are competent transfers to digital of the original tapes. As with all digital remasters from tape, the question is: what does the remaster give you? With well done modern remasters your hear more detail (or you hear the same detail more easily), a bit more "air/space" around between instruments, and you hear the extreme low end and high end a bit better/more cleanly. But yes, the differences aren't huge. I'd agree there isn't a "compelling" reason to buy these at $35 a pop. But if you don't have the Reprise CD, this is probably the best alternative - the Reprise CD in the original release version is going to cost you about double that if you can find one.
  9. Just checked this in DSD format and I also think it sounds really good. Doesn't sound compressed. DR of the DSF (acc'd to Roon) is the same as my 2010 CD version, which does sound a little compressed. I looked at DR of the Redbook layer of the SACD at the DR database and yes it is a little lower, but only in stereo - not so much in the mono version. Roon and the DR database use different methods for measuring DR- average vs. peak, I believe.... I just now converted the DSD to 24/88 and it seems to also reflect the above. In Roon all 3 versions have the same overall DR - acc'd to their rating scale. But in DR ratings of Foobar (like those at the database) the 24/88 has a DR of 10 vs 8 for the 2010 CD (stereo); the mono tracks have a DR of 11 and all 26 tracks together have a DR of 11. I don't listen to the CD layer or the disk itself. In short I don't think there is any issue with the the DR of this SACD, or the Redbook layer. It might be very slightly compressed compared to the Reprise version, but I don't think it's an amount that is bothersome or even very noticeable. It's also hard to compare slightly different DR ratings between formats - the format also affects the reading. The DSD rip sounds really good and it seems on listening to be very noticeably less compressed than my 2010 CD with a DR of 8, if that helps you.
  10. Did you notice the author...?
  11. Well, Qobuz has several versions available. The 24/192 sounds more highly volume compressed than the newer 24/96 (remixed and remastered 2018) which sounds more like the original, I think (I don't have it available to compare). Of course, for those who aren't Jud, if you are only going to get one of their albums, the Live "Rock of Ages" is the one to get...😉
  12. firedog

    HQ Player

    I'm not sure how the Trinnov works. But I'd assume you would use the digital out from whatever device HQP itself is installed on and connect that to an input on the Trinnov. No NAA needed in this setup.
  13. https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2019/03/17/florida-2019-the-shunyata-research-noise-reduction-experiment/ Comments?
×
×
  • Create New...