Seems to me that as long as you are in the digital domain and you copy bit perfect it shouldn't matter if you copy it a hundred times in a row as long as the bits are bit perfect to the original source material there should be no degradation in the information. Now once you do the conversion from digital to analog that is where the changes are going to happen but before that bit perfect should say it all. How can it be otherwise, only if it is not bit perfect should there be any difference.
I would think this no different than sharing a file or program on a computer, if you move files they should stay exactly the same no matter how many copies you create or what generation copy it is as long as the 0's and 1's are in the exact same order with no added bits. Otherwise as Scott was saying how would we have an internet and computer programs that didn't give different results depending on what hard drive you are be using?
I would think this no different than sharing a file or program on a computer, if you move files they should stay exactly the same no matter how many copies you create or what generation copy it is as long as the 0's and 1's are in the exact same order with no added bits. Otherwise as Scott was saying how would we have an internet and computer programs that didn't give different results depending on what hard drive you are be using?
Last edited:
So then why don't you design your gear to have the same gross distortion and frequency response aberrations as the CyberLight cables that Fremer said was the most significant technological breakthrough in his entire career and was superior in every way?
Seems you've been doing it backwards all this time.
se
Get rid of both the LP and the CD. And be rid of all the gear used to make them and play them.
Instead, listen to the original source stored in memory sent directly to you to play back (streaming) or store in your SS memory and then play back. That works a lot better.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Richard,
Besides the fact that you can use a higher bit rate and clock speed it seems that storing information on a spinning hard drive would have the same clocking and jitter problems that you would have with a typical CD once you have to send it out to the D/A conversion process. I don't think at the current prices an SSD would be a very cost effective method to store music files so you are just using magnetic storage instead of optical storage of the digital file. Can't follow how this would make any difference in sound quality and the fact that most of these hard drives would be inside a computer means you probably have a good chance of adding all kinds of injected noise in that environment. Now if you use an external network storage system this may ameliorate some of those problems but not sure they remove all the electronic noise from a bunch of spinning disk drives
Besides the fact that you can use a higher bit rate and clock speed it seems that storing information on a spinning hard drive would have the same clocking and jitter problems that you would have with a typical CD once you have to send it out to the D/A conversion process. I don't think at the current prices an SSD would be a very cost effective method to store music files so you are just using magnetic storage instead of optical storage of the digital file. Can't follow how this would make any difference in sound quality and the fact that most of these hard drives would be inside a computer means you probably have a good chance of adding all kinds of injected noise in that environment. Now if you use an external network storage system this may ameliorate some of those problems but not sure they remove all the electronic noise from a bunch of spinning disk drives
From that article:
Codswollop. That someone that well known should say such is a great pity, obviously has not done the exercise of taking that downsampled result and upsampling it, back to hi-res. Amazingly, he would have found the grunge had disappeared, and his ceiling bounced up 6 feet, in one move.
Meaning, it's all about the replay mechanism, stup... . Having done that very exercise, and finding nothing but purely random 16 bit resolution noise in the difference between the files - it's a great shame, and money beckons, so, it's apparent that this same nonsense will be repeated, ad nauseum, for some time to come ...
Last edited:
Didnt say it was perfect. It isnt, yet. It is just a whole lot better without a spinning LP or CD injected into the process.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
IOW, you're altering the supposedly irrelevant electrical factors in the environment to improve sound. That's fine, but means that the playback is always fragile - a far more robust solution is to make the audio chain impervious to electrical interference, no matter what the source of that noise is.
He might have done the former experiment (downsampling then listening and comparing with original) on a sub-standard D/A converter where the digital filter at the lower rate was flawed (perhaps a half-band with substantial aliasing around the corner freq). Not that I'm particularly interested in defending David Chesky but its a strong possibility nevertheless - blaming the format though for imperfections in the particular replay chain is needlessly idiotic.
That would be best, yes. Dont intend to throw that out.
If one watches carefully, LP and CD are rapidly becoming superfluous. There is still a market for them today as there are land-line telephones.
Lets sort out this future direction of Things and see how it works best.
I am ready to have High Res audio streamed to me of the song of my choosing 24/7 anywhere and everywhere and at any time.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I thought this was a nice summary for those who don't understand the technical side of sampling systems:
'Nonsense, says Montgomery, who explains that the samples actually serve as plot points that are used by music software to draw continuous, analog-form waves. CD-quality files are more than enough to generate smooth waves for all frequencies detectable by human ears, he adds.'
Jan
HDtracks is proprietary aiff (apple) - booo !! 
Same SQ as flac , which is compressed and open source. yeah!!
Both are lossless.
Actually have 60K+ of all three types (320k mp3/flac/aiff). Some mp3's
sound better than some flacs , source is god ... garbage in-garbage out.
Have redundant flacs - aiff -waves(.wav) .... identical.
The software (or plugin) that converts these files for your soundcard to use ,
and the D/A in your sound card (or external amp DAC) is a big
factor in end SQ.
OS
Same SQ as flac , which is compressed and open source. yeah!!
Both are lossless.
Actually have 60K+ of all three types (320k mp3/flac/aiff). Some mp3's
sound better than some flacs , source is god ... garbage in-garbage out.
Have redundant flacs - aiff -waves(.wav) .... identical.
The software (or plugin) that converts these files for your soundcard to use ,
and the D/A in your sound card (or external amp DAC) is a big
factor in end SQ.
OS
- Status
- Not open for further replies.