John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 2779 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21st September 2012, 02:40 AM   #27781
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnloudb View Post
Me too. But I listened on stereo speakers and I didn't know it was mono till I looked at the LP.
I can get definite ' stereo ' from a DVC driver with ' Left '
to one coil and ' Right ' to the other ......
I.E........... Punch and UnPunch the ' stereo - mono ' button
and hear an obvious differance

Last edited by hitsware; 21st September 2012 at 02:43 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 02:51 AM   #27782
diyAudio Member
 
Chris Hornbeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Little Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitsware View Post
I can get definite ' stereo ' from a DVC driver with ' Left ' to one coil and ' Right ' to the other ......
I.E........... Punch and UnPunch the ' stereo - mono ' button
and hear an obvious differance
The diaphragm can only be in one place at any one time, but the motor is different when the coils are driven differently.

All good fortune,
Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:10 AM   #27783
diyAudio Member
 
Johnloudb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:

Mr. Curl
What SY wants to convey, is the sad truth.



George
SY can't handle the truth!

kidding
__________________
My Website: Hyperacusis, Tinnitus, My Story
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:19 AM   #27784
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnloudb View Post
Okay, and they always master the CD worse because?
At a guess because it sells to a different market. Cheaper, less quality conscious. More likely to buy on loudness i.e. quantity. But they also want to paint the SACD in a better light too for marketing reasons otherwise why invent the format?

Quote:
If CDs can't be mastered well, then who needs them?
Just because they aren't in cases where there's an SACD too it doesn't follow that they can't be. I have plenty of decently mastered (to my ears) CDs.
__________________
I have the advantage of having found out how hard it is to get to really know something... how easy it is to make mistakes and fool yourself. - Richard Feynman
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:30 AM   #27785
diyAudio Member
 
Johnloudb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
At a guess because it sells to a different market. Cheaper, less quality conscious. More likely to buy on loudness i.e. quantity. But they also want to paint the SACD in a better light too for marketing reasons otherwise why invent the format?



Just because they aren't in cases where there's an SACD too it doesn't follow that they can't be. I have plenty of decently mastered (to my ears) CDs.
Well, I'm not saying CD's don't sound good. But, no, I don't buy into the notion that they master the CD poorly so the SACD will sound better. The CD layer of SACD's are often some of my very best recordings on CD, yet they are still not as good as the SACD layer, to my ears.

Still, I prefer 24bit/192kHz Bluray sound to SACD's. Lot's of bluray players out there and lots of movies with 24bit/192kHz sound ... shame, shame, shame on the music industry ... all I have to say!
__________________
My Website: Hyperacusis, Tinnitus, My Story
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:41 AM   #27786
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnloudb View Post
The CD layer of SACD's are often some of my very best recordings on CD, yet they are still not as good as the SACD layer, to my ears.
I speculate that your CD player doesn't have the right kind of DAC chip in it. Stanley Lipshitz says (more to the point, shows) DSD is technically flawed, Lynn Olson says the SACD sounds distinctly different from the mastertape. I can't see any reason to disbelieve either of them. But then maybe you value other aspects in the sound of SACD vs CD to those I do. Or perhaps I have too poor an SACD player.

Quote:
Still, I prefer 24bit/192kHz Bluray sound to SACD's.
Now that's beginning to sound more promising... So what does SACD give up to 24/192 to your ears?
__________________
I have the advantage of having found out how hard it is to get to really know something... how easy it is to make mistakes and fool yourself. - Richard Feynman
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:48 AM   #27787
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
What kind of crazy systems do you guys own? You really need 192/24 to find satisfaction?
I think 96/24 might sound a bit better than Redbook, but maybe it's just better mastering.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 03:50 AM   #27788
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Me, I'm a Redbook die-hard, but I do listen to it upsampled 2X, no longer NOS.
__________________
I have the advantage of having found out how hard it is to get to really know something... how easy it is to make mistakes and fool yourself. - Richard Feynman
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 04:03 AM   #27789
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
It's been noted several places on the internet that sometimes the CD layer has even been taken from an existing CD remaster in the case of older music. I have personally listened to a Depeche Mode hybrid SACD which was louder and had more compression on the CD layer.

Abraxalito is exactly correct on the reasons why.

The truth is, SACD was not created in some noble attempt at better audio, that was a secondary result. The primary goal behind SACD was to make a format that was difficult to pirate and then market it as a replacement for the CD. This was back when selling shiny discs was still their only mission.

Does anyone really believe people at Sony thought DSD was so audibly better than 24/96 LPCM? They knew DSD was sufficiently different (annoying) that no consumer PC would play it for years to come and there would be a total lack of cheap software to process it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2012, 04:06 AM   #27790
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
What kind of crazy systems do you guys own? You really need 192/24 to find satisfaction?
I think 96/24 might sound a bit better than Redbook, but maybe it's just better mastering.
It's probably just placebo. I believe every single available DAC IC performs worse at 24/192 compared to 24/96.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:23 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2