I disagree with the digital side of things, most I have seen are terrible and for the price they charge... To many like to have audiophile layouts with through hole components in the digital section etc. Not up to the standard I would like to see.
Even the analogue I don't see anything special, again usually marketing points and audiofile fashion quite often.
Thanks Frank for that YouTube link....i watched bits and then the last 5 mins or so....I have to watch my data usage.
Anyway, yeah, been there done that with modifying laser pickups, I can get better sound than that $2000 glass cd disc (you cannot be serious !) for close to zero cost.
That said, it is most interesting that the actual cd material can make a sonic difference...I have gold metallised discs and they have another sound again.
So, yes, the point is made that 16/44 can be good, bloody good, and better than many give credit to.
Dan.
This was discussed in detail by I believe someone very close to creating discs...How can different metallization's sound different.... Different discs were tested for data and the data was exactly the same from all disks bit wise.... Reading problems are not as bad as made out so it is unlikely to be read errors. This needs to lie alongside silver cables and BQPs.
Let me make myself perfectly clear - op amps are extremely useful, and they have evolved a lot since the early days of audio use, not just internally, but in terms of choice, there's one for everyone somewhere out there. Personally I choose Analog Devices, but will also use other chips from other manufacturers.
Like any and every technology, op amps have their pros and cons. Yes, they can provide matched devices, always a good thing, but with admittedly more work and at greater expense, you can have matched devices in discrete as well. They are compact, again, always a good thing because it allows for shorter PCB runs. Lastly, their prices have become very reasonable for what you get, and there are the cheap'n'cheerful and the wildly expensive ones, so one truly has a wide choice however you look at them, horizontally and vertically.
On the other hand, they are what they are, generally take it or leave it, not too much you can do for them. They sound as they do, period. Some techniques have been evolved to ameliorate their possibly greatest shortcoming, which are bias currents for their output stages, like adding a discrete pair, etc.
But in a discrete design, which is bulkier and harder to do, one does keep full control by being able to use EXACTLY the right transistor in any given place, from small power TO-92 types to medium power types, like BD 139/140, 2SC3503/2SA1382, etc. You can bias each and every one of them to almost anything (subject only to their capabilities as devices), and you can run them hot or relatively cold just as you please. This is especially true of their output stages.
So, pick your poison, mister. Both approaches are valid, both will work, and if you try hard enough both are capable of delivering good sound. My feeling is that discrete will do better if you're after the ultimate, though. Such is my experience thus far, at least.
Last edited:
I was reminded, from the earlier posts, of this fine gentleman from Texas who was living a couple of townships away until recently ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhJsALyDkt0.
Enjoyed several sessions listening to him in a local coffee house, and having some chats, about music and such - he'd bumped into quite a number of the well known Oz performers over the years. Just recently moved back to the USA, as far as I'm aware - so, just recommending that people keep an eye out for him - a very entertaining, affable gent ...
Enjoyed several sessions listening to him in a local coffee house, and having some chats, about music and such - he'd bumped into quite a number of the well known Oz performers over the years. Just recently moved back to the USA, as far as I'm aware - so, just recommending that people keep an eye out for him - a very entertaining, affable gent ...
Yeah, there is some seemingly weird sh*t going on that I have well experimented with but hitherto do not have concrete explanations for...yet.
Data errors/changes is not the issue I believe, analog sources can be similarly changed.
The really interesting part is that my treatment applied to the final end of the replay chain undoes most of the upstream errors/intonations to the point of master tape/live playback.
I do not want to start another BQP sh*t fight, but I do hear their effects, and I as I have stated previously IME the BQP effect whilst enabling/causing a cleansing also causes/leaves a particular signature that is not to my liking.
I am awaiting some eBay bits to build some jigs that can maybe flesh out measurements of what we are hearing/what's going on....I need to reread and better understand the Heyser unpublished documents also.
Marce, you are big into high end/sota electronics/emc designing....what are you hearing, what are your thoughts on differing cd metallisations ?
Dan.
Last edited:
Based on that one recording, to me ho hum....maybe.
One guitarist who still mesmerises me every time is Aus blues legend Phil Manning.
Phil Manning - Diddie Wa Diddie
Phil Manning at the Adelaide Guitar Festival 2014
I know Phil personally, have heard him live a million times (at a local every Thursday night, hot fat music, hot skinny women , enticingly cold beer....fun times/rotten Coopers hangovers), always loved his playing on numerous favourite seminal blues records/bands long before I met him.
Phil is royalty of Aus blues/pub culture/history, a world class guitar maestro, and humble to a fault.
Regardless of that I find his performances/recordings are fun/engaging/entertaining, Peter Mulvey does not grab me the same.
Ha, so my comments were accurate !, thankyou.
For the Peter Mulvey recording I would have gone closer, dead front on and central and facing upwards to his vocal (possibly placed higher and facing horizontal/downwards in order reduce room/ceiling sounds ?) to get a fatter vocal and lesser guitar...guitar and room sound can very easily dominate as is evident in this recording.
The Blumlein pair so placed would have given you more intimacy with less room sound, especially that panning/zooming early reflection.
The mic (Blum pair) distance/azimuth is critical....an adjoining room for monitoring during mic placement is needed even if the isolation is not perfect, to get the mic distance/azimuth dialled in correctly.
Can you give links to the other recordings you mention please ?.
I did get the point in the first case that you were well chuffed to arrange such a muso to make your house warming for you and your guests.
.I have done a heap of FM live to air recordings in the past....seat of the pants stuff with rotten isolation but I did capture some killer recordings.
Nothing beats that clean, clear live being there simplistic equipment direct recording path capture that most studio recordings do not quite replicate.
Dan.
I will try an find the previous stuff... Other than that I don't know, I have heard copies that I thought were inferior to an original CD yet when I ripped them to my hard drive I could not tell the difference... that is why I have stopped using CD players, I had a collection from early Kenwood tri, CD63's and a French make Omega I think and of course DVD players... all had subtle differences that I perceived and interestingly some would be more techy about disk condition, so I ripped everything to hard drive and now don't have to worry... The differences were small and I don have the gear to observe such small changes to check whether it is my mind playing tricks, such as believing DVD players were harsher than the bespoke CD players.
So I do like many perceive differences but prefer to have empirical back up to confirm that it is really a difference and not just inside my head.
So I do like many perceive differences but prefer to have empirical back up to confirm that it is really a difference and not just inside my head.
I did get the point in the first case that you were well chuffed to arrange such a muso to make your house warming for you and your guests.
No guests, just my wife and me. During the two months a year he's in the area, we try to get out and see him whenever and wherever he plays- most recently, this past weekend.
Mike placement was almost exactly what you were suggesting- closer in than one meter actually exaggerated the guitar more, not that this is a bad thing with a vintage Martin. it's not a great room for recording; I miss the nice living room we had in Austin.
My Lee Barber and Scott's Southpaw Jones recordings are on Soundcloud. I thank these guys for permission to make the recordings public- most of the folks I record do it under the "only for your own use" proviso.
Lately I have been using a BlueTooth receiver in my sunroom as a wireless link from my laptop PC to my B system (decentish Panasonic shelf system) and the sound is pretty darn good....to a point.
The wireless convenience is great, but the receiver is prone to placement issues.
The issues are the material that it is placed upon, not data transmission errors.
This ties in with the cd disc substrate/metallization materials sounds highlighted in above posts.
Dan.
Yes, of course, but what to measure ?.......So I do like many perceive differences but prefer to have empirical back up to confirm that it is really a difference and not just inside my head.
I agree HD is so convenient, but I also have shelves full of CDs sorted into categories/genres that i have not ripped...according to my want I go to particular shelves and grab particular discs or handfuls and play them through, a bit like playing vinyl forces one to listen to the whole album/side.
Running from HD/SD changes that dynamic,
The problem with most CD players is the jitter characteristics.
Playing from/via HD/BT gives a different jitter characteristic...more usually a broadband/white noise character to the jitter which can be different to/better ? than typical CDPs that can give a subjectively wrong emphasis characteristic due to jitter behaviour.
To date, neither satisfies me fully, that said I have not tried proven super stable/low noise clocking as yet.
Dan.
Ok, that changes the performance dynamics....musos thrive on/live for live audience feedback, no wonder your recording is that bit uninvolving and studio sounding.
No dissing you intended, I feel there is a slightly 'overdamped' character to the recording equipment also.
Re mic placement you get the vocal/guitar placement/sound balance right by relative distances and angles....hence the need for remote monitoring and an assistant.
I will try to search out the other recordings that you reference and take a listen.
Dan.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, all my singing is good for is to chase unwanted guests out pronto.
Before I blaspheme, I do have keep in mind that while God didn't give me a voice, he did bless me with an excellent hearing for my age. Not many still hear 16 kHz at the age of just under 62.
the material you place the receiver on may have an impact on the signal strength and possibly even multipath environment, but comparing modulated RF behaviour with different substrates in an optical pickup is stretching things way beyond any valid reference for comparison.
2V/us slew rate
That was taken care of.
See, this is how it goes:
1 - Pono MUST be good because a) would Neil Young mislead us? and b) Charly Hansen lead his name to it;
2 - Then we find a 2V/uS, 0.95mA Iq class B opamp in the thing! How to rationalise that??
3 - Solved! - it must be the servo!
Jan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.