Well that has always been a selling point of the oppo in having 'audiophile' 2 channel outputs. But as it just can't be done for that price...
If this is true (at it likely is), there is only one small detail to explain: then why would I care about what you, or Destroyer, are hearing (or not, BTW)?
Just speak for yourself, and leave it there. It's not a statement about the SQ, but the "it's so easy to hear" part that I find really annoying. That is, instead of saying "I have bat ears and can hear 1E-6 distortions @100KHz" (which I can't, and won't, debate) you say "you can't hear this, you must be stone deaf" (which I may find insulting).
I have far-from-perfect pitch, but my tolerance for turntable wow/flutter decreased drastically
after using CDs more often for casual listening, especially on piano.
Waly, I don't want to insult anyone.
Regarding the "easy to hear" claim, I think once hearing/listening something is learned, it can seem very easy.
Like understanding Urdu is easy. Or French. Sure, once you understand it, maybe.
But, people tend to forget what it was like before they knew what they know now. And that applies to all sorts of things, not just hearing/listening.
I know a PhD physicist and professor whom I once asked if he could imagine not understanding any physics, like going back to when he was in junior high or something. Could he imagine what it would be like for him put himself in the frame of mind of not understanding anything about how the physical world works? He thought for a moment, and said, "no way, its impossible!" At least he was honest about it.
As far as what you might care about, I would say it depends. If you want to listen for your own enjoyment, I don't know why there would be any need to change. On the other hand, if you wanted to take up recording and mixing as a hobby or new vocation and you wanted to be the best you could at it, then there would be a lot of things to learn and practice, including more development of listening.
Last edited:
in
If musicians and athletes have to constantly practice to maintain and improve their skills,
why should analytical listening not require similar efforts? Just because the data goes into the brain,
that doesn't mean the circuitry is there to process it to full advantage.
If musicians and athletes have to constantly practice to maintain and improve their skills,
why should analytical listening not require similar efforts? Just because the data goes into the brain,
that doesn't mean the circuitry is there to process it to full advantage.
Last edited:
rayma,
Yes, things tend to deteriorate with disuse. Some things are easier to get back into practice at than other things though. And physical skills like athletics tend to deteriorate significantly with age no matter how much practice. Same for genius thinkers, most do their best work before age 30.
However, for people who have made a habit of lifelong learning, taking up some kinds of new things may be reasonably possible. For example, I recently started taking up drums, just because. It's fun, and I'm slowly getting better at it, but it's important to practice some every day, and to keep working at developing new skills.
Yes, things tend to deteriorate with disuse. Some things are easier to get back into practice at than other things though. And physical skills like athletics tend to deteriorate significantly with age no matter how much practice. Same for genius thinkers, most do their best work before age 30.
However, for people who have made a habit of lifelong learning, taking up some kinds of new things may be reasonably possible. For example, I recently started taking up drums, just because. It's fun, and I'm slowly getting better at it, but it's important to practice some every day, and to keep working at developing new skills.
Well, I would put my learning efforts elsewhere, like electronics and acoustics. Honestly, when it comes to hearing/listening, ignorance keeps the costs down and leaves you equally happy. You lose the bragging rights, though.
I'm not a boombox advocate, but a "high end audio" swindle enemy.
Yes, and regular exposure to live music is essential for developing listening skills to their fullest.
Last edited:
"For all I know the Oppo's implementation is awful and horrendously awful, but this assertion really makes no sense as it's written. We're *all* dealing with complex impedances. Maybe you meant something different? "
Daniel, no not really. But I don't really consider common place good engineering that does account for complex impedance, at least so much as to function, to be what I'm describing. I'm more interested in microsaturations, ringing, and such; very tiny things happening. For me I even reject the validity of cables with different sized signal conductors (like coaxial, or something with two grounds twisted around a signal). I especially have yet to use a device with an IEC inlet filter sound ok at all, as another source of the same problems.
Making sure a corner frequency is right or something isn't really in the realm of anything but the blatantly obvious, not worth mentioning.
The biggest issue, really, that none of you, especially Oppo fan boys, aren't asking is, if not Oppo then what? Sadly that's not the easiest answer. I use a Bel Canto CD1 that I had to pull an IEC inlet filter out of, and modify the SMPS a tiny bit. It was also like $5k new, 12 years ago, and they almost don't exist... The other thing I use until I get the time to play with Scott's or Jan's almost in production phono PCB boards is a cheap $100 modified unit. If someone wants to spend about $150, I'm game to give you part numbers for modification. Sadly the input caps I use are now long retired blackgates :/ so it won't be 100%.
Daniel, no not really. But I don't really consider common place good engineering that does account for complex impedance, at least so much as to function, to be what I'm describing. I'm more interested in microsaturations, ringing, and such; very tiny things happening. For me I even reject the validity of cables with different sized signal conductors (like coaxial, or something with two grounds twisted around a signal). I especially have yet to use a device with an IEC inlet filter sound ok at all, as another source of the same problems.
Making sure a corner frequency is right or something isn't really in the realm of anything but the blatantly obvious, not worth mentioning.
The biggest issue, really, that none of you, especially Oppo fan boys, aren't asking is, if not Oppo then what? Sadly that's not the easiest answer. I use a Bel Canto CD1 that I had to pull an IEC inlet filter out of, and modify the SMPS a tiny bit. It was also like $5k new, 12 years ago, and they almost don't exist... The other thing I use until I get the time to play with Scott's or Jan's almost in production phono PCB boards is a cheap $100 modified unit. If someone wants to spend about $150, I'm game to give you part numbers for modification. Sadly the input caps I use are now long retired blackgates :/ so it won't be 100%.
Is there something inferior about ripping CDs with a good drive and playing the wav files through a very good DAC?
Some people seem to think a DAC-3 sounds better for playing CDs than a Bel Canto CD-1. Wouldn't know myself, never heard a CD-1.
Facts don't matter to a certain crowd. The Oppo "sounds bad" because it's an Oppo. If this were an Ayre unit with the exact same stuff in it they would be waxing poetic about the sound. It can't possibly sound any good, measurements be damned, because it's from a Chinese AV equipment manufacturer.
Almost sounds like from an offended Oppo owner. Or offended about something?
Last edited:
.Yeah, someone tell Mark that the mix of audio-as-fashion and the ridiculous, impossible, yet obnoxiously snobbish/elitist positions people take are what get peoples rankles. He doesn't seem to get it.
"Microsaturations? Sorry I call flooby."
Come on over to this side of the ocean, I'll demonstrate.
Mark, my friend has the DAC3 and it sounds pretty nice. It has a couple itty bitty things that should certainly be changed, and some were in later models. But then again we only ever compared the stock CD1, which has a crappy SMPS and that damned inlet filter on the IEC (did, in my case).
If someone uses a computer instead of CD, that's great if they like it. I personally greatly prefer changing discs and being committed to one... just like how I listen to mostly vinyl. If I have to recommend an easy way into a source that's worthy then an Oppo or computer feeding a DAC is as easy as it gets. The Oppo as a transport I can't say anything bad about (thus far).
Come on over to this side of the ocean, I'll demonstrate.
Mark, my friend has the DAC3 and it sounds pretty nice. It has a couple itty bitty things that should certainly be changed, and some were in later models. But then again we only ever compared the stock CD1, which has a crappy SMPS and that damned inlet filter on the IEC (did, in my case).
If someone uses a computer instead of CD, that's great if they like it. I personally greatly prefer changing discs and being committed to one... just like how I listen to mostly vinyl. If I have to recommend an easy way into a source that's worthy then an Oppo or computer feeding a DAC is as easy as it gets. The Oppo as a transport I can't say anything bad about (thus far).
Make it good, or make it's DAC as good as a stand-alone DAC going for about the same price? I think you know I didn't mean the former, so why are you trying to make it look that way?
And I wasn't trying to offend OPPO owners or be insensitive about their equipment choices. Again, I think you know I was trying to explain to John why concluding all digital is bad based on listening to his modified OPPO was probably a premature judgement, and that there might be other DAC devices better suited to his listening preferences, but maybe not at around the same price and still have full CD player included in with the deal. I don't see what was morally wrong with that.
This is a very nice set of measurements. The only additional measurements I would like to see before acknowledging it as "sufficient condition" for "good sound" is a measurement of HF spectrum above audio band, at least to 10MHz. Though audio band output of the player itself may be unaffected, HF garbage may be a reason of "different" sound with vatious amplifiers, due to demodulation or intermodulation with HF components.
Agreed. Will see if anyone has published those. IMO it does not suggest this is rubbish or justify the concept that at this price point it can't possible offer good sound. I can't work out if Mark is brainwashed or just being condescending to those of us who don't have the budget for $2000 2 channel DACs but could just about stretch to something that was a universal player and excellent 2 channel device at the same time for half that. economies of scale are marvellous things after all.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.