Scott, you are not being helpful. IF you want to criticize Keith, at least watch his presentation, AND THEN criticize.
Your criticisms are based on rumors and prefab opinions, not on evidence.
For me, Keith's talk is a 'breath of fresh air'. You know, I actually learned a thing or two, that I MAY have suspected, but could not prove. Keith went to his lab and showed real evidence of what we 'hi enders' subjectively note, often try to convey when given a chance.
AND despite the condemnations of both SY and Scott, I will keep listening to audio sources and TRUST MY EARS.
Only a fool would ignore the evidence of their senses.
Your criticisms are based on rumors and prefab opinions, not on evidence.
For me, Keith's talk is a 'breath of fresh air'. You know, I actually learned a thing or two, that I MAY have suspected, but could not prove. Keith went to his lab and showed real evidence of what we 'hi enders' subjectively note, often try to convey when given a chance.
AND despite the condemnations of both SY and Scott, I will keep listening to audio sources and TRUST MY EARS.
Only a fool would ignore the evidence of their senses.
look John, you seem to have a low threshold of proof, thats cool, I do not. I agree with quite a lot of what Keith had to say, but the marketing angle was evident also, as you would expect. hes not my friend (nor is he my enemy) and here we are on a forum talking about technical aspects, so i'm noit going to gloss over something. you are posting it as some kind of reference, in that regard its flawed, especially today.
what concerned me, is he spent a great deal of time talking about problems that dont really exist in the recording chain, even back then. this constant need to use measurements of clearly inferior audio equipment as justification or scaremongering to show audiophiles, is classic marketing, not science.
he talked of the horrible problems that come from sampling at 44.1 and then using digital mixdown technique/volume/processing etc, not playing, sampling. pretty much nobody would do that, its not a problem that exists in reality. certainly not for any half way decent engineer, or student, there is no reason to do it and the issues are well known to all in the field. I wouldnt have done that nearly 10-12 years ago now and I was an entry level hobbiest. pro-sumer grade soundcards back then like the RME HDSP9632 and even my MAUDIO Delta 1010LT had that licked. For 44.1 output, studios and hobbiests alike, would normally sample at higher rate, do your mixing and processing at the higher rate, then down-sample as part of mixdown, that has been the way of it for many years.
just as the talk of quality opamps that barely make -120db, clearly false even back then. all the talk about steady state measurements, sure some manufacturers might still primarily use such things, I wouldnt have thought anyone in his audience would consider them and certainly nobody in this thread would ever rely totally on them; but its very popular to pretend that people do.
Last edited:
Quisp, Keith Johnson has DESIGNED CD PLAYERS, some of the best in the industry, at least at one time. He IS a real engineer, and is up-to-date with his test methods, and he is a VERY SMART GUY. To ignore him because he might develop something to sell, does NOT make you any smarter. Learn and grow. IF you find fault with his results, then CRITICIZE THE RESULTS, not the very idea that someone in the audio business can be helpful in furthering the art of audio.
John, did it sound like I ignored him? did it read like a personal criticism of him?
I simply cannot take the word only of one person so easily, when they are in the business of promoting and producing hires, I did not criticise the man. You may believe that there are superhumans in the audio business that do not allow their motivation to be swayed by the want to promote, I tend to think thats pretty damn rare, its only human and..well. its just good for business.
then I went on to do EXACTLY WHAT YOU ASK (since you are shouting) I critiqued the argument/content and did it without a hint of personal attack.
note: dont shout, its annoying and childish. it doesnt make your point any clearer
also, do you think you could avoid the constant misspelling of my handle? if its easier, you can just call me Jeremy
it was a well framed argument and good presentation, if you ignore the fact that the vast majority of problems he brings up are quite solvable, or not even real problems given well known and widely used technique
I simply cannot take the word only of one person so easily, when they are in the business of promoting and producing hires, I did not criticise the man. You may believe that there are superhumans in the audio business that do not allow their motivation to be swayed by the want to promote, I tend to think thats pretty damn rare, its only human and..well. its just good for business.
then I went on to do EXACTLY WHAT YOU ASK (since you are shouting) I critiqued the argument/content and did it without a hint of personal attack.
note: dont shout, its annoying and childish. it doesnt make your point any clearer
also, do you think you could avoid the constant misspelling of my handle? if its easier, you can just call me Jeremy
it was a well framed argument and good presentation, if you ignore the fact that the vast majority of problems he brings up are quite solvable, or not even real problems given well known and widely used technique
Last edited:
OK, well whats the alternative? that he doesnt really know what hes talking about? that seems unlikely, he seems to have a good grasp of possible issues and has great diagnostic equipment by the looks of it. I just have no idea why he spent so much time on non-issues
my spidey sense is tingling, perhaps there is some sort of industry in-joke i'm not aware of?
Last edited:
is this the same guy?
if it is, the marketing material on that page contradicts much of what he said in the talk ... or are we to only buy specifically and only HDCD? seems...a little limiting ...
if it is, the marketing material on that page contradicts much of what he said in the talk ... or are we to only buy specifically and only HDCD? seems...a little limiting ...
Keith would not be on anyone's list as a pitchman. He is presenting what he found through legitimate work. He has far more experience making a recording and presenting it well than anyone on this list. You may not agree but you can't discount what he has done because you think he is selling high res. Trust me, neither recording nor Spectral are moneymaking efforts of his.
Lets shift things a little --- is there an audible difference between minimum-phase and linear-phase filters (most commonly used) in the recording and then the reconstruction filter afterwards? And, what if they are not the same type and complimentary characteristics? What affect would that have on the harmonic structure?
Thx-RNMarsh
Thx-RNMarsh
Then what about HDCD that was sold to Microsoft?
High Definition Compatible Digital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yawn, more 8 legs bad send me your money blather.
Speaking of not needing HDCD, I've been listening to hhoyt's stream from Chapel Hill on internet radio, very nice.
Last edited:
sorry Demian, but that just makes the presentation all the more confusing. I dont doubt the material, just its relevance to anything an engineer or somewhat knowledgable hobbiest, or even consumer would ever have to deal with then, or now; given a little thought. regardless of his experience, nobody would ever record in 44.1 today if they had any mastering/mixing to do on it, nor for years. that would be incompetence, nothing to do with limitations imposed by technology.
yep, scattered through the talk too along with the usual misrepresentations. its either full of misrepresentation/misdirection/omission, or misunderstanding. there are no other options. its interesting how integrated DACs are always capable of superlative sound, but use the same processes for the output and OMG, its horrible what it does ...
you guys are making it seem like its more the latter option and I dont know thats doing him a favor (I thought it was the least likely). some seemed quite switched on, but then there was incongruous oddball stuff too; not worth mentioning as the problems are dealt with.
problems with your CD servo re-encoding line noise into the analogue output of your dac? isolate the dac, use isolated, or very high PSRR supplies for the clock and output stage. buffer the i2s before reclocking, lose the spinner etc etc
scott wurcer said:
yep, scattered through the talk too along with the usual misrepresentations. its either full of misrepresentation/misdirection/omission, or misunderstanding. there are no other options. its interesting how integrated DACs are always capable of superlative sound, but use the same processes for the output and OMG, its horrible what it does ...
you guys are making it seem like its more the latter option and I dont know thats doing him a favor (I thought it was the least likely). some seemed quite switched on, but then there was incongruous oddball stuff too; not worth mentioning as the problems are dealt with.
problems with your CD servo re-encoding line noise into the analogue output of your dac? isolate the dac, use isolated, or very high PSRR supplies for the clock and output stage. buffer the i2s before reclocking, lose the spinner etc etc
Last edited:
The best Hi-Fi sound I get in my home is with digital as a source. And, the High-Def downloads off the Internet are great sounding. Better than playing CD's.
My inquiry may not be for everyone as I am looking at difference between measurement systems and techniques that are on individual harmonics well below the -100dB levels. But even approaching 0dB, the THD increases with sound card (type) processors and there needs to be a work around for that when used for T&M. In music playback, such work arounds arent used and distortion is higher than what we can do with them for T&M.
Thx-RNMarsh
My inquiry may not be for everyone as I am looking at difference between measurement systems and techniques that are on individual harmonics well below the -100dB levels. But even approaching 0dB, the THD increases with sound card (type) processors and there needs to be a work around for that when used for T&M. In music playback, such work arounds arent used and distortion is higher than what we can do with them for T&M.
Thx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Wow! Why would Keith Johnson be contributing interesting audio papers, based on his own research, for the last 50 years? Could it be, that he, like me, likes to research audio problems in order to improve the listening quality of the medium?
He and I have independently done audio research, that takes man-months of effort, each time, without any payment from an employer. That is why I respect him, even though we are not on speaking terms, personally.
He and I have independently done audio research, that takes man-months of effort, each time, without any payment from an employer. That is why I respect him, even though we are not on speaking terms, personally.
When I use the term clipping I mean specifically that the max level has been exceeded that the digital format can faithfully represent - not that compression has been used in mastering. Any track can have either one or the other, or both. If 3 successive samples are either at the max level, or a couple of bits down from that maximum level, via 'limiting', is irrelevant - the signal is still clipped as far as following analogue circuitry is concerned.
Unfortunately the paying customers in high end don't want complicated technical truth, they want a romance entwined with unobtainable fantastic imagination. Discussions like the one about how the boundary's of analog recording can be fit inside of a digital recording with room to spare are too disappointing and dull. Get a heavy disk spinning or even better reels spinning and the heart strings go twang and the pocketbooks open.
If you treat audio as a technical pursuit with a clear definable goal it has a rational endpoint and goalposts that can be attained through engineering. If audio is a mistress promising sensual delights that can be attained only after enduring some arduous tests and personal deprivation it fits the myth and give a purpose to the ongoing frustration that the sound is not good enough yet.
If you treat audio as a technical pursuit with a clear definable goal it has a rational endpoint and goalposts that can be attained through engineering. If audio is a mistress promising sensual delights that can be attained only after enduring some arduous tests and personal deprivation it fits the myth and give a purpose to the ongoing frustration that the sound is not good enough yet.
And the other end as well. My UULE, a no-name TV used for CD playback, is capable of very pleasant sound IF all local emi sources are shut down. The instant a little bit of interference is introduced into the environment the sound degrades to junk midfi, unlistenable to, at least for me. This is how severe the problem can be, and is something that I find virtually every audio system is guilty of to some degree ...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.