If we're discussing old tape formats, does anybody have a secret magic pinky finger never tell fix for the Revox A-700 meter's sticking? Mine runs fine but the (insert profanity here) meter sticks mechanically. Have tried everything obvious, no joy.
Also, if anyone wants a Sony TC-765 and/or a lot of Teac parts, they're yours. Now decades old, but free of course.
All good fortune,
Chris
Also, if anyone wants a Sony TC-765 and/or a lot of Teac parts, they're yours. Now decades old, but free of course.
All good fortune,
Chris
Excellent advice, to which I would humbly add by encouraging anyone interested in SACD to look a little further down the road, and invest in a player that can be firmware-hacked for backing up the DSD files to a computer.
For many years this was only possible using a hacked Playstation of a certain (very obsolete) vintage. But awhile back the window opened again when a bunch of SACD players from Oppo, Pioneer, Sony, & perhaps others were discovered to have a chipset that could be coerced into ripping SACDs. These players have also gone out of production, but can still be found. Here's one of the main places where this is discussed.
I had previously dismissed SACD as a doomed format, but after buying a Pioneer BDP-80FD and realizing that the software can indeed outlive the hardware, I've been buying discs like crazy! It's almost like, if I'm allowed to back up the software I purchase, I feel compelled to purchase more of it!! What a concept... 🙄
As I can't fit mult channel in the tiny living room I hope that by the time I have a bigger room it will be available as multichannel downloads!
Thanks for your feedback.
I listened to the 5.1 channel SACD's in Polyhymnia's well equipped own listening room.
For some reason they didn't like the sound coming from their original ESL63 Pro's (not enough bass ?) and that's why they demonstrated with top models from the B&W 800 series.
And yes, sound was coming from all directions, not at all giving me the sensation of sitting in a concerthall.
Recordings made from birds in the open were absolutely fantastic, birds all around you, but that's comparable to spectacular video with 5.1 surround sound, but not for Audio IMO.
Hans
Ok there are now six reactions to the listening test.
Outcome is in the table below.
The three samples where in this order resp:
A: The unprocessed 88.2/24 .wav file from 2L.NO
B: Now BW restricted to 20Khz/24, packed in 88.2/24
C: BW restricted to 20Khz and truncated to 16bits. packed in 88.2/24
In case B and C, non correlated content was added to above 20Khz,
and in case C non correlated noise was added to fill the space between 16 and 24bits.
Two candidates couldn't here a difference.
One had all answers right but reported very slight differences.
Three judged the original version to be sounding the worst of the three.
This test proves nothing but that if there are differences, they must be very small.
Hans
Outcome is in the table below.
The three samples where in this order resp:
A: The unprocessed 88.2/24 .wav file from 2L.NO
B: Now BW restricted to 20Khz/24, packed in 88.2/24
C: BW restricted to 20Khz and truncated to 16bits. packed in 88.2/24
In case B and C, non correlated content was added to above 20Khz,
and in case C non correlated noise was added to fill the space between 16 and 24bits.
Two candidates couldn't here a difference.
One had all answers right but reported very slight differences.
Three judged the original version to be sounding the worst of the three.
This test proves nothing but that if there are differences, they must be very small.
Hans
Last edited:
I think this is the core of my concern. In a concert hall its the reverberation you can hear from all around. Which is subtle but powerful in creating the sense of space. Perhaps too subtle for many!
A concert hall has a dense first arrival, with direct sound and the near-wall reflections needed for the band to hear themselves, then an (ideally) 25 millisecond gap, then the hall's reverberant field.
But that's the Concertgebouw, or Muzikverein or Boston Symphony Hall. It can't be fit into someone's living room, beginning a chain of abstractions and compromises that end, torn and tattered, here in the Black Hole Zone.
Always the best,
Rod Serling
But that's the Concertgebouw, or Muzikverein or Boston Symphony Hall. It can't be fit into someone's living room, beginning a chain of abstractions and compromises that end, torn and tattered, here in the Black Hole Zone.
Always the best,
Rod Serling
Cool. All other where to afraid, to old or to technically inhibited to even try. Aha so you added some fairy dust above 22 k for A and B. Thats one way to do it. Another would to leve this additions out I suppose. What made yo take this interesting path?
Thanks for your efforts! Educating.
//
Thanks Hans,
I must say A was noticeably worse sounding.....it had a definately muddied Sound with less definition. This I do not believe to have been imagination, now the difference between B and C, I could understand as there was no night and day difference there for me....very subtle, and I could understand being mistaken.
Please don’t take this as an excuse from me but something was definitely wrong with A ?
I must say A was noticeably worse sounding.....it had a definately muddied Sound with less definition. This I do not believe to have been imagination, now the difference between B and C, I could understand as there was no night and day difference there for me....very subtle, and I could understand being mistaken.
Please don’t take this as an excuse from me but something was definitely wrong with A ?
It can't be replicated, but how close can you get? I'd hate to think 2 ch was as good as it got?
Hans,
When you say something like 24/44 is 'packed' in 24/88, exactly how does one pack it? Are the 44kHz data zero-stuffed to make them 88kHz, or what?
When you say something like 24/44 is 'packed' in 24/88, exactly how does one pack it? Are the 44kHz data zero-stuffed to make them 88kHz, or what?
Was supposed to be 96 ?
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachments/the-lounge/823593d1583743699-black-hole-testbench-jpg
Edit.....after looking at this site/chart Hans downloaded from wouldn’t a more appropriate test have been between the 24/192 (one file to left), 24/96, and the 16/44.1 version straight from the site? It was there three files to the right.
Last edited:
Bob: it was supposed to be 96 on the link but 2L had something wrong. This way we have exact provenance of what was done, whereas on the 2L site we don't know what they did. also if you KNOW what each file is that can drive an expectation of the outcome. This way you only had your ears.
Yah.....something is not right with A though, I’d go to the mat on it.
Bill, what I meant was a random blind test of the three unadulterated files straight from the site.
It doesn’t matter that I failed to identify it correctly......I’m fine with failure, it happens to me on a regular basis! It’s just that something is quite obviously (to me) wrong with A.
Bill, what I meant was a random blind test of the three unadulterated files straight from the site.
It doesn’t matter that I failed to identify it correctly......I’m fine with failure, it happens to me on a regular basis! It’s just that something is quite obviously (to me) wrong with A.
Last edited: