stevers said:
so that's why you've chosen to boycot Quad then 😉
My road to damascas hifi experience was listening to a humble ESL57, Quad 303/33 setup. I still hark after that sound.
This argument is a lot of fun and will no doubt run & run. My parting words are that we have to be pragmatic. I want to listen to a particular pieces of music and have to live in a world where it may not be available in the format of choice, so I have to find a way of making it acceptable.
treat yourself to that matching quad preamp, you know it makes sense .
good health to you
a possible reason some early CDs sound bad: ultrasonic audio frequencies from violins, flutes, and pretty much every musical instrument may not have been adequately low pass filtered. If the sampling rate used at the ADC was just 1x (44.1KHz), any audio above the Nyquest limit (22KHz) will end up being aliased to a lower frequency. You don't hear this stuff at the concert hall with just the violinist and your ears. You don't know if the violin is producing sound at say 40KHz, but the ADC will. That will beat with the sample rate to produce an alias frequency at (44.1- 40)=4.1KHz which you'll definately hear. So you use a brick-wall low pass filter to pass everything below say 20Khz and stop dead everything above 22KHz. Such filters have other audiable issues though. Nowadays we run the ADCs at faster sample rates like 8x and use simpler low pass filters before the ADC. The we digitally downsample to 44.1Khz and burn that to a CD.
THey may have not used good enough low pass fiters back in the early days, also oversampled rate ADCs at 16 or more bits didn't yet exist back then.
THey may have not used good enough low pass fiters back in the early days, also oversampled rate ADCs at 16 or more bits didn't yet exist back then.
Everyone has missed the obvious reason........
In the early days of "digital" recordings, recording engineers still had the EQ on their consoles set to where it was with tape mastering. They knew that after x number of tape operations, that they had to crank up the EQ by a certain amount to make it sound right after it was all mixed.
They weren't smart enough to figure out the they didn't lose some top-end in an "all-digital" recording chain.
No, they aren't very smart, and only a few admitted that they screwed up. The fact that most of them are probably deaf, and use some of the most dreadful monitors, did not help matters any.
(Haven't seen the inside of a studio in 20 years, but I doubt that they use better monitors today.)
Jocko
In the early days of "digital" recordings, recording engineers still had the EQ on their consoles set to where it was with tape mastering. They knew that after x number of tape operations, that they had to crank up the EQ by a certain amount to make it sound right after it was all mixed.
They weren't smart enough to figure out the they didn't lose some top-end in an "all-digital" recording chain.
No, they aren't very smart, and only a few admitted that they screwed up. The fact that most of them are probably deaf, and use some of the most dreadful monitors, did not help matters any.
(Haven't seen the inside of a studio in 20 years, but I doubt that they use better monitors today.)
Jocko
They still love the NS10 and then there are hordes of Mackie etc active monitors running of amplifiers best suited to AC motor speed control rather then audio amplification. There is the exception and it is funny to hear a well recorded CD and almost every time a coconut when anything is mentioned about the gear in the liner notes it is more hifi like kit.
On Radford: I have a STA15 3 in the cupboard, used it for many years, could not find a SS amp I liked and could afford, hence the Tubenut moniker. Recently I changed to Electrocompaniet and I love it, does everything better except for a little mid liquidity.
I personally have listened to quite a few CDPs in different systems and believe enjoyment is possible!! I do prefer vinyl but it is all about availability (and cost) of the music I wish to play. I believe CD sound however has less to do with the latest greatest technology rather then the method of implementation. My 13 year old Theta rig (modified) still sounds better to me then many players up to USD 3000.00 available today. The same goes for bespoke units from years ago at lower prices. A Philips based player from the early 90s that sold for around the 250-350 USD mark will still compete favourably with todays product at that price level. (probably beat it with a few exceptions).
I have tried a few DVD players as transports but none have been satisfying (all low priced stuff though).
Some years ago I sold Quad, I believe a Quad 66CD, 66 pre and 606 power amp with ESL63s (add gradients if funds permit) was a very satisfying way to enjoy CD.
Just m2cw
On Radford: I have a STA15 3 in the cupboard, used it for many years, could not find a SS amp I liked and could afford, hence the Tubenut moniker. Recently I changed to Electrocompaniet and I love it, does everything better except for a little mid liquidity.
I personally have listened to quite a few CDPs in different systems and believe enjoyment is possible!! I do prefer vinyl but it is all about availability (and cost) of the music I wish to play. I believe CD sound however has less to do with the latest greatest technology rather then the method of implementation. My 13 year old Theta rig (modified) still sounds better to me then many players up to USD 3000.00 available today. The same goes for bespoke units from years ago at lower prices. A Philips based player from the early 90s that sold for around the 250-350 USD mark will still compete favourably with todays product at that price level. (probably beat it with a few exceptions).
I have tried a few DVD players as transports but none have been satisfying (all low priced stuff though).
Some years ago I sold Quad, I believe a Quad 66CD, 66 pre and 606 power amp with ESL63s (add gradients if funds permit) was a very satisfying way to enjoy CD.
Just m2cw
Hi Jocko,
Tubenut is right. The NS-10's are a studio standard, and the awful-tones are still there.
Many Canadian studios still use the JBL monitors and DC300's, or 4B's. I have no doubt there are engineers who can't hear the top end anymore. Mixing at 3:00 AM doesn't help things either.
Non of this is what an audiophile wants to hear. (or the Beldin snakes 😉 !)
-Chris
Tubenut is right. The NS-10's are a studio standard, and the awful-tones are still there.
Many Canadian studios still use the JBL monitors and DC300's, or 4B's. I have no doubt there are engineers who can't hear the top end anymore. Mixing at 3:00 AM doesn't help things either.
Non of this is what an audiophile wants to hear. (or the Beldin snakes 😉 !)
-Chris
stevers said:
Yes, CD only started to sound half decent 10 years ago (1994~5), with some rare previous exceptions, and those were mainly Jazz and classical recordings.
I agree with your comments and I also have many CDs that I just can't listen. It comes to mind a Depeche Mode CD from 1986 that is plain digitalitis, like as if the sound is coming from a toilet.
I bought my first cdp in 1989 but kept buying vinyl for how long I could and was available, because CD sounded so bad to me...
Now a curiosity: one of the best CD recordings I've heard (around a yeard ago) was a very old and scratched CD with classical music, from Philips Japan, and guess what?... (c) (p) 1982. 😱
wa2ise said:
So you've answered yourself.
You may calculate the required order of butterworth low pass -1dB at 19kHz and -40dB at 22050Hz. Surprised?
We don't have to forget that the analog LP is a totally different source compared to CD. Every source has its pro's and contra's.
Even with a cheap cartridge LP can sound very good. But can sound bad also. I still have a LP of 10CC, it is surprising it wasn't thown away immediately when the first tones hitted my ears. And the before mentioned CD "RHCP Californication" is indeed of the same throw-away quality.
Jocko is right, in the beginning of CD recordings the engineers didn't handle the new format on the right way. Nowadays it is better. (Telarc, others?)
Surpisingly indeed as also mentioned before i have good sounding CD's recorded in early 80's. They where problably taken from analog tapes. (Btw, that's why they can sound so good imo)
I see a lot of youngers nowadays: many of the wear MP3 and iPod stuff to listen too...
We will see what the future brings, but SACD is not very popular yet, so the audiophiles will have a hard time i think.
Even with a cheap cartridge LP can sound very good. But can sound bad also. I still have a LP of 10CC, it is surprising it wasn't thown away immediately when the first tones hitted my ears. And the before mentioned CD "RHCP Californication" is indeed of the same throw-away quality.
Jocko is right, in the beginning of CD recordings the engineers didn't handle the new format on the right way. Nowadays it is better. (Telarc, others?)
Surpisingly indeed as also mentioned before i have good sounding CD's recorded in early 80's. They where problably taken from analog tapes. (Btw, that's why they can sound so good imo)
I see a lot of youngers nowadays: many of the wear MP3 and iPod stuff to listen too...
We will see what the future brings, but SACD is not very popular yet, so the audiophiles will have a hard time i think.
Several of my 80's-90's cd's have an interesting feature, the "singles" tracks are so much harsher than the rest of the album. Most of these are analogue masters.
Might this mean these were produced with several more repetitions of tape than the less commercially promising songs?
Might this mean these were produced with several more repetitions of tape than the less commercially promising songs?
Well, thanks to all for a fascinating thread.
If I may (as a complete amateur, only educated by Arthur Radford and, no doubt, deaf and demented) sum up :-
CDs sound awful.
A few CDs in the 90s sounded less awful but now they sound awful again.
Surely the raison d'être of this forum is to listen to digitally recorded sound. But it isn't listenable to. It is awful. Universally, unrelentingly, tizzily awful (and mixed by deaf, p*ss*d or worse engineers ? at 03.00)
I'm buying a Studer A80. Anybody want a RAKK DA convertor and a few hundred CDs cheap?
This, by the way, is no slight on the RAKK, I believe it to be the best there is and on a few CDs (oddly the best being Blysma Bach solo cello suites recorded in Bavaria in 1979 by van Geest and GOK how they got onto SEON/RCA CD) the sound is better than vinyl but the threat of that dreadful paper comb treble is always there.
If I may (as a complete amateur, only educated by Arthur Radford and, no doubt, deaf and demented) sum up :-
CDs sound awful.
A few CDs in the 90s sounded less awful but now they sound awful again.
Surely the raison d'être of this forum is to listen to digitally recorded sound. But it isn't listenable to. It is awful. Universally, unrelentingly, tizzily awful (and mixed by deaf, p*ss*d or worse engineers ? at 03.00)
I'm buying a Studer A80. Anybody want a RAKK DA convertor and a few hundred CDs cheap?
This, by the way, is no slight on the RAKK, I believe it to be the best there is and on a few CDs (oddly the best being Blysma Bach solo cello suites recorded in Bavaria in 1979 by van Geest and GOK how they got onto SEON/RCA CD) the sound is better than vinyl but the threat of that dreadful paper comb treble is always there.
you could try this ?
Should you sell your DAC/CD player you migh try this route ? Cost is approx 20 euros
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31123
Many have described the sound as analogue like
Should you sell your DAC/CD player you migh try this route ? Cost is approx 20 euros
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31123
Many have described the sound as analogue like
Have you considered the possibility that the combination of your rakk dac with the player is not synergistic? Before you give up totally on digital you might want to try (i.e borrow) a couple of different players and transports. A lot of what you are hearing may be due to the quality of the spdif stream your dac is receiving. Universal players tend to have high levels of jitter on their spdif outputs due to design shortcuts made to keep them affordable. (SMPS supplies, insufficient supply decoupling, shared supplies, mediocre performing chip sets, bad board layout, etc..)
Some would say take a look at the cable between the dac and the player as well..
Mind you I still think my Thorens 125, SME3009, Grado mr8 handily beats my homebrew media server and PSA Ultralink II dac combination on some material, but not on others. IMHO my server sounds better than the PSA Lambda Drive it replaced. (See my server thread if curious.)
It is true that a lot of early cd's were badly remastered, and that is true of a lot of current pop cd's as well.
Incidentally all analog components in my system with the exception of the dac analog stages are homebrew tube designs.
Kevin
edit: fix typo
Some would say take a look at the cable between the dac and the player as well..
Mind you I still think my Thorens 125, SME3009, Grado mr8 handily beats my homebrew media server and PSA Ultralink II dac combination on some material, but not on others. IMHO my server sounds better than the PSA Lambda Drive it replaced. (See my server thread if curious.)
It is true that a lot of early cd's were badly remastered, and that is true of a lot of current pop cd's as well.
Incidentally all analog components in my system with the exception of the dac analog stages are homebrew tube designs.
Kevin
edit: fix typo
I must be doing something wrong, all my CDs sound very good. I only listen 99% of the time to 60s 70s & early 80s rock, some being reissues so I've got the vinyl and CD versions to compare and they both sound similar and usually very good. The few CDs from late 90's onwards sound good but I don't like the studio production overmuch, overproduced I say. I prefer to hear instruments and voices sound more natural, or like a live recording with a few bum notes but it sounds REAL.
Vinyl system is:-
Linn Sondek Valhalla, Ittok, Audio Technica AT-F5 moving coil.
CD system is:-
Marantz CD63, with Cambridge DacMagic2.
Amp:-
Crimson Elektrik CK1010/CK1100 amp (a kit, a few mods added to the PSU like snubbing, preamp RCRC filtering to regulators, better capacitors, nothing expensive).
Speakers:-
Castle Conway 2 (late 70's 3 ways, plastic cone mid & tweeter, doped 8" woofer). Naim NAC4 cables, speakers also wired internally with same. These (rewired) speakers are gems, I've recently tried out a load of speakers at 3 hi-fi shops and gave up they were so poor in comparison being compressed, boxy, lacking attack and openness. The only speakers I've preferred were 2 pairs of stacked Quad ESLs heard years ago at a hi-fi show, they were magical.
I have tweaked things over the years to get the sound I want, which is a clean, open and bright one with a solid tuneful bass. As we're talkng treble clarity and cleanness here, here are the things that have made a big difference to just that......
Speaker cables (big effect)
I know it's unfashionable nowadays, but I went through 4 different sets of cables popular 15-20 yrs ago trying to get MY sound, 2 were hopeless, one (very fat QED stuff) was very good but the treble was gritty, just as people are complaining of in this thread. Naim NAC4 was good all round so that's stayed ever since. Wiring inside the cabinets with NAC4 helped as well. I tried making cables up as well, if you want a really clean sound but a bit lacking in detail try single core 5A mains lead as used for lighting circuits.
Speakers (moderate effect)
Swapped out the unpolarised tweeter electrolytics for film types, can't remember which type though, probably polyester. Also, the crossover PCB was slightly modified by cutting tracks and fitting links so that all 3 sections were made separate, no common tracks carrying current to/from more than one speaker; this mod may have helped the treble clarity a little, it definitely made for a better 3D image. Another mod was to make speaker stands that leaned the speakers back a few inches as this time aligned the drivers, imaging really snapped into focus. I believe this in itself helps perceived treble smoothness, as the treble does not become 'detached' from the main body of the sound and is more easily accepted as being a natural part of the sound.
Capacitors (big effect)
A couple of electrolytics with little or no DC across them were swapped out for polypropylenes I had hanging around, definitely treble sweetened up after this and 3D imaging improved as well.
CD player (moderate effect)
Light silicone grease applied to the laser guide rail. I did this to fix a problem with the sound skipping just once about a minute after every cold start, but was also rewarded with a purer treble.
DAC (moderate effect to treble, some general haze removed, better detail)
Snubbers added to all internal transformers/bridges. The success of this latest mod may spur me on to greater things with this DAC.
All systems behave differently though, so the answer to other people's treble edginess may lie elsewhere of course. I also wonder whether good 70's speakers are the best way to listen to 70's & 80's music?
Vinyl system is:-
Linn Sondek Valhalla, Ittok, Audio Technica AT-F5 moving coil.
CD system is:-
Marantz CD63, with Cambridge DacMagic2.
Amp:-
Crimson Elektrik CK1010/CK1100 amp (a kit, a few mods added to the PSU like snubbing, preamp RCRC filtering to regulators, better capacitors, nothing expensive).
Speakers:-
Castle Conway 2 (late 70's 3 ways, plastic cone mid & tweeter, doped 8" woofer). Naim NAC4 cables, speakers also wired internally with same. These (rewired) speakers are gems, I've recently tried out a load of speakers at 3 hi-fi shops and gave up they were so poor in comparison being compressed, boxy, lacking attack and openness. The only speakers I've preferred were 2 pairs of stacked Quad ESLs heard years ago at a hi-fi show, they were magical.
I have tweaked things over the years to get the sound I want, which is a clean, open and bright one with a solid tuneful bass. As we're talkng treble clarity and cleanness here, here are the things that have made a big difference to just that......
Speaker cables (big effect)
I know it's unfashionable nowadays, but I went through 4 different sets of cables popular 15-20 yrs ago trying to get MY sound, 2 were hopeless, one (very fat QED stuff) was very good but the treble was gritty, just as people are complaining of in this thread. Naim NAC4 was good all round so that's stayed ever since. Wiring inside the cabinets with NAC4 helped as well. I tried making cables up as well, if you want a really clean sound but a bit lacking in detail try single core 5A mains lead as used for lighting circuits.
Speakers (moderate effect)
Swapped out the unpolarised tweeter electrolytics for film types, can't remember which type though, probably polyester. Also, the crossover PCB was slightly modified by cutting tracks and fitting links so that all 3 sections were made separate, no common tracks carrying current to/from more than one speaker; this mod may have helped the treble clarity a little, it definitely made for a better 3D image. Another mod was to make speaker stands that leaned the speakers back a few inches as this time aligned the drivers, imaging really snapped into focus. I believe this in itself helps perceived treble smoothness, as the treble does not become 'detached' from the main body of the sound and is more easily accepted as being a natural part of the sound.
Capacitors (big effect)
A couple of electrolytics with little or no DC across them were swapped out for polypropylenes I had hanging around, definitely treble sweetened up after this and 3D imaging improved as well.
CD player (moderate effect)
Light silicone grease applied to the laser guide rail. I did this to fix a problem with the sound skipping just once about a minute after every cold start, but was also rewarded with a purer treble.
DAC (moderate effect to treble, some general haze removed, better detail)
Snubbers added to all internal transformers/bridges. The success of this latest mod may spur me on to greater things with this DAC.
All systems behave differently though, so the answer to other people's treble edginess may lie elsewhere of course. I also wonder whether good 70's speakers are the best way to listen to 70's & 80's music?
sbrads said:
That's exactly the wrong way around.
A bad recording sounds plain bad on a good system.
That's the cruel truth.
Trying to 'fix' this up is mucking it.
Specially when you have good recordings and several sources to compare.
And good vinyl.
CD can sound very, very good, and I get the same satisfaction (on some recordings) listening to it as I do with vinyl.
But there are some recordings that are simply unbearable, and they are unbearable almost everywhere, unless you use heavy EQ just to listen to them, like in a car.
The problem is that the labels have absolutely no respect by the consumer (us), you pay good money for a disc and then it sounds like cr@p.
To 'solve' this, Musical Fidelity had a device that was a valve buffer, to connect between the CDP and the amp.
It 'sweetened' the sound, making bad recordings (and bad CDPs) bearable.
I can't agree with this.
I've been through the 200 odd CDs I have and five sound OK so the medium either can sound OK or the distortion induced is inaudible or acceptable on these.
All distortion is the same, a harshness in the mid range suggesting odd harmonic distortion. Once heard, unfortunately, the old ears get rather good at noticing it and the anticipation spoils the listening pleasure (rather like that click in the quiet bit on your favourite 33 rpm).
If a recording sounds bad on the RAKK (system is a RAKK/valve buffer into a QUad 606 and ESL 63s or straight into earphones) it also sounds bad on my daughters €22 player, my old Technics machine into Quad 33/303/Quad 77s (best small speakers I've ever heard BTW) and on the car CD. Exactly the same problem.
No full orchestral music is good, always distortion on a tutti string passage. Same on female vocals. The good recordings are bizarre, solo harp, solo cello, brass band music, one organ recording.
If any one has an extensive CD collection try 'Vaughan Williams Works for String Orchestra' Nimbus NIM5019. This illustrates the problem perfectly.
Alternatively listen to one of the R3 lunchtime concerts whem R5 live isn't in action and compare the live bits with the inevitable replay of a recorded item. Usually the live bits are tizz free but as soon as the recording cranks up-there it is.
I'm nipping over to the UK to pick up an old Revox 77 and some decent tape to record our village band and the local tracker action organ so I can work my way up the reproduction train to try to lay the ghost. I expect it will turn out to be digital medium. More in a week. I'd be interested to hear of a CD title that someone thinks actually sounds like the real thing. Classical for preference and currently available so I can buy it.
All distortion is the same, a harshness in the mid range suggesting odd harmonic distortion. Once heard, unfortunately, the old ears get rather good at noticing it and the anticipation spoils the listening pleasure (rather like that click in the quiet bit on your favourite 33 rpm).
If a recording sounds bad on the RAKK (system is a RAKK/valve buffer into a QUad 606 and ESL 63s or straight into earphones) it also sounds bad on my daughters €22 player, my old Technics machine into Quad 33/303/Quad 77s (best small speakers I've ever heard BTW) and on the car CD. Exactly the same problem.
No full orchestral music is good, always distortion on a tutti string passage. Same on female vocals. The good recordings are bizarre, solo harp, solo cello, brass band music, one organ recording.
If any one has an extensive CD collection try 'Vaughan Williams Works for String Orchestra' Nimbus NIM5019. This illustrates the problem perfectly.
Alternatively listen to one of the R3 lunchtime concerts whem R5 live isn't in action and compare the live bits with the inevitable replay of a recorded item. Usually the live bits are tizz free but as soon as the recording cranks up-there it is.
I'm nipping over to the UK to pick up an old Revox 77 and some decent tape to record our village band and the local tracker action organ so I can work my way up the reproduction train to try to lay the ghost. I expect it will turn out to be digital medium. More in a week. I'd be interested to hear of a CD title that someone thinks actually sounds like the real thing. Classical for preference and currently available so I can buy it.
I must be doing something wrong as well....
I have many 80's CD's, a lot of pop and rock and don't have any that sound so bad that they can't be enjoyed
If anything I agree some can sound a bit thin and 2 dimensional with excessive treble.
They are however surprisingly clean sounding which makes them fully acceptable from a listening perspective.
Source material from the 60-70th mastered during the same time don't have any of this. I find them typically much warmer, not so clean and a bit fluffy.
Why don't you give us a few examples of 80th CD's that you think sound horrible and tell us how they sound bad.
We'll see if we have them and tell you how we think they sound!?
I have many 80's CD's, a lot of pop and rock and don't have any that sound so bad that they can't be enjoyed
If anything I agree some can sound a bit thin and 2 dimensional with excessive treble.
They are however surprisingly clean sounding which makes them fully acceptable from a listening perspective.
Source material from the 60-70th mastered during the same time don't have any of this. I find them typically much warmer, not so clean and a bit fluffy.
Why don't you give us a few examples of 80th CD's that you think sound horrible and tell us how they sound bad.
We'll see if we have them and tell you how we think they sound!?
Well, it's all relative, isn't it ?
One effect is that one gets used (maybe even addicted) to quality; I personally noticed this trying different wines (and unfortunately more expensive) and after having consumed better wines, the ones we normally had were all of a sudden unbearable.
Then we have the effect of different ears and perception.
Stevers has mentioned a few of his reference cd's, we could use more so others can compare their perception of them with Stevers; I've got a gut feeling Stevers may be much more critical 😎
A personal note:
When not having had a good day, my music on my system definitely sounds much worse. Those days I wonder why on earth I'm into the DIY hobby.
I'm quite lucky though, I seem to be able to enjoy AM radio (in my car for over a year, no FM antenna 🙂 ), MP3. Don't seem to have golden ears.
I do agree that some cd's are quite unbearable though, and the better the reproducing system, the worse these cd start to sound.
One effect is that one gets used (maybe even addicted) to quality; I personally noticed this trying different wines (and unfortunately more expensive) and after having consumed better wines, the ones we normally had were all of a sudden unbearable.
Then we have the effect of different ears and perception.
Stevers has mentioned a few of his reference cd's, we could use more so others can compare their perception of them with Stevers; I've got a gut feeling Stevers may be much more critical 😎
A personal note:
When not having had a good day, my music on my system definitely sounds much worse. Those days I wonder why on earth I'm into the DIY hobby.
I'm quite lucky though, I seem to be able to enjoy AM radio (in my car for over a year, no FM antenna 🙂 ), MP3. Don't seem to have golden ears.
I do agree that some cd's are quite unbearable though, and the better the reproducing system, the worse these cd start to sound.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.