I'm not claiming anything. I'm just giving a "technical" example for differences in the retrieval of the same file. Never said it is a real-life example and i don't believe it is.
Again "Just to say that differences could be explained technically, even if not obvious". Let me change the "could" into "might" then.
"But that can only be about the process of retrieval, not the file data"
yes, agree 100%
And to really get across what the post was about (i hope): "Thinking out loud, a form of playback differences, Not fact and i don't think this occurs in reality, Dont believe 6, in theory, not describing reality, just trying to find a technical argument, don't believe".
So not claiming, just speculating.
Last edited:
If I have to explain that "seem to" is used to denote a tentative position, then it seems likely that any further discussion is pointless.
I have always thought that audio should be an enjoyable pursuit with sharing of information and some sort of commonality of interest, not some nit-picking contest of egos. However, it seems evident that I'm wrong.
Good day, Gentlemen...
Well I see that some progress is being made. Very good!
Terry, I don't think you need to leave. As far as I can tell, no one has disputed the claim that different optical media "may" cause different sonic results. It seems that most of the engineers understand and accept that it could happen. There has been no conclusive proof presented yet, but it could be found. Most here would know where to look for it.
My recent rip-burn-rip test of the free holiday CD is a good illustration of this.
On the other hand, not many will except that differences heard between identical files on identical media is anything other than imagination. Listening experiences aside, there has not been a theory proposed at to where the differences in identical files may be.
The basic theory of "better" files seems to be mostly one of noise. It is thought that an electrically quieter system will give better rips. Quiet rips more like the original than those done on a system with high noise. In some cases mechanical noise is also said to be a problem. To me, this is a confusion of the difference between analog and digital recording.
Once the information has reached the digital stage, it is easy to keep it error and noise free. In the analog domain, that is not so easy. So there is a confusion as to how different digital is to analog. Even tho at the lowest level it is all analog, the digital "system" is well engineered to keep the ones and zeros intact. The S/N ratio has to be tremendously low to corrupt the data.
Terry, I don't think you need to leave. As far as I can tell, no one has disputed the claim that different optical media "may" cause different sonic results. It seems that most of the engineers understand and accept that it could happen. There has been no conclusive proof presented yet, but it could be found. Most here would know where to look for it.
My recent rip-burn-rip test of the free holiday CD is a good illustration of this.
On the other hand, not many will except that differences heard between identical files on identical media is anything other than imagination. Listening experiences aside, there has not been a theory proposed at to where the differences in identical files may be.
The basic theory of "better" files seems to be mostly one of noise. It is thought that an electrically quieter system will give better rips. Quiet rips more like the original than those done on a system with high noise. In some cases mechanical noise is also said to be a problem. To me, this is a confusion of the difference between analog and digital recording.
Once the information has reached the digital stage, it is easy to keep it error and noise free. In the analog domain, that is not so easy. So there is a confusion as to how different digital is to analog. Even tho at the lowest level it is all analog, the digital "system" is well engineered to keep the ones and zeros intact. The S/N ratio has to be tremendously low to corrupt the data.
OK, let's just think for a minute about the right way of doing things.
One day I'm in the kitchen, making tzatziki, and listening to music.
The CD I'm listening to finishes, and I take it out of the player with the intention of changing it but it slips from my grasp, and falls into the bowl of yoghurt, playing surface down.
Somewhat annoyed with my carelessness, I quickly whip the disk out of the yoghurt, rinse it under the tap, and wipe it dry with a kitchen towel. Worried that the CD may have been damaged by its immersion, I stick it back in the player to check that it's OK.
I'm immediately struck by the fact that the CD sounds better than it did before.
Intrigued, I get out a few more CDs, play a track or so on each, then dip them in yoghurt, clean them off, and play them. In every case the improvement is unmistakeable. I try just washing them, but that's not it. It's the yoghurt that makes the difference.
Fantastic. Just by accident, I've found a way of improving the sound of CDs at minimal cost, by an easy process that anyone can do. Just wait till the guys at DiyAudio hear about this one!
What do I do next?
I set about organising a test that will independently verify what I have discovered, taking the greatest care to ensure that the test is free from bias and that I can in no way have any influence on the outcome.
What do I not do next?
Rush off to the computer to share my discovery with the guys at DiyAudio.
Why not?
Well, if you haven't learned that after participating in a thread like this, there's not much point in me spelling it out in words of one syllable.
w
One day I'm in the kitchen, making tzatziki, and listening to music.
The CD I'm listening to finishes, and I take it out of the player with the intention of changing it but it slips from my grasp, and falls into the bowl of yoghurt, playing surface down.
Somewhat annoyed with my carelessness, I quickly whip the disk out of the yoghurt, rinse it under the tap, and wipe it dry with a kitchen towel. Worried that the CD may have been damaged by its immersion, I stick it back in the player to check that it's OK.
I'm immediately struck by the fact that the CD sounds better than it did before.
Intrigued, I get out a few more CDs, play a track or so on each, then dip them in yoghurt, clean them off, and play them. In every case the improvement is unmistakeable. I try just washing them, but that's not it. It's the yoghurt that makes the difference.
Fantastic. Just by accident, I've found a way of improving the sound of CDs at minimal cost, by an easy process that anyone can do. Just wait till the guys at DiyAudio hear about this one!
What do I do next?
I set about organising a test that will independently verify what I have discovered, taking the greatest care to ensure that the test is free from bias and that I can in no way have any influence on the outcome.
What do I not do next?
Rush off to the computer to share my discovery with the guys at DiyAudio.
Why not?
Well, if you haven't learned that after participating in a thread like this, there's not much point in me spelling it out in words of one syllable.
w
I would argue it's not the yogurt, but that the cd is cleaned (with water and towel). And that the cd player can read the cd much better because of that etc. etc.
What kind of towel did you use? 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀
What kind of towel did you use? 😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀
you're in luck! I have a new yoghurt that has nanoparticles of a rare earth material in it. My assertion is (and listening tests by all of my friends concur) that the nanoparticles suspended in the yogurt film accelerate the photons as they transfer from the disk and so improve the pace and timing of the music!
It even put the Dambuster March into 3/4 time!
My wife agrees - she doesn't know a lot about the technology obviously, but while I explained it all to her yesterday - admittedly a little breathlessly, but none-the-less comprehensively - she nodded emphatically and clucked "Yes dear!"
What more proof do you need?
It even put the Dambuster March into 3/4 time!
My wife agrees - she doesn't know a lot about the technology obviously, but while I explained it all to her yesterday - admittedly a little breathlessly, but none-the-less comprehensively - she nodded emphatically and clucked "Yes dear!"
What more proof do you need?
The important thing is that he subjected the yoghurt treatment to independent, unbiased testing before posting his discovery here. I wish more people would do that.
p.s. I can't wait for somebody else to try this on their hard drive. I'd expect a significant reduction in background noise. Well, in this thread anyway.
p.s. I can't wait for somebody else to try this on their hard drive. I'd expect a significant reduction in background noise. Well, in this thread anyway.
I have tried the nanoparticle rare eath yoghurt on a HDD and can confirm that there was a reduction in extraneous noise caused by jitter and power supply fluctuations.
THere has also been a significant drop in the signal. I think what has occured is that, since the nanoparticles are marginally magnetic being hte remains of a rare earth magnet that I was purifying in a microwave oven, they have changed the dataset such that it now consists of 0.5s instead of 0s and 1s.
I am very pleased with this outcome as i now have a system with the blackest, deepest background. The blackness is very wide too - an improvement in soudstage that I had not expected. It is incomparably better than before in this respect.
Moreover all my friends have listened to it, and they agree.
My wife commented favorably on the depth of the silence as well. She doesn't know a lot about audio, but clearly she has magnificent ears and a huge capacity for truth.
THere has also been a significant drop in the signal. I think what has occured is that, since the nanoparticles are marginally magnetic being hte remains of a rare earth magnet that I was purifying in a microwave oven, they have changed the dataset such that it now consists of 0.5s instead of 0s and 1s.
I am very pleased with this outcome as i now have a system with the blackest, deepest background. The blackness is very wide too - an improvement in soudstage that I had not expected. It is incomparably better than before in this respect.
Moreover all my friends have listened to it, and they agree.
My wife commented favorably on the depth of the silence as well. She doesn't know a lot about audio, but clearly she has magnificent ears and a huge capacity for truth.
Last edited:
CDs? You limit your thinking with such pedestrian ideas pano.
I'm about to EnABL some Lowthers with the nanorarearth yogurt.
I'm also considering going global with the entire deal. For only 59.99 in any hard currency you can name, i will send you a self-adhesive baggie of the yoghurt (hencesforth these devices are known as Slopstream (tm)). This can be zipptied to cables, or fixed to the back (or front) of ANY audio equipment for immediate improvement in pace, timing, rhythm, attack, decay, jitter, jitterbug, and of course wider soundstage.
I have tested this on friends who have excellent systems capable of resolving far more details than yours could ever do. They all confirm astonishing improvements.
My wife has just been listening to my system that has had a full yoghurt treatment including the latest slopstream yoghurt devices and she confirms a vast improvement, not that she knows what she is listening for but she is, as noted earlier highly gifted in this field.
I await your cheque.
I'm about to EnABL some Lowthers with the nanorarearth yogurt.
I'm also considering going global with the entire deal. For only 59.99 in any hard currency you can name, i will send you a self-adhesive baggie of the yoghurt (hencesforth these devices are known as Slopstream (tm)). This can be zipptied to cables, or fixed to the back (or front) of ANY audio equipment for immediate improvement in pace, timing, rhythm, attack, decay, jitter, jitterbug, and of course wider soundstage.
I have tested this on friends who have excellent systems capable of resolving far more details than yours could ever do. They all confirm astonishing improvements.
My wife has just been listening to my system that has had a full yoghurt treatment including the latest slopstream yoghurt devices and she confirms a vast improvement, not that she knows what she is listening for but she is, as noted earlier highly gifted in this field.
I await your cheque.
Last edited:
Is it OK to lick most of it off first, before rinsing? I hate to see good tzatziki go to waste.
depends if you have slopstreamed the wife as well. In this case, your removal method is highly recommended.
Could be worth a try. I tried drawing round the edge of mine with a green marker pen once, but the noise just got worse.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.