given the vinyl vs CD debate is about resolution it surprises me that so many people have ignored the playback transform.
This is the RIAA curve plus cartridge plus preamp.
I have a audio technica MM (2.5mV) cartridge in a $300 turntable.
I designed a preamp that "forces" the cartidge to output a similar frequency response to CD. I used Brothers in Arms / Dire Straits Album and CD to align the frequency response of the LP audibly.
Tests of sound quality afterwards almost always favored the Turntable.
RIAA is a guideline, NOT a absolute standard, Bass is muddy and treble weak and/or muffled. RIAA is ideal Cartidge,Z in, C in , Gain, Bandwidth,rumble etc. all rolled together. The magic is the preamp.
BTW , Mine will fail RIAA flatness badly but the result is spectacular.
This is the RIAA curve plus cartridge plus preamp.
I have a audio technica MM (2.5mV) cartridge in a $300 turntable.
I designed a preamp that "forces" the cartidge to output a similar frequency response to CD. I used Brothers in Arms / Dire Straits Album and CD to align the frequency response of the LP audibly.
Tests of sound quality afterwards almost always favored the Turntable.
RIAA is a guideline, NOT a absolute standard, Bass is muddy and treble weak and/or muffled. RIAA is ideal Cartidge,Z in, C in , Gain, Bandwidth,rumble etc. all rolled together. The magic is the preamp.
BTW , Mine will fail RIAA flatness badly but the result is spectacular.
This wasn't with an early digital recorder, it was something rather modern that could do various frequencies as software options (no hardware changes). That's how I surmised it must be the filters. The forum was GearSlutz, I've recalled it now. I think this was the thread, but haven't trawled through it again to verify:
Why are modern A/D converters unable to accurately reproduce an analog recording? - Gearslutz.com
Why are modern A/D converters unable to accurately reproduce an analog recording? - Gearslutz.com
Explain to me what is wrong with insuring the integrity of the clock signal throughout the process. I don't know the scale of the operation, do you?
John
Nothing - if they'd said that then my alarm bells wouldn't have gone off. Guess that didn't sound hyped enough for them though😛 Ensuring clock integrity is necessary for any digital system to operate successfully.
No.
Mike,
Send all your door stops to me immediately. I'm currently (bad pun) using two Radio Shack clock radios for amplifiers (MonoClocks) and need something that sounds worse!
Hurry there's not a moment to spare!
😀
Best Regards,
Terry
Name the scoundrels..................... 🙂
Thanks for the link, interesting ...............
What are you currently using ? .....................
For those that aren't able to keep up with the current technology, here's a brief summery of the digital formats on disc that are currently available (I mean right now):
(1.) K2 Interface Encoding System: Developed by two JVC engineers in early 1987. This format can be regarded as the first audiophile attempt at better A to D conversion. It is now considered out-dated, and has been replaced by other formats.
(2.) HDCD (High Definition Compatible Digital): Strictly speaking, this is not a mastering format, but a very good filtering circuitry developed by Pacific Microsonics, USA, in the early 1990s. HDCD minimizes digital noise and lowers the jitter rate. A CD player equipped with this circuitry is identified by a blue light on the front panel.
(3.) XRCD (Extended Resolution CD): In 1993, the K2 Team at JVC succeeded in creating 20-bit super encoding with the use of a special 20-bit A/D converter. In 1999, JVC launched its first XRCD products, using in the mastering process a device capable of a higher sampling rate than the Redbook standard.
(4.) SACD/DSD: In 2000, Philips/Sony launched the new DSD (Direct Stream Digital) format for recording and mastering encoding at a 1-bit / 2.8224 MHz operational frequency, based on DSD, a departure from the PCM-based Redbook standard. DSD has higher resolution and capacity, and is playable on an SACD player. In a hybrid version, the Redbook portion on the same Hybrid SACD is playable with a CD player.
(5.) XRCD 24: In 2002, JVC’s XRCD technology further matured to become a format capable of encoding 24-bit in the mastering process and using a rubidium clocking device, thereby achieving sonority to rival the SACD, while retaining the PCM domain, and thus being playable on all CD players. Winston Ma of First Impression Music had the honor to debut this format at the 2002 CES exposition.
(6.) K2 HD: The K2 Team at JVC did not rest on its laurels. In 2004, another major breakthrough was achieved with the encoding not only of 24 bits, but also a 100 kHz sampling rate, into the Redbook confines. After the testing of this technology in the Japanese domestic market by JVC, First Impression Music officially launched this superior K2 HD mastering format in August 2007 at the Hong Kong High End Show, and then again later at the January 2008 CES.
(7.) DXD: The full name of this new format is Digital eXtreme Definition. It offers higher resolution capability than any other existing mastering or recording formats, operating at a 24-bit / 352 kHz sampling rate—three times the data rate of SACD. DXD was initially developed for Merging’s Pyramix DSD workstation, which processes all PCM data at 32 bit. Again, FIM had the privilege to debut this superlative format on an international basis, in March 2009.
I might add that there is a lot of work being done to surpass what's listed above. You may note that the elusive disc article referred to and linked in a prior post is sadly, quite dated. [Edit: The technology referred to was 11 years ago (1999). See #3 above]
Best Regards,
TerryO
(1.) K2 Interface Encoding System: Developed by two JVC engineers in early 1987. This format can be regarded as the first audiophile attempt at better A to D conversion. It is now considered out-dated, and has been replaced by other formats.
(2.) HDCD (High Definition Compatible Digital): Strictly speaking, this is not a mastering format, but a very good filtering circuitry developed by Pacific Microsonics, USA, in the early 1990s. HDCD minimizes digital noise and lowers the jitter rate. A CD player equipped with this circuitry is identified by a blue light on the front panel.
(3.) XRCD (Extended Resolution CD): In 1993, the K2 Team at JVC succeeded in creating 20-bit super encoding with the use of a special 20-bit A/D converter. In 1999, JVC launched its first XRCD products, using in the mastering process a device capable of a higher sampling rate than the Redbook standard.
(4.) SACD/DSD: In 2000, Philips/Sony launched the new DSD (Direct Stream Digital) format for recording and mastering encoding at a 1-bit / 2.8224 MHz operational frequency, based on DSD, a departure from the PCM-based Redbook standard. DSD has higher resolution and capacity, and is playable on an SACD player. In a hybrid version, the Redbook portion on the same Hybrid SACD is playable with a CD player.
(5.) XRCD 24: In 2002, JVC’s XRCD technology further matured to become a format capable of encoding 24-bit in the mastering process and using a rubidium clocking device, thereby achieving sonority to rival the SACD, while retaining the PCM domain, and thus being playable on all CD players. Winston Ma of First Impression Music had the honor to debut this format at the 2002 CES exposition.
(6.) K2 HD: The K2 Team at JVC did not rest on its laurels. In 2004, another major breakthrough was achieved with the encoding not only of 24 bits, but also a 100 kHz sampling rate, into the Redbook confines. After the testing of this technology in the Japanese domestic market by JVC, First Impression Music officially launched this superior K2 HD mastering format in August 2007 at the Hong Kong High End Show, and then again later at the January 2008 CES.
(7.) DXD: The full name of this new format is Digital eXtreme Definition. It offers higher resolution capability than any other existing mastering or recording formats, operating at a 24-bit / 352 kHz sampling rate—three times the data rate of SACD. DXD was initially developed for Merging’s Pyramix DSD workstation, which processes all PCM data at 32 bit. Again, FIM had the privilege to debut this superlative format on an international basis, in March 2009.
I might add that there is a lot of work being done to surpass what's listed above. You may note that the elusive disc article referred to and linked in a prior post is sadly, quite dated. [Edit: The technology referred to was 11 years ago (1999). See #3 above]
Best Regards,
TerryO
Last edited:
Yes it did, including this bit:
.link said:
Read it again - I'm sure the link is correct.
(unable to do multi-quote, sorry).
This was discussed a few pages ago, with glass masters sounding better and the error correction breaking down into having to 'fill-in' sections with errors too big for the ECC; and that those 'fixes' tended to sound edgy. It was in conjunction with the benefits of ripping a CD to PC with multiple passes and speeds to reduce this error.
I.e. digital 'tracking error' has been discussed in this very thread, and is in my view a serious shortcoming of CDs that data discs do not have (data discs have far better error correction and either work or stop).
Twelve years ago Elektuur magazine published a "CD clipping detector" which had an S/PDIF input. Remember how some record stores let you audition CDs with headphones without buying them? Imagine you're on good terms with the store owner, you could "measure" the CD before buying it 🙂
Of course today we have online lists of well and poorly mastered CD's.
Of course today we have online lists of well and poorly mastered CD's.
Good old FNAC. 🙂
Terry-O. If I had any 405s lying about, I'd ship them right off to you good buddy. But I'm smarter than that - ain't got none. I'm sure it's not the world's wost amp, but it's no winner. At least when driving what? - Quad ESL panels - OMG, the speakers it was meant to drive. Bleh. But that's way OT and another story all together.
Terry-O. If I had any 405s lying about, I'd ship them right off to you good buddy. But I'm smarter than that - ain't got none. I'm sure it's not the world's wost amp, but it's no winner. At least when driving what? - Quad ESL panels - OMG, the speakers it was meant to drive. Bleh. But that's way OT and another story all together.
If you have any Qad 405's to "throw" away throw them this way please. Its still the the best unit of its time I dont see anything else to match it for reliability, sound quality, and price per Watt around today.
Including quad current products which are "assembled" in China.
Its the only product to have won the Queens award for technological achievment.
The paper to read the science and the math to go with it rather than using the "psuedo science" jargon of todays "experts" ( and there are so many aren't there?) is available at
http://quad405.com/currentdumping.pdf
A basic HNC in electronics from Circa 1967 to 75 should do to read and duplicate it. An interesting paper for sure.
No phraseology like"scintillating treble", "dynamic bass extension", "total control of the speakers" "superb transient handling capabilities".
Or any other of the total rubbbish and nonsense touted around as fact. Just pure science from a creative and clever expert.
Who instead of uttering rubbish and nonsense about other peoples products and how to make them sound "better" or how they "should sound" simply designed his own and history was made.
So remember when someone comes along with all the "solutions" on how to make your amplifier or whatever "sound better" or make it sound "as the manufacturer intended".
Recognize what you are dealing with.
If they had a single clue about basic electronics they would go off and design their own product and make a fortune wouldn't they?
But no, they find a place to "sell" their little chips and caps and "low noise" resistors" and "clever" mods and at a price, convince you its much better now.
Oh well back to the land of dreams!
Including quad current products which are "assembled" in China.
Its the only product to have won the Queens award for technological achievment.
The paper to read the science and the math to go with it rather than using the "psuedo science" jargon of todays "experts" ( and there are so many aren't there?) is available at
http://quad405.com/currentdumping.pdf
A basic HNC in electronics from Circa 1967 to 75 should do to read and duplicate it. An interesting paper for sure.
No phraseology like"scintillating treble", "dynamic bass extension", "total control of the speakers" "superb transient handling capabilities".
Or any other of the total rubbbish and nonsense touted around as fact. Just pure science from a creative and clever expert.
Who instead of uttering rubbish and nonsense about other peoples products and how to make them sound "better" or how they "should sound" simply designed his own and history was made.
So remember when someone comes along with all the "solutions" on how to make your amplifier or whatever "sound better" or make it sound "as the manufacturer intended".
Recognize what you are dealing with.
If they had a single clue about basic electronics they would go off and design their own product and make a fortune wouldn't they?
But no, they find a place to "sell" their little chips and caps and "low noise" resistors" and "clever" mods and at a price, convince you its much better now.
Oh well back to the land of dreams!
Thanks for the OT rant, Phil! You know what say about opinions - they are like speakers, everyone has at least two. 😉 Mine is mine, that's all.
It's OK to color the sound but it's much easier to try to hit the right RIAA EQ if you build something DIY and afterwards use a descent Equalizer, right? 🙂
Mike,
I don't believe that I've ever heard 405's, so I'm pretty neutral.
I was wondering, when you lived in France and were bumming around those years with your buddy Jean Hiraga, were any of those designs "good enough" to compare to the 405s?
Best Regards,
TerryO
Dang Terry, you caught me! Um, yes. Ring me up some time and I'll tell you a fun amplifier story. Quad 303 and 405 involved. I'm too lazy to write it.
This has been gone thru before. The uncorrectable errors are c2 errors and even with midrange cd players there are less than a handful per CD (unless there hacked up). So a filled in section of 44 bytes (16 bits/byte=a lot of lost bits) lasts 1 millisecond. How does 1 "fix" that short during a song make the music sound edgy?
As far as CD clipping, once its on the cd you have no idea if it was accidentally clipped before making the CD (recording,mastering), deliberately badly limited (loudness wars), or a section of music that naturally uses the last bit for a few samples.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.