OK! Is there a resultant time smear of the signal from ringing?
So this flaw can be overcome if a condition is met - is the condition always met?
So you state that for certain people whose hearing is performing optimally, CD is flawed but for the rest of us (most of us), it's OK?
Might be but what I said was that there was a statement made earlier that "IF one's goal is to accurately reproduce the signals coming from the microphones (or master tape)" & I am saying that this is proven to be incorrect for CD - CD is not without it's problems & this statement is vapid. You are disputing the audibility of these problems & I would agree with this line of logic as I have said all along that psycho-acoustics are probably more important than linearity but what you & Feyz have teased out is that CD is not linear!
Yep, still much research needed.
Sorry, yes it's a challenge & not easy but the terrain has been mapped out, by & large. In digital the terrain is still being discovered. I'm talking about implementation issues rather than mathematical theorems!
The devil is in the details, it would seem, as in most everything.
Last edited:
At the ETF last year, it took Martina Schöner an entire night to set up her Loricraft Garrard 401.
She finished half an hour before the brekkie room opened shop, not untill after breakfast did she allow me to go to sleep, for 1.5hr.
(not a lot of TT's able to keep up with that one, costing several times the +$20K, imho)
http://www.holgerbarske.com/etf2010/hb/DSC_0856.jpg
Must have been the bourbon that made me audit Guido-T's CDP+sideshow other half of the time.
Last edited:
Not at all. Don't know where you get that.
Don't have time to write a long reply this morning, on a digital video gig all day.
Will try to explain later tonight, if I can.At the ETF last year, it took Martina Schöner an entire night to set up her Loricraft Garrard 401.
She finished half an hour before the brekkie room opened shop, not untill after breakfast did she allow me to go to sleep, for 1.5hr.
(not a lot of TT's able to keep up with that one, costing several times the +$20K, imho)
http://www.holgerbarske.com/etf2010/hb/DSC_0856.jpg
Must have been the bourbon that made me audit Guido-T's CDP+sideshow other half of the time.
Everything is relative. If it was a digital system she may still be there trying to get it sounding excellent?
So what I meant (& I corrected it in my next post) was that the terrain in vinyl is known i.e how to optimise vinyl so she knew how to approach the issue & what she was doing (I presume) - it might have taken a long time but that is an implementation issue.
With digital the terrain is still being explored & hasn't been fully mapped or agreed upon. There still seem to be some more to be discovered i.e the level of & spectrum of jitter that is important to sonics, the way to overcome the flawed digital signal communication that is SPDIF, the importance of the PS in digital, etc. So given these issues, a night would not be enough to
I gave an example of something that was initially developed in the '50s and '60s, but got really serious within the last 15 years or so.
(original 301, 401, 501's are not me cupper of tea leave dribble)
From a helicopter view, both media are inherently flawed, both LP and CD are round and flat, both need to spin to do their thang.
There are (still) various LP schools ; oil bearings, air or magnetic lift.
Direct or belt-drive, single or multi-belt, one motor or several, synchronic or not, now even with the electric drive as bearing.
Then there's rigid chassis, sub-chassis, wobble chassis, full alloy tonearms or woodpeckers, pivoted or tangential.
All in all, still much under development, recently.
There's belt-driven CD, multi oversampling or no sampling, upsampling, the latest D/A critter or stacking a bunch of retro 1541's, low jitter or not to dither.
Which got really serious in the last 15-20 years or so, still much under development, recently.
Some might have the impression the spin duo thrives on eachother.
(and at the verge of extinction, full-balanced phono stage and all-balanced DAC types as me
)
Last edited:
Vinyl proponents waxing high on CD not being linear should ponder their medium. I happen to like both, but why not consider how the signal is drawn from an LP, and what that means for so-called linearity.
It spins at 33 1/3 per minute. When the needle is in an outer groove, it covers a lot more distance than when it is in an inner groove. In fact, the signal is changed, rotation for rotation, precisely to account for that change in "speed over ground" during playback at 33 1/3 as the needle moves towards the inner grooves - which totally puts a lie to any claim of linearity for this medium, of course.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It spins at 33 1/3 per minute. When the needle is in an outer groove, it covers a lot more distance than when it is in an inner groove. In fact, the signal is changed, rotation for rotation, precisely to account for that change in "speed over ground" during playback at 33 1/3 as the needle moves towards the inner grooves - which totally puts a lie to any claim of linearity for this medium, of course.
On the other hand IMO it is much easier to make a drive that maintains a steady 33.33 rpm on a TT than a special variable speed drive used for turning the CD.
One of my usual most important mods in a CDP is precicely upgrading the Servos PSU so it controls better the CD rotation .
This provides a much better sound reproduction because the error correction system is not used so heavily.
One of my usual most important mods in a CDP is precicely upgrading the Servos PSU so it controls better the CD rotation .
This provides a much better sound reproduction because the error correction system is not used so heavily.
Last edited:
Having just spent all day in a large stone church listening to pipe organ and choir, both "direct" and thru mics-console-headphones, I began to wonder how anything good ever comes of CD or vinyl.
That kind of live sound has a smoothness and sweetness that no electronics seems to capture. Sometimes not a bad facsimile, but no the real thing. 🙁
That kind of live sound has a smoothness and sweetness that no electronics seems to capture. Sometimes not a bad facsimile, but no the real thing. 🙁
You don't understand servos if you think CLV is difficult. You don't understand PLLs and data recovery if you think it's particularly important. The error recovery has to be rather good if it's possible to use the medium to load your operating system where 1 bit error can blow out the whole deal.
G²
I highly doubt that. I've oft seen it mentioned, but never seen it tested or verified. Changing 1 random bit in the OS will kill the whole thing?
Yep. Why not try the experiment if you're in any doubt? Download a free hex editor and edit a system file, changing one bit only. If you hit the right bit your system will no longer boot.
It would be an interesting experiment - since you have access to excellent material - to do a simultaneous digital capture at higher bit depth and sample rates to compare to 44.1/16.
My first digital recording was also in a church - in Chicago - with the organ but no choir Sept 11, 1982 using a pair of Sony C-38 mics, transformerless preamp into a Technics SVP100 44.1 K 14 (not 16) bits. No compression or processing of any kind and the mics wide spaced about 15 ft off the floor. That weekend was special because the carpets had been removed but not yet replaced.
Levels on organ are easy with the organ as I just ask for a sforzando C-major block chord, set levels ad just start/stop the rest of the day. When the choir gets in the act it's more difficult.
G²
As always it would have to be in one of the core services but virtually all your software comes via optical disc. If there were inherent problems with the media something else would get used.
G²
I have built a vacuum tube output stage for my CD ROM drive, and modified the optical tracking system to minimise feedback.
The system seems indefinably 'crisper', updating the screen that much more nimbly. The colours on screen are definitely more vivid, and the speakers give better soundstage and authority. Fonts are somehow smoother, yet better focussed.
The system seems indefinably 'crisper', updating the screen that much more nimbly. The colours on screen are definitely more vivid, and the speakers give better soundstage and authority. Fonts are somehow smoother, yet better focussed.
It would be. (I posted that last night, but my vacuum tube based modem seems to have lost it). Would need 2 sets of ADCs, but it could be done. And interesting because it's part of what I've been trying to explain to Coppertop and others.
OK, off to the salt mines with me. College coeds today - almost hate to go. (not).
Are we saying that you can't sample at the highest depth and sample rate then 'downsample' to 16/44.1 for your comparison with CD..?
I came across these posts by JJ Johnston on AVS forum concerning exactly the same issue as we are discussing here: (just search for jj_0001 on AVSforum.com
Some of this was referred to earlier in this thread. What I find interesting is the complex soundstage & this might explain why, for some, LP is preferred sonically to CD. He also goes on to say:
Last edited:
Yes, that's the idea. As the quality of sample rate converters is often called into question, then running parallel recordings that are not resampled would be the experiment.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.