Would you care to comment on Fig. 7 here:
Audio Note CDT One/II CD transport & DAC 2.1x Signature D/A processor Measurements | Stereophile.com
Fig. 1 would be for Monty's fans.
Yes, that's a prime example of how you often get worse engineering in fashion audio. This is an incompetent design (they left out the reconstruction filter), and is greatly outperformed by cheap units. I note that John Atkinson said, "Overall, it is difficult to avoid the temptation to describe the Audio Note DAC 2.1x Signature as "broken"!"
$6500. For this. smh
edit: For 20 times less money, you can get this:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/musical-fidelity-v90-dac-da-processor-measurements
Figure 7 tells the tale.
$6500. For this. smh
edit: For 20 times less money, you can get this:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/musical-fidelity-v90-dac-da-processor-measurements
Figure 7 tells the tale.
In the 1980s either Audio Source or Audio Control had a 10 band stereo graphic EQ that did this. I owned one, and it worked very well - had no effect on ambience, just killed the LF out of phase component in the signal. (Mono bass to somewhere north of 200Hz) I have searched for the device to no avail so far, but will keep trying. I remember the circuitry as being of moderate complexity. I will casually keep trying to find it.
See this thread for an approach to killing out of phase LF for vinyl playback by one of our members:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...ore-effective-than-just-high-pass-filter.html
It is somewhat more complex than I remember the aforementioned equalizer being.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...ore-effective-than-just-high-pass-filter.html
It is somewhat more complex than I remember the aforementioned equalizer being.
I firmly believe that this right here is the crux of the biscuit, as Frank used to say. I think that people are affected just as much by the various imperfections in audio reproduction as by the "good" sounds (and sights, and smells
).I grew up listening to vinyl, and was always so frustrated by pops & ticks, cartridge mistracking, inner groove distortions, etc, etc, that I eventually gave up even trying to enjoy some of the more challenging recordings (piano, organ orchestral, etc.) Digital audio (yes, even redbook CD) has allowed me to enjoy these recordings again.
And yet there are plenty of intelligent, open-minded people who absolutely prefer the sound of vinyl, and complain of digital's harshness or sterility or any number of things. The only plausible explanation for this I've been able to come up with is that each group is hearing something(s) objectionable in one medium or the other, that the other group either doesn't notice or isn't bothered by (as much).
For whatever reasons, be they physiological, psychological, political or spiritual, people just hear stuff differently. And that includes the stuff we don't like.
-- Jim
Me too.
I think some of us enjoyed removing the grilles and watching our woofers wobble.
We are short of critical readers (while critical listeners are in abundance
)Which of all examples (illustrated in which plot?) you are referring to?
George
PS I have a relevant question (exercising all DAC codes) but it’s totally off topic. I’ll ask you in another circumstance.
No, it's not distorted. It is exactly what that particular test signal is supposed to be.
Ah I knew I had something **** about. The mono Sub experiment should reduce ambience with vinyl more than it does with CD.
Possibly, with enough averaging, and assuming a perfect mechanical system (the cartridge will be limited to -70dB or so from thermal noise before it even touches a groove). An actual -90dB distortion measurement is shown in the same review, and there's no trace of any of the harmonics in the spectrum.
Billshurv posted asking for example Decca SXL recordings made in Kingsway Hall which include London underground train subsonics, as well as building lf ambience in fine quantities.
I've been racking my memory to think of an example which is also likely to re-released on CD for ready comparison. So, from memory (my system is down at the moment), Decca SXL 2238 Mozart Clarinet Concerto LSO/MAAG 1959. Which remains a fantastic example of realism in Stereo recording from the 50s, and nicely records the building sounds. I can't verify this was recorded in Kingway Hall either, BTW, but IIRC has the characteristic periodic tube rumble subsonics.
It's possible that a few people here have that Decca recording on vinyl - I do. But I don't have the CD or digital release. Would be interesting to compare, but I expect the digital version has been 'improved' at the bottom end
In classical recordings, building ambience is part of the sound - I think Brendel said that building reverberence shapes performance, waiting for decay times to subside etc.
The early Decca recordings didn't filter lf ambience, and are far better for that IMO in terms of realism. In case anyone hasn't hear Decca's SXL 50s/60s recordings on vinyl, it's a treat and not only stands up by today's standards but is still the reference IMO.
To the OP, it would seem that lf ambience can be important to perception. Whether 'pseudo' ambience in the form of out of phase channel subsonic noise can influence perception, I don't know but would guess so.
I've been racking my memory to think of an example which is also likely to re-released on CD for ready comparison. So, from memory (my system is down at the moment), Decca SXL 2238 Mozart Clarinet Concerto LSO/MAAG 1959. Which remains a fantastic example of realism in Stereo recording from the 50s, and nicely records the building sounds. I can't verify this was recorded in Kingway Hall either, BTW, but IIRC has the characteristic periodic tube rumble subsonics.
It's possible that a few people here have that Decca recording on vinyl - I do. But I don't have the CD or digital release. Would be interesting to compare, but I expect the digital version has been 'improved' at the bottom end
In classical recordings, building ambience is part of the sound - I think Brendel said that building reverberence shapes performance, waiting for decay times to subside etc.
The early Decca recordings didn't filter lf ambience, and are far better for that IMO in terms of realism. In case anyone hasn't hear Decca's SXL 50s/60s recordings on vinyl, it's a treat and not only stands up by today's standards but is still the reference IMO.
To the OP, it would seem that lf ambience can be important to perception. Whether 'pseudo' ambience in the form of out of phase channel subsonic noise can influence perception, I don't know but would guess so.
Jim,
I understand your frustration, but must readily say the mistrackng is easily dealt with by a good cartridge and a high quality passive linear tonearm, I designed one I still use everyday and it has greatly diminished even igd. Pops and ticks are also vastly diminished by a well designed phono stage with enough headroom, and slew rate that exceeds the energy of the pops which produce a lot of energy, too low a slew rate will greatly accentuate these.
Colin
I understand your frustration, but must readily say the mistrackng is easily dealt with by a good cartridge and a high quality passive linear tonearm, I designed one I still use everyday and it has greatly diminished even igd. Pops and ticks are also vastly diminished by a well designed phono stage with enough headroom, and slew rate that exceeds the energy of the pops which produce a lot of energy, too low a slew rate will greatly accentuate these.
Colin
One might add on headroom for how hot vinyl is actually mastered, sometimes +15dB peak or more above nominal 0dB. A reasonable estimate of range under favourable conditions with a tailwind is c 80dB IMO - normally far less than that.
edit: also RIAA precomp has effect, and there are mechanical constraints that mean 0dB is not recordable/playable by any means at all frequencies and spindle radii. For example, at 5kHz 33rpm 6cm radius, mechanically the trackability limit works out about -3dB (ref 5cm/S), at 10kHz c -8dB. At 100Hz c +15dB if groove spacing permits. So RIAA and mechanics affects available dynamic range across the spectrum once noise is then taken into account.
Last edited:
not got the mozart on my box set DECCA SOUND / THE ANALOGUE YEARS - 54 CDs - Buy Now but will get the booklet out tonight to see if there was anything done in kingsway. I do have on work PC the EMI recording of Dupre playing the delius and Elgar piano concertos. Will listen to that.
I readily believe that. Offset arms are disadvantaged because the drag force acts along the line between stylus and spindle. This adversely affects the maximum groove angle which can be tracked, hence maximum level, even if the cartridge is perfectly aligned. Quality cartridges have quality styli with low friction/drag, this also improves maximum groove angle which can be tracked. Groove angle is bigger for any given programme level for inner grooves, that's why mistracking shows up there. Et voila (or any stringed instrument, Douglas !).
I do, of course, mean along the line between stylus and arm pivot - oops !
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.