Well give us some data on the number of uncorrected bits per second you are talking about. An anecdote about a blinking light decades ago doesn't give us much to go on does it?
I drilled a series of 1/8" holes into a cd as suggested,
when I spun it up, it whistled, my dog chased it for a while, but then decided that he liked the ball better.
then I went next door and Sadie chased it for a while and then went back to wanting a ball.
I guess that means that 2 out of 3 dogs like balls to cds.
Cheers
Alan
when I spun it up, it whistled, my dog chased it for a while, but then decided that he liked the ball better.
then I went next door and Sadie chased it for a while and then went back to wanting a ball.
I guess that means that 2 out of 3 dogs like balls to cds.
Cheers
Alan
Last edited:
No, Scott. I was never fully satisfied with my work, both in music and engineering.
I avoid generalizing unless to be able to demonstrate something irrefutably.
Not the case for this unimportant thing, which is so sad for you.
What I'm sure of is that this tip improved the quality of reproduction on *my * CD player, placed on *my* shelf with the vibrations of *MY* listening room. And that improvement has come to *me*, over time, with enough evidence for me to talk about it.
I took the trouble to understand, measured a visible change on the movements (focus) of the diode lazer: so something tangible happens.
Now you can, or not, trust my listening skills, with which *I have earned my life*, As you earned your with your technical skills. And even the word 'improvement' is subjective.
I also understand that someone who has spent his life creating technological objects by applying formulas and performing calculations, surrounded by measuring devices, may be outraged that others may use more subjective ways. Especially since you have achieved impressive results on paper.
You told us, did you not, that you developed your audio or operational integrated circuits, with a deserted listening room then reconfigured into a conference room?
I have the greatest admiration (and considerable sympathy) for the breadth and depth of your knowledge, but since I do not believe in God, I do not believe it is you.
And since I do not believe in the Devil either, I do not think J.C is him. ;-)
And reciprocally.
Last edited:
Eh? You make a claim, when asked to back this up with numbers you want money. Is this just a reminiscence of old times from your armchair rather than a serious attempt to share useful information? No problem if it is, you just need to be clear about that.
I wasn't asking about what you personally cannot explain. That is unless you are THE knowledge of the world when you posted "Almost everything, if you listen hard enough." and therefore if you cannot explain it then no one can. Is that the case?
I can rip a CD 20 times and get the same disc CRC. You guys are paranoid beyond all reason.
Why? He taped a lead sheet on the CD cover, heard an improvement and happy about it. Perhaps reason is not as he suspected, but I fail to see the "paranoid" on his post.
Oh, but they insist on playing CDs in "CD players," not computers.
Has anyone yet made an "audio center" that instead of "playing" an inserted CD, immediately starts ripping it to hard disk (or SSD or whatever) and then immediately starts playing the ripped file as it's being written? It seems this would be much more reliable for playback, and could spit out the disc well before the first track is through playing. That's about the performance I get from EAC - I buy a lot of thrift store CDs, and most (and virtually all classical, for some odd reason ...) rip at high speed with no error.
Thank you, I enjoy to learn from you, I hope for you to enjoy to learn from me.
Yes I do expect you to note/accept my subjective findings, in the context that I have made such statements only after rigorous AB comparison on many system examples and over a very long time period....IOW I am certain in my subjective findings even if I do not have any theory 'proofs'.
Agreed, and I am working on measuring these difference subjective observations currently.
What has not been clear up to date is that the system excitation signal is critical and that impulsive/musical waveforms trigger system noise behaviours that sinewave stimulus may not.
This correlates with subjective experience of particular recordings triggering particular 'wrongs' or 'nasties' in various systems......some recordings sounding good on 'any' gear, some recordings sounding good on some systems yet bad on others etc.
This system signal dependent behaviour is also at least partial explanation for standard performance measurements not necessarily correlating with subjective opinions.
A standard -120dBV USB 24bit soundcard is good enough to discriminate differences, a -140dBV really good soundcard would be better.
I am investigating different test signal waveforms and averaging to discriminate decaying noise 'tails', at his stage I am seeing change in difference signal of several dB at -60dB down from the original measured broadband, and more change at very low and subsonic frequencies for old school Roland US-122 soundcard and Yamaha stereo amplifier test loop when applying my filters.
I will compare ferrite and see what I can similarly differentiate.
Dan.
Dan, a subjective observation poses little problem. But supporting measurement and/or robust math is required to be a technically accepted fact, otherwise the explanation can only be a hypothesis. Somebody in the future (perhaps even yourself) will present the required measurements and math when a real need to do so arises.
Outsourcing experimental verification jobs to dogs/cats is a valid methodology. 😉
“. . . I am working on measuring these difference subjective observations currently.
What has not been clear up to date is that the system excitation signal is critical and that impulsive/musical waveforms trigger system noise behaviours that sinewave stimulus may not.”
I’ve heard this too many times before . . . Best we move on.
What has not been clear up to date is that the system excitation signal is critical and that impulsive/musical waveforms trigger system noise behaviours that sinewave stimulus may not.”
I’ve heard this too many times before . . . Best we move on.
Possible you are hearing noise floor modulation that is characteristic of S-D DACs. Such modulation can be audible and objectionable to some people. The best S-D dacs may have low enough noise levels such that the noise floor modulation that does occur may be below the threshold of hearing. IIRC, there is some mention on the phenomenon in the Sabre DAC technology paper available on the downloads page at the ESS website: http://www.esstech.com/files/4314/4095/4318/sabrewp.pdf
However, if what you claim to hear can't be accounted for by DAC noise floor modulation, then a possible mechanism becomes much harder to imagine.
That is what happens in car/automobile CD players. They are just CD-ROM drives configured to re-read when things get a bit bumpy.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.