XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 10:37:48 GMT
Oooops, I accidently replied. lark I stopped responding to these types of threads because they always go pear shaped. Actually responding is good, when you have the time to think and read, as it CORRECTLY expand the horizon for the topic and become more aware of the topic. As it can be seen here, it's rather quite narrow to see things from only the technical aspect of things when clearly there is more to it. We should look at it from fresh angles and from a holistic approach. Is sound reproduction just only form the angle of the technical? No, I can very confidently demand. We mostly subjectivists, are not dogmatic to things technical. At least for me as I come from a technical background too. It's only that when arguing in just a technical background holds not enough basis for what is the truth and nothing but the truth. Don't we want the truth? People like Ian, a professional musician by trade, is even more acute to hearing differences as he composed (designed) music as well. His ears will be even more senstive than us the audiophiles and, mind us, he is not fully into as an audiophile from some of his replies regarding those things. He at times even thought that we audiophiles are nuts and why can't we just use the medium to enjoy music like he is. Well, as he is as a professional music making pro. Now he is more full time flying model helicopters. Yeah, you are right that this type of arguments can become quite rowdy. But it's good as that brings us to the truth and nothing but the truth. Can we take the truth? So can we keep ourselves from some name calling here and there and get on with the analysis and the topic. Yeah, not grudge bearing, can we? This is what good forums are all about and has always to be like that. Btw, we subjectivists are not telling things from dreams or gut feelings but really from real encounter like what the rest of the guys in most audio manufacturers are hearing. But please try to hear these things from a high enough hirez system and not something that's expensive. I take John Atkinson's definition of hirez as the definitive meaning of hirez. The problem is many don't hear from a high enough hirez system and start to say there is not difference. In fact, I was quite surprise myself many years ago that even at an awkward angle, I can hear the difference when the Walker TT guy applied a coat of CD teatment fluid to a CD and let us see whether we can detect the difference between the one treated and the one not treated. It's so clear cut and we will be stupid not able to hear the difference. Mind us, we were dealing with DIGITAL PERFECT FOREVER medium and still are now. I don't think I need to elaborate on others that I have also encounter. But I can say I'm very fortunate to be able to witness the differences without having the $$$$$ to buy one of those systems.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 10:45:16 GMT
Yeah, btw, even Alex and I are mostly subjectivists, but that doesn't mean I have to always agree with him on things subjective. So we are just brothers in arm for the truth and nothing but the truth on this topic. Go ask him whether this is the case.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 11:11:23 GMT
Simple - different cd recording methods can create differing artefacts in the recorded media. CD players live half in the digital domain and half in the analogue domain. These recording artefacts can cause variance in read errors, jitter and other digital to analogue artefacts. Read errors can cause a read failure and can require some "guess work" to fill the read error time region. This can manifest itself in many ways. Jitter will effect the timing and has subtle to significant effects on the data, depending of the severity of the jitter. You understand jitter well, so I wont bore you with the details So no, I will not claim that Sony is lying. As we both know, CD players have a digital stage and an analogue stage. The digital stage pretty much ends at the CD. During playback the CD must read the data in time, this is a real world analogue artefact - "real world timing" but does not effect the digital world the same (rips, files copies, etc). But my argument will be that data on CDs is digital, but CD playback (not ripping) is still influenced by the analogue world and has its flaws. Ok, take a DDD recording then and see whether there is a difference for the blu spec CDs. Sorry, I can't provide one reference for all to buy and check for themselves insitu as the blu spec catalogue must be investigated first for DDD stuff first. After that there will be no more arguments in that area as then it's only DDD until the same cdp playback for both the blu spec CD as well as the normal CD. But please, use a high enough hirez system that can differentiate the differences and not some bloody portable and HPs, etc that's not hirez enough. Please state the system you use here, can you, for that comparison? Fair to all right? BTW - despite your name calling, I would do not consider myself an expert, there is so much I do not know and there are so many experts that know so much more than I. I call these guys experts. But I do know a some things, and I know some things well - but I'm not arrogant enough (yet ) to call myself an expert. So please Alex, can't we just discuss our views without getting all personal and sensitive about it. Ok, no more name calling shall we. But that doesn't mean that you can claim ignorance that digital medium is prefect as that's what your proposal of digital medium is for this good and lively towards the truth debate.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 11:20:51 GMT
Also, the supposedly no difference between SACD CD layer and the std CD. No, there are significant differences between SACD and CD - Higher sampling rate, Higher dynamic range, higher frequency range, and discrete surround. So yes one would expect there is the possibility for improvement between SACD and CD. There is a lot of technical merit for improvement. No, I'm not talking of SACD vs normal CD. That will be a straight away KO. I'm a firm believer and actor (not Oscar, ok) on fairness as can be seen from my arguments at RG. SACD CD layer and normal CD.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 11:29:51 GMT
I just can't understand your basis for argument based on "other people have said the same so it must be true" will never hold water for me. Especially in the face of technical understanding and common sense. Oh, do you believe in the court and God first? Court is based on jury verdicts and not everything from all possible angles may be argued on and yet a person can be condemned or a free man/woman/gay as it's based on overall jury votes In God, do you think that present technicals can and will answer all that's happening in this world and specifically to electronic and digital music reproduction. Only God can and unfortunately our nutty Prof Frans is a non believer in God and so it seems from you as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2011 11:32:39 GMT
Chong Although many may think this is BS, a year or so back, a C.A. member did similar with de ionising, demagnetising and used a proprietary CD application fluid. He uploaded a couple of .wav files, one from before the special treatment, and one after the treatment. Surprisingly, all 3 of us chose the untreated CD as sounding better. BTW, the person involved was a C.A. member from NYC, and our own Jeff C. was the other participant. Anybody who thinks I am making this up should check with Jeff. Alex
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 11:58:31 GMT
Yeah, don't forget HDCD for the 5% manipulation in the LSB and claim that there is no difference in sound too. Sorry, explain that to me again.. 5% manipulation in the Lowest Significant Bit.. What does this even mean... The LSB is a single bit, equalling either exactly 1 or 0. in the digital world 5% of that means nothing. To reuse an expression I've used before - that makes as much sense as questioning the marital status of the number 5. Ok, according to what I know about HDCD: And this is supposedly not audible in the digital world. But is it? Ref: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCDOur dear Prof Frans had already explained it somewhere here along this line but didn't mention the LSB part of the HDCD encoding.
|
|
|
Post by lark on Oct 9, 2011 12:12:57 GMT
Ok, take a DDD recording then and see whether there is a difference for the blu spec CDs. Sorry, I can't provide one reference for all to buy and check for themselves insitu as the blu spec catalogue must be investigated first for DDD stuff first. After that there will be no more arguments in that area as then it's only DDD until the same cdp playback for both the blu spec CD as well as the normal CD. But please, use a high enough hirez system that can differentiate the differences and not some bloody portable and HPs, etc that's not hirez enough. How is this relevant to this discussion? I think you're asking me to compare two different formats? I don't expect these will contain the same data.. I'm not sure how it's relevant for a discussion about lossless audio codecs, but my daily listening gear is a pair of K702 and either my Aune mini dac or my home built SCHA (Alex's variant). Modest gear, but it's all I need for desktop use. My living room setup consists of VAF DC-X G4MKIIs driven with a Denon 3808ci - again, modest gear but does just what I need. I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I think you're saying that I think the all digital medium is perfect. I don't, but that's a different topic, let's not go off on tangents it makes discussion difficult. What I am saying is that two identical files (checksums match) are identical and will sound identical (regardless of how they are ripped) I'm also saying that no lossless audio codec/format (eg flac, wav) will have any effect of the audio quality.
|
|
|
Post by lark on Oct 9, 2011 12:15:14 GMT
No, there are significant differences between SACD and CD - Higher sampling rate, Higher dynamic range, higher frequency range, and discrete surround. So yes one would expect there is the possibility for improvement between SACD and CD. There is a lot of technical merit for improvement. No, I'm not talking of SACD vs normal CD. That will be a straight away KO. I'm a firm believer and actor (not Oscar, ok) on fairness as can be seen from my arguments at RG. SACD CD layer and normal CD. If they are bit identical, when ripped and played from a computer, they will sound identical. But I expect the content differs between the two releases - I could be wrong, I've never looked. But if so, you'd expect them to sound different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2011 12:17:46 GMT
I don't want to crap on this thread so I'm happy to receive PM responses. I've never before heard of Blue Spec CDs so can someone tell me whether they're played on a Blue-Ray player or a standard CD player or something else? TIA, Dave. Hi Dave Sorry, but I missed this post. BluSpec CDs will usually be more readily available from Japan where they have quite a large following. They can be played on a normal CD/DVD player as they are fully compatible with the CD format. Regards Alex www.cdjapan.co.jp/popular_formats/Blu-spec-CD/index.html
|
|
|
Post by lark on Oct 9, 2011 12:19:56 GMT
I just can't understand your basis for argument based on "other people have said the same so it must be true" will never hold water for me. Especially in the face of technical understanding and common sense. Oh, do you believe in the court and God first? Court is based on jury verdicts and not everything from all possible angles may be argued on and yet a person can be condemned or a free man/woman/gay as it's based on overall jury votes In God, do you think that present technicals can and will answer all that's happening in this world and specifically to electronic and digital music reproduction. Only God can and unfortunately our nutty Prof Frans is a non believer in God and so it seems from you as well. No, I am not religious. I don't see how that has any relevance though.
|
|
|
Post by lark on Oct 9, 2011 12:25:23 GMT
Ok, according to what I know about HDCD: And this is supposedly not audible in the digital world. But is it? Ref: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCDOur dear Prof Frans had already explained it somewhere here along this line but didn't mention the LSB part of the HDCD encoding. So in some format they've used the lsb to encode some other data - this increases noise. That's to be expected. Can it be distinguished? I don't know. But this has nothing to do with audio formats, rips, etc.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 12:39:23 GMT
How is this relevant to this discussion? I think you're asking me to compare two different formats? I don't expect these will contain the same data.. 2 different formats? My, my when we are talking of 44 16 bits. I'm not sure how it's relevant for a discussion about lossless audio codecs, but my daily listening gear is a pair of K702 and either my Aune mini dac or my home built SCHA (Alex's variant). Modest gear, but it's all I need for desktop use. My living room setup consists of VAF DC-X G4MKIIs driven with a Denon 3808ci - again, modest gear but does just what I need. Then I suggest you attend some meets or demos where they have some high enough hirez systems like Alex and me to expand your horizon. Not trying to boast but to help you get over things easier. How to convince you and all the technical guys when you don't even have a chance to compare properly or atune to comparison. I'm not sure what you're saying here, but I think you're saying that I think the all digital medium is perfect. I don't, but that's a different topic, let's not go off on tangents it makes discussion difficult. What I am saying is that two identical files (checksums match) are identical and will sound identical (regardless of how they are ripped) I'm also saying that no lossless audio codec/format (eg flac, wav) will have any effect of the audio quality. Ok, again take it to your home ground "advantage", based on your checksum of digital media PERFECTION, there is still a difference. Try the liquid that I mentioned on a CD and listen thru a high enough hirez system and be convinced. Btw, Alex and I were not hallucinating of what we had said earlier. As I had stated earlier, we are NOT brothers in arm on all matters but only THIS as it's what we heard. We can go different way after this.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 13:01:45 GMT
No, I am not religious. I don't see how that has any relevance though. So how can you claim yourself to know all what is good for music reproduction when your horizon is not holistic enough? First, you ONLY fully accept that subjectivity is crap and nonsense when there is every right to it as objectivity. You are even not sure of the unknowns as with GOD and we are talking of a holistic approach here to be able to capture the REAL essence of a good msuic reproduction chain.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 13:05:25 GMT
So in some format they've used the lsb to encode some other data - this increases noise. That's to be expected. Can it be distinguished? I don't know. But this has nothing to do with audio formats, rips, etc. That's what we are trying to say. Accordingly, it's not more than 5% as stated earlier and they are saying it's not audible in the digital domain as what you had stated as well.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 13:15:47 GMT
Hey, we are all talking nonsense here! This thread is for Using EAC for Flac. Ok, can we all stop and have coffee or beer togather after this? Too much damage done already!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2011 13:28:43 GMT
You know, Chong. In the end it really doesn't matter.
If it's found later that in fact, there IS a difference in the files, I'd make sure that the guys who wear blinkers don't get a copy!!
If there isn't a difference, so what. I'm happy.
I'm open to anything and would at least try it but if you don't accept it in the first place, no point in trying.
The CD's I made in the 80's were appalling sounding but the guys making the recording insisted that they were top notch, full frequency with massive dynamic range etc. It was a load of berloaks but they insisted that it was a top notch sound.
Now we know better, it's no longer a top notch sound - same numbers and all!!!
So who cares?
Some are happy in their ignorance and others are happy in their knowledge.
In the end, it really doesn't matter and I've learned to tread my own weary path and not worry what anyone else thinks. As long as it sounds good to me.
Ian
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 13:47:50 GMT
Beer time! To Ian: You are right!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2011 16:08:16 GMT
Gawd, what a funny video. I really enjoyed that Chong. I don't normally watch them all the way through, but that was really good!!! Oh ..... I hope it was a good bit rate or else I hated it. Ian
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Oct 9, 2011 21:57:53 GMT
Oh ..... I hope it was a good bit rate or else I hated it. Oh, the Pink is obviously loudness war until clipping distortion! I think you sensed it quickly too by that statement. So lousy digital there!
|
|
|
Post by lark on Oct 10, 2011 11:56:44 GMT
How is this relevant to this discussion? I think you're asking me to compare two different formats? I don't expect these will contain the same data.. 2 different formats? My, my when we are talking of 44 16 bits. So? Just because they are both 44KHz 16 bit recordings does not mean they are the same mixing and mastering.. And there are other factors to consider with the playback system it's a whole other topic. hirez this, hirez that, blaa, blaa blaa - please, it makes no difference how hirez your system is - it can not change what is and is not possible. Hmm.. Really? Ohhhh, on hirez... Do you have a definition or criteria for 'hirez', not that it makes any difference to the discussion, but you seem to be obsessed with this 'hirez' thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2011 5:34:56 GMT
My living room setup consists of VAF DC-X G4MKIIs driven with a Denon 3808ci - again, modest gear but does just what I need. What I am saying is that two identical files (checksums match) are identical and will sound identical (regardless of how they are ripped) I'm also saying that no lossless audio codec/format (eg flac, wav) will have any effect of the audio quality. Hi lark, I agree 100%. By chance I also have some VAF DC-X G4 and I have been told that my system is not good enough to hear the differences. ;D BTW: I have always used EAC to rip WAV / CUE files and I have purchased the FLAC versions of the Beatles albums. regards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2011 5:45:41 GMT
It might be if you ever complete the SC DAC. I believe that your very good VAF speakers are being let down by the rest of your present system! Why do you insist on using Carlos's DX or gainclones with them ? ;D Are you now saying that you "fibbed" about hearing the differences back at the January listening session , or did you later on decide that you must have been mistaken ? ;D P.S. Why don't you take the controls for a short while at the listening session on Sunday, and see if the other 4 present are able to hear differences between a few comparison .wav files that you can't .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2011 6:27:11 GMT
It might be if you ever complete the SC DAC. I believe that your very good VAF speakers are being let down by the rest of your present system! Why do you insist on using Carlos's DX or gainclones with them ? ;D Are you now saying that you "fibbed" about hearing the differences back at the January listening session , or did you later on decide that you must have been mistaken ? ;D P.S. Why don't you take the controls for a short while at the listening session on Sunday, and see if the other 4 present are able to hear differences between a few comparison .wav files that you can't . Hi Alex, The last time I used Carlos's DX was at your home at Waitara, many, many years ago and I only use gainclones when people ask to hear them. Normally I have my AKSAs running with a VALVE preamp. That's why you love it so much. At the January GTG I heard lots of combinations of things and yes I could hear differences but there was also confusion to exactly what we where listening to. I would only be convinced if I prepared the files myself, then I would know exactly what I was comparing. At GTGs I prefer to just sit back, absorb and enjoy the music, technology and company. Looking forward to seeing you on the weekend. regards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2011 6:58:45 GMT
Hi Greg You may remember that I asked David if he had "ExactFile" on his PC so that he could generate the MD5 info.for the 2 files? Unfortunately he didn't. This time I will include an ExactFile report in the folder. If you can think back that far, can you remember if this description of the differences that you THOUGHT you heard, included better HF definition, especially near the beginning when the HF effects alternated between channels ? I don't think that we discussed that aspect at the time, regarding the Claire Martin 24-96 tracks ? Please bring along your SC DAC too if it is still working after that apparent design fault that caused the Multiplexer I.C. to overheat after repeated Input Scanning. I think you may have the nice Altronics full kit with metalwork done ? Did you contact SC about this deficiency in their software ? Perhaps your mate in S.A. could rewrite it to include a timeout after an appropiate time ? Alex
|
|