Storage Options

[Deleted]

Robin
Did you have a fan in front of your HDDs ?
I do have an 80mm MB controlled fan there, but I switch it off when directly ripping to the Corsair Voyager GT, with improved results.
I would expect the HDDs in a PC to run cooler than in a typical Mac, as I understand that at least one model uses 17 fans !
A few months back, a Computer Audiophile member uploaded a couple of .wav files, one from an untreated CD ,and the other from the same CD after cleaning, demagnetising and a special Ion treatment. Interestingly, the 3 people who compared them, (including myself and JeffC ) reported that the untreated version sounded better, which was the opposite of what we all expected.
Do you still have that copy of DS -L.O.G ? If so , I have a fresh rip made a few minutes ago for comparison.This time direct from LG BR writer to Corsair GT with front fan switched off . (It's back on now !!!)
Alex

[FauDrei]

Wow! Robin, I'm impressed.

Always admired those big symphonic orchestras and the grandeur and complexity of sound that they produce. Also always wanted to see how those symphonic pieces are recorded...

...and you play in one and record that.

I started this headphone fixation of mine in student years when I had no money to buy decent source-amp-speakers combo. Back then I've used to sneak into concert hall with my student pass and compare the "real thing" with headphones presentation of it... and always left a little bit disappointed with my gear. But still, my first Sennheisers were sufficiently believable option of having Berliner Philharmoniker in the dorm.

Today, many years from then, I'm still headphone weirdo (RockGrotto has some inspirational and educational influence in that), but have less opportunities to attend symphonic performances. The head-gear has greatly improved though - my last setup can really picture the orchestra and the ambient around it (but still not good enough for Alex's tests ).

Sooo, if I may impose - I'd also like a sample of Bruckner's 4th (enjoying Wiener Philharmoniker performance of his 7th as I type this ). wav, flac, wavpack, ape, tak... any of those will do for me.

Will play it from RAM:



...and will use bit-perfect output:

[Deleted]

my last setup can really picture the orchestra and the ambient around it (but still not good enough for Alex's tests ).

In all fairness, the differences were much more subtle back then, although many people were still able to hear the differences.
Of course, if your brain because of previous teachings tells you it is impossible for there to be any differences, you most likely will not hear any ! I think that it is fair to say however, that the SQ of the rip that Robin heard of "Dire Straits-Love Over Gold" gave him a renewed
respect for some recording engineers, and the quality that CD is able to provide when due care is taken at all stages up to the transfer of the .wav files to storage media.

[FauDrei]

Alex, do you EVER sleep?

[Deleted]

Jan 5, 2010 4:11:15 GMT FauDrei said:

Alex, do you EVER sleep?

What ,at 3.16PM Daylight Savings Time on a beautiful sunny day ?
Besides, I have to keep a watchful eye on people who keep mentioning my name in their posts !

started this headphone fixation of mine in student years when I had no money to buy decent source-amp-speakers combo

It seems that you still can't afford them now that you are married !

P.S.
Did you ever sort out that reported data related Jitter problem with the Musiland ?
Was there any basis to it, or was it just a beat up ?

[FauDrei]

Oh, ya... I keep forgetting that we are across the globe... It's 5 something (AM) here... The one who must be obeyed just went by shaking her head in disbelief...

...and you are right - I am still forced to get a new car instead of Uno Picco... ;D

Data related jitter with Musiland? Not sure I've heard of that. Can you point me to the issue?

Later though. Must sleep now.

[Deleted]

Reply 76 -posted by jkeny

rockgrotto.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=talk&action=display&thread=4557&page=6

[Sol]

Jan 4, 2010 23:58:17 GMT rowuk said:

I need a bit more time with a recent concert then I'll get you a sample of Bruckners 4th Symphony with a 107 piece orchestra that I play in. You can check if your playback system correctly resolves the 20x15 meter stage and 50 x 130 meter hall. It is audible and geometrically reproducible. Glorious music too. We recorded at 96/24 with the special array my son developed and an absolute minimum of spot microphones (none for the brass though we were 20 meters away from the microphones). I'll let you know.

Now that I would like to hear

[FritzS]

Jan 5, 2010 14:31:43 GMT Sol said:

Jan 4, 2010 23:58:17 GMT rowuk said:

I need a bit more time with a recent concert then I'll get you a sample of Bruckners 4th Symphony with a 107 piece orchestra that I play in. You can check if your playback system correctly resolves the 20x15 meter stage and 50 x 130 meter hall. It is audible and geometrically reproducible. Glorious music too. We recorded at 96/24 with the special array my son developed and an absolute minimum of spot microphones (none for the brass though we were 20 meters away from the microphones). I'll let you know.

Now that I would like to hear

Yes I too

[rowuk]

Jan 5, 2010 0:20:45 GMT @sandyk said:

Robin
Did you have a fan in front of your HDDs ?
I do have an 80mm MB controlled fan there, but I switch it off when directly ripping to the Corsair Voyager GT, with improved results.
I would expect the HDDs in a PC to run cooler than in a typical Mac, as I understand that at least one model uses 17 fans !
A few months back, a Computer Audiophile member uploaded a couple of .wav files, one from an untreated CD ,and the other from the same CD after cleaning, demagnetising and a special Ion treatment. Interestingly, the 3 people who compared them, (including myself and JeffC ) reported that the untreated version sounded better, which was the opposite of what we all expected.
Do you still have that copy of DS -L.O.G ? If so , I have a fresh rip made a few minutes ago for comparison.This time direct from LG BR writer to Corsair GT with front fan switched off . (It's back on now !!!)
Alex

Alex,
the discs had enough"air" around them and were in a BSD OS NAS server. They are high speed and the tape kept the heat in the disc instead of dissipating like it should have. I think I will be happier with mass coupling. 10 pounds of rock should keep the vibration down!

The original Mac G5 had a lot of fans which is ok for its intended professional use where a soundproof box is no issue. The Mac consumer units like the MacBooks, iMac and MacMini are quiet. They will also run windows for those that are not convinced. The Mac has always been a very low maintenance experience for me - and have had long and productive lives. I bought the G4 FW800 that I am typing on in 2002 and only bought one OS upgrade for $68. The SQ has never been an issue and it still is a strong dependable performer.

What can be magnetic about a polycarbonate disc with a couple of micron thick vapor deposited aluminium? Magnetic fields do not affect either material. If you hear a difference, it isn't that. Cleaning perhaps, static should get grounded by the spindle of the drive. Anything you do with an ion gun will disappear as soon as the disc starts spinning. If not grounded, a CD will pick up a static charge as soon as air starts to move across it.

DS is still a reference for pop productions for me. I was very pleasantly surprised.

I have been giving more thought to jitter and have decided that there is even more BS than meets the eye (or ear). If you are using a master clock, BOTH ends of the transmission are in sync even if the deviation itself is very great. The decoding also needs a stable clock for stable 44.1KHz. I have NEVER heard a CD with pitch problems like wow and flutter and have NEVER been able to measure (or hear) sidebands that would correspond to a time smearing. My feeling is that we also have a great deal of technobabble here too. The harshness in many early digital productions were high frequency ANALOG resonances from the microphones and perhaps some bad behaviour on the part of the HF filters. I have an old Neumann that has that nasty spike only critical in a digital chain (or perhaps a direct to disc vinyl - for the first 10-15 plays).

Sandy, I think you need to start using a playback system that will allow you to use a phase corrected digital equalizer and tune your tunes 1/4 dB at a time. You may not have to rip CDs as much afterwards. Veils will fall! Who cares where it comes from, as long as it comes!My sons favorite: www.waves.com/Content.aspx?id=190 and www.waves.com/Content.aspx?id=207.

Waves offers DAE, AudioUnit, and VST plug-ins for Digidesign Pro Tools, Steinberg Cubase & Nuendo, Apple Logic Pro, Ableton Live, and other popular DAWs. From equalizers, reverbs, and compressors to limiters, noise reduction, and surround sound, Waves has the audio software plug-ins for you

[Deleted]

Sandy, I think you need to start using a playback system that will allow you to use a phase corrected digital equalizer and tune your tunes 1/4 dB at a time. You may not have to rip CDs as much afterwards. Veils will fall!

Robin
That is rubbish ! These are not just my findings about CD ripping.They have been confirmed by quite a few RG members,DIYAudio members, and Computer Audiophile members,both directly from my PC and also via uploads. Even the lead designer of XXHE playback software in the Netherlands, as well as a Mastering Engineer in Germany have heard the differences that the actual ripping can make,despite identical check sums.
The playback was using different software players, completely different hardware, and even different Operating Systems.
Alex
P.S.
The main problem with early CD playback was due to the Brickwall filters used, and there was even a circuit published in Elektor to help correct the resulting phase aberrations.

P.P.S.
Watch your email for a DL link from Filemail.

[rowuk]

Jan 5, 2010 20:23:26 GMT @sandyk said:

Sandy, I think you need to start using a playback system that will allow you to use a phase corrected digital equalizer and tune your tunes 1/4 dB at a time. You may not have to rip CDs as much afterwards. Veils will fall!

Robin
That is rubbish ! These are not just my findings about CD ripping.They have been confirmed by quite a few RG members,DIYAudio members, and Computer Audiophile members,both directly from my PC and also via uploads. Even the lead designer of XXHE playback software in the Netherlands, as well as a Mastering Engineer in Germany have heard the differences that the actual ripping can make,despite identical check sums.
The playback was using different software players, completely different hardware, and even different Operating Systems.
Alex
P.S.
The main problem with early CD playback was due to the Brickwall filters used, and there was even a circuit published in Elektor to help correct the resulting phase aberrations.

P.P.S.
Watch your email for a DL link from Filemail.

Alex,
the EQ is NO JOKE. It is one of the best tools to even out the playing field. I do not criticize what you hear one bit. I firmly believe a lot of it ends up causing frequency response anomolies that are "curable". 1/4 dB is at least one veil if you know where to place it (2K is my first recommendation followed by 250 Hz). Most commercial recordings have errors MUCH greater! Of course it makes sense to get as much info out of the file as possible BEFORE doing anything else with it. Every circuit, every transducer and every combination including cables makes changes to the frequency domain that our ears ARE very sensitive to. I was dead serious even if an EQ used to be the WORST thing that you could offer a true audiophile.

I built the Elektor circuit for my (14Bit)Philips CD101 many years ago. I also built a tube analog stage for it with 2 12AU7s.

[Deleted]

Alex,the EQ is NO JOKE. It is one of the best tools to even out the playing field

Robin
It makes sense with what you are doing with your own high resolution recordings, but I can think of much better uses of my time than stuffing about with minor EQ of well recorded CDs to try and make them sound better.
However, I did EQ my Test CD some time back to correct the frequency response anomalies of the Stax headphones that I had at the time.
The CD then sounded like it was played with high quality normal headphones, with much of the accenture of female voice that Stax lovers are so fond of, virtually disappearing.
Alex

P.S.
You should now have received a DL link email from Filemail.

[FauDrei]

OK, now I'm curious...

How exactly do you precisely EQ your (headphone) gear?

[Deleted]

How exactly do you precisely EQ your (headphone) gear?

Valter
If you are referring to me, I don't believe in any further manipulation of the original .wav file, except for some CDs that are severely painted by the loudness brush. In that case , I use SeeDeClip Duo Pro.
If the CD hasn't been painted by the loudness brush, I want to hear it exactly as the producer intended.
In the case of the Test CD, it was a one off, and I used the Stax published specs to get a reasonable approximation for correction, which was done using Sound Forge. As I said, I do not believe in further stuffing around with a ripped CD, unless I feel like I have been ripped off, such as with the recent Norah Jones release which annoyed the hell out of me because of the heavy handed approach of the recording engineer. In that case I used SeeDeClip Duo Pro, which made this CD sound more like her previous releases.
Alex

[FauDrei]

Well, I just want to know what is the proper procedure... nothing more.

This SeeDeClip Duo Pro looks interesting... will give it a go with some Oasis garbage that I have.

Latest Norah? Not Too Late? I think it is pretty decent recording... what bothers you there?

[Deleted]

Valter
The most recent from Norah Jones is "The Fall"
They haven't even used a jewel case for the deluxe version. Just folded cardboard.
Alex

P.S.
Obviously SeeDeClip Duo Pro can't work wonders with all recordings, but can make many of them more listenable. I found it quite good with many Music Video Promos, which can sometimes make good Music Video compilations.

www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Norah-Jones-Fall

[rowuk]

Jan 6, 2010 1:16:55 GMT FauDrei said:

Well, I just want to know what is the proper procedure... nothing more.

This SeeDeClip Duo Pro looks interesting... will give it a go with some Oasis garbage that I have.

Latest Norah? Not Too Late? I think it is pretty decent recording... what bothers you there?

The easiest way is with a variety of musical instruments or voices that you are familiar with. If you can get a believable soprano, mezzo soprano, tenor and bass, a not too scratchy violin, a grand piano with weight but not so much bloom, you are very close. The hardest instruments to judge are the ones with lots of harmonics - trumpet, oboe, distorted electrical instruments.

2Khz is THE audiophile frequency. A bit more adds "detail", a bit less increases "smoothness". perceived room size can be tuned in between 200 and 250 Hz. This of course assumes a VERY clean source. I always use the above mentioned instruments and voices from a handful of recordings to get a balance when I am listening to new transducers. After that, the rest is up to the resolution of the playback chain. With headphones I do not eq the bass. If the phones sound lightweight, I compress the pads (like on my AKG 701s). If they are too "fat"(like DT770s), I add shims under the pads to get my ears further away from the driver (in that case about +1.5mm). I am surprised that there are no top cans with adjustable geometry. They sure would be more "universal"! I may experiment with this one day.

What producers "intend" on pop productions is very often JBL 4430/4435ish. Hardly the audiophile experience. The classical scene has quite a few large B+W or Genelec in the control room. With the big mixboard offering a great surface for nearfield reflections, I would dare say that many of us have "better" reproduction at home

[FritzS]

Jan 6, 2010 23:42:55 GMT rowuk said:

The easiest way is with a variety of musical instruments or voices that you are familiar with. If you can get a believable soprano, mezzo soprano, tenor and bass, a not too scratchy violin, a grand piano with weight but not so much bloom, you are very close. The hardest instruments to judge are the ones with lots of harmonics - trumpet, oboe, distorted electrical instruments.

2Khz is THE audiophile frequency. A bit more adds "detail", a bit less increases "smoothness". perceived room size can be tuned in between 200 and 250 Hz. This of course assumes a VERY clean source. I always use the above mentioned instruments and voices from a handful of recordings to get a balance when I am listening to new transducers. After that, the rest is up to the resolution of the playback chain. With headphones I do not eq the bass. If the phones sound lightweight, I compress the pads (like on my AKG 701s). If they are too "fat"(like DT770s), I add shims under the pads to get my ears further away from the driver (in that case about +1.5mm). I am surprised that there are no top cans with adjustable geometry. They sure would be more "universal"! I may experiment with this one day.

What producers "intend" on pop productions is very often JBL 4430/4435ish. Hardly the audiophile experience. The classical scene has quite a few large B+W or Genelec in the control room. With the big mixboard offering a great surface for nearfield reflections, I would dare say that many of us have "better" reproduction at home

The 2kHz problem have 2 or more way speakers - IMHO in this range there should no crossover.

Some use DT770 pads with the AKG HD 271/272 ....

If I know more and more about the recording influence - sometimes I think all we do after with the home equipment it's trivial

Sometimes I would say »Wir streiten um des Kaisers Bart» Robin please translate this old verdict

PS: Robin you have a broad knowledge about recording

[Deleted]

2Khz is THE audiophile frequency. A bit more adds "detail", a bit less increases "smoothness".

Friedrich

Many years ago,I remember reading an indepth review of my DCM QED speakers, which are renowned for their imaging, and there was mention about a deliberate small amount of "tailoring" at 2KHZ. IIRC, imaging was improved due to a very small reduction of level in that area.
Alex

[FritzS]

Jan 7, 2010 10:08:31 GMT @sandyk said:

Friedrich
Many years ago,I remember reading an indepth review of my DCM QED speakers, which are renowned for their imaging, and there was mention about a deliberate small amount of "tailoring" at 2KHZ. IIRC, imaging was improved due to a very small reduction of level in that area.
Alex

one European producer (B&O?) use a third LS chassis (in a two way LS) only for phase correction in the crossover section

[rowuk]

Jan 7, 2010 9:31:17 GMT FritzS said:

........

Sometimes I would say »Wir streiten um des Kaisers Bart» Robin please translate this old verdict

PS: Robin you have a broad knowledge about recording

"Wir streiten um des Kaisers Bart" means arguing about things insignificant. The Austrian Kaiser had a beard and his subjects argued about its shape if I remember correctly. Some liked it, some not, but NONE had the power to do anything about it.

About 1/3 of my playing is behind a microphone. I know what gets done in the studio and the significance of the engineer and the producer. If audiophiles spent any time watching what REALLY goes on, they would realize how insignificant the playback is compared to the sins committed in the studio. If the studios spent as much time arguing about snake oil as audiophiles, we would have a lot less to listen to. There are some "high end" engineers however that spend more on cable and sound treatment of the acoustic environment than on the rest of the hardware. Denon, Delos and Reference Recordings are a couple of labels that come immediately to mind.

[rowuk]

Jan 7, 2010 14:10:58 GMT FritzS said:

Jan 7, 2010 10:08:31 GMT @sandyk said:

Friedrich
Many years ago,I remember reading an indepth review of my DCM QED speakers, which are renowned for their imaging, and there was mention about a deliberate small amount of "tailoring" at 2KHZ. IIRC, imaging was improved due to a very small reduction of level in that area.
Alex

one European producer (B&O?) use a third LS chassis (in a two way LS) only for phase correction in the crossover section

The technology is called "filler driver" and actually allows the speakers to produce coherent square waves. The filler driver has to have at least 4-5 octaves of solid range and be 6db louder than the other two flanking it (the tweeters can be padded down-never the woofer!). The crossover is very unique to this setup. I have formulas from the early 80's on how to calculate them. I have never heard it sound convincing. I built some speakers with this geometry using JBL LE8-Ts as the filler driver crossing over between a 12" woofer and a big wooden radial horn tweeter. After 6 months of lying to myself, I went from 3 to 2 way crossing over at 700 Hz and the SQ improved enormously. That cured me about the absolute audibility of phase.

[Deleted]

Back to closer what the thread is about :

www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/157945-memory-card-player-doesnt-make-sense-4.html#post2040389

Yesterday, 06:27 AM #35
-ecdesigns-
diyAudio Member

Join Date: May 2006 Quote:
Memory card player doesn't make sense


CD transports are mechanical contraptions that attempt to detect reflections caused by microscopic dents, placed on a wobbly (often not perfectly centered)plastic disk using a spindle motor, laser positioning mechanism, dynamically focused laser beam and servo circuits to keep the minute focused laser spot on target.

And o wonder, it actually works, and this ancient technology that reminds me of the flintstones is still in use today, but so are primitive combustion engines...

Fact is, sooner or later these will be replaced by more modern devices as technological developments advance.

Apart from obvious downsides like laser aging, problems with mechanical wear, sensitivity to shock and vibration, and high cost, these mechanical devices seem to do a good job.


Unfortunately, the servo electronics produce electrical and electromagnetic interference when performing required dynamic corrections to keep the laser spot on the moving target. The result of these actions is the pollution of power supplies and connected electronics.

If both, source interference and jitter would be completely inaudible on the receiving side (DAC), then yes, a CD transport would be fine. Unfortunately it's virtually impossible to isolate both, source interference and jitter from the DAC electronics without using extreme measures.

Integrating both CD transport and DAC is also not optimal either, because of this source interference.


What we actually need for ultimate CD playback is a digital audio source that provides 100% bit-perfect playback, zero interference and zero jitter. CD-transports are not able to provide this, not even the very best, highly modded audiophile devices. They can deliver the data, but unfortunately they also deliver some unwanted waste products in the form of electromagnetic and electrical interference.

Computers won't be able to provide this either as both interference and jitter levels are usually much higher than CD transports. Slaving a sound card could reduce jitter levels, but the interference will make it all the way to the connected DAC as it "rides" on the required digital interface signals like USB, Firewire, and SPDIF (Toslink) and ground loops. Even if full galvanic insulation between computer and DAC is provided, the interference still enters with the digital audio interface signal in the form of timing jitter. In other words, all computer interference is neatly preserved in the interface signal (SPDIF, USB, FireWire) and is just waiting to pollute each and every circuit in the connected DAC (power supplies, logic circuits, and so on).

Oh yes, jitter is by far not the only problem with digital audio playback, interference (source, mains, EM, and so on) that will inter-modulate with the audio spectrum may even cause more perceived sound quality degradation than jitter does.



Here is why a memory card player makes a lot of sense, especially in extreme performance audiophile equipment:

- Extreme low jitter levels possible (<100 femto seconds rms).
- Extreme low interference signals possible (<10uV rms on both I2S signals and power supplies).
- Dead quiet, completely silent operation.
- Fast response, no seek time.
- Over 50 CDs (WAV format) on a single 32GB SDHC memory card "CD changer".
- No laser aging.
- Insensitive to schock and mechanical vibration.
- Insensitive to pollution (dust particles on laser lens and CD).
- Insensitive to ambient temperature and humidity.
- Compact size and much lower cost compared to audiophile CD transports (high quality SD-transport could be mass manufactured for less than approx. $10).

[FritzS]

Jan 8, 2010 23:49:23 GMT @sandyk said:

What we actually need for ultimate CD playback is a digital audio source that provides 100% bit-perfect playback, zero interference and zero jitter. CD-transports are not able to provide this, not even the very best, highly modded audiophile devices. They can deliver the data, but unfortunately they also deliver some unwanted waste products in the form of electromagnetic and electrical interference.

Computers won't be able to provide this either as both interference and jitter levels are usually much higher than CD transports. Slaving a sound card could reduce jitter levels, but the interference will make it all the way to the connected DAC as it "rides" on the required digital interface signals like USB, Firewire, and SPDIF (Toslink) and ground loops. Even if full galvanic insulation between computer and DAC is provided, the interference still enters with the digital audio interface signal in the form of timing jitter. In other words, all computer interference is neatly preserved in the interface signal (SPDIF, USB, FireWire) and is just waiting to pollute each and every circuit in the connected DAC (power supplies, logic circuits, and so on).

TOSLINK is the once to isolate, but computer and DAC should have a separated electricity supply

Oh yes, jitter is by far not the only problem with digital audio playback, interference (source, mains, EM, and so on) that will inter-modulate with the audio spectrum may even cause more perceived sound quality degradation than jitter does.

jitter could be reduce with a bigger FiFo buffer (till 640 MB for one CD?) in the DAC, the only handicap, if you start a CD you must wait till the buffer is full.

Here is why a memory card player makes a lot of sense, especially in extreme performance audiophile equipment:

- Extreme low jitter levels possible (<100 femto seconds rms).
- Extreme low interference signals possible (<10uV rms on both I2S signals and power supplies).
- Dead quiet, completely silent operation.
- Fast response, no seek time.
- Over 50 CDs (WAV format) on a single 32GB SDHC memory card "CD changer".
- No laser aging.
- Insensitive to schock and mechanical vibration.
- Insensitive to pollution (dust particles on laser lens and CD).
- Insensitive to ambient temperature and humidity.
- Compact size and much lower cost compared to audiophile CD transports (high quality SD-transport could be mass manufactured for less than approx. $10).

Technically it sounds good - AFAIK this idea is not new, but only now low budget SDHC available.

Lifespan of a SDHC memory compared with a CD?

The music industry would have the SDHC memory too, they could easy integrate DRM - if the music industry say's »game over« the musical piece is deleted from the SDHC or you must buy the next instalment

It's the same game as with ebook! You lost the right of disposal, the music industry could do what ever they want. With a CD the music industry don't have right of disposal, they could not prohibit playing for the life time of the CD or ripping, or, ...

A paper book is a paper book, a CD, DVD, BlueRay is a pice read only medium.
IMHO - .wav files on a CD, DVD or BlueRay are the best and you could copy them to a SDHC player.

I hope you understand what I will say with this words, my english is not the best