Some Thoughts on Hi-Fi, Vinyl, and.CD [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Some Thoughts on Hi-Fi, Vinyl, and.CD



SweatLaserXP
02-24-2006, 10:35 PM
I was at the bar the other night, having a discussion with my older friend about audio gear. I had overheard him talking about McIntosh with a friend of his, and we all had a discussion about recording tech. as well as hi-fi playback. My friend is an independent recording technician, and in some ways I have more respect for him than some of the folks I've brushed up against in the hi-fi community, whether they are sales reps, both agreeable or full of b.s., or neurologists who have $40,000 systems (who often are amiable guys themselves). I have, though, met plenty of down-to-earth, level-headed sales reps and doctors who truly love this expensive, nebulous, and sometimes frustrating hobby.

It's one of those dirty secrets that many (but of course not all) of the folks who consume the more expensive hi-fi gear do not actually have a very good ear, or they very well may not even enjoy listening to music much. They may get bored or nod off to sleep while sitting at the Metropolitan Opera. They may fire up their B&W 800Ds once every three months. It's kind of like a rich but lousy driver who buys a Ferrari 550 Maranello- obviously, a 550 Maranello is a marvelous beast, but unfortunately, without those lousy millionaire drivers, Ferrari would not be able to stay in business. The engineers and staff at the numerous high-end audio companies are passionate, brilliant, and tireless people who love this thing called hi-fi, but they all know that their livelihood depends on patrons who are often apathetic to their raison d'etre.

There are also those who can hear quite well, but they are obsessed with the technology, with sound of their own particular gear, and not the beautiful music flowing from the speakers. They may see their five-star recordings as tools to demonstrate the transparency of their system. They are constantly swapping components and cables, tweaking things, moving things around, constantly listening "into" their system rather than sitting back with a wine, closing their eyes, and allowing the music to envelop them. These people are often wealthy as well, but they don't fit the previous category because, as I said, they are perfectly capable of distinguishing a Conrad from a Krell. Some of the people on this forum fit this description, but they serve a certain role in hi-fi audio. At least they are quite aware of the complexities of their expensive circuitry and acoustical treatments. Trial-and-error, incessant tweaking, and modification are the modus operandi of circuit design.

There is a third category, and many of us belong to it- those who are involved in this hobby because they love music, and they see the equipment as a means for sheer enjoyment. They are not blowing their wad to impress their rich associates, or to achieve absolute precision, but to be moved and entertained by the music coming from the system. They appreciate the essence of the music, which is simply embellished by their nice hi-fi system.

Getting back to my buddy, who records for a living- he's always listening to real instruments, and accounting for many factors of acoustics, choices of microphone, microphone preamp, etc., and trying to relate that to what the mix will sound like through speakers. What this means is that he probably has a better idea of what, say, a cymbal actually sounds like, or how to tell when he's properly set up to record a bass kick, than what some hi-fi folks may perceive as accurate sound. People often are very confused about this- they prefer a speaker that smooths out the sound of a trumpet, when in fact, trumpets, well, sound harsh in small spaces. I am a conservatory student in violin, and I am around a plethora of instruments all week. Violins are not necessarily "smooth" or "lush" sounding. They actually have a very piercing tone, especially in close proximity, and very much so when right underneath your left ear. Like many instruments, the sound becomes beautiful and dimensional when it flourishes in a large space.

My friend and I got into a long discussion about analog and digital. As a 48-year-old recording tech., he has embraced digital since its entry into mainstream recording. His love of digital is the convenience of working with a digital studio, and the S/N ratio and low noise floor of CD. We talked a long time about this, but I eventually admitted to him that, though I really only listen to CD, the most exquisite and engaging sound I've ever heard from hi-fi systems has always been exclusively through vinyl playback. Period.

He had some half-baked theories about why vinyl "fools" the ear into thinking that the sound is more warm and continuous: that a higher noise floor and needle friction created background noise and thresholds that the listener is not consciously aware of during playback. I didn't fully understand what he was trying to say- he may indeed have no idea what he is talking about in this corner of audio. Digital playback certainly has its share of sonic flaws that are only resolved in the finest players available, which most of us can't afford. I explained to him that silent backgrounds are only one virtue of good sound. He, of course, agreed wholeheartedly because he's a good sport. A much greater virtue- indeed the most important one- is an open, natural, and involving midrange. It's the most important frequency range for loudspeakers. Vinyl can be a very expensive, high-maintenance format, but the vinyl enthusiasts are engaged in a noble cause because even a very modest analog playback system has an easy, continuous, engaging sound that digital playback always struggles to contend with.

Even at the highest eschelons of the hi-fi industry, whether it's the big-wig reviewers or the lousy Ferrari drivers, there seems to be a deep, basic awareness that recreating every nuance of a musical performance, in its entirety, is an exercise in futility. Someone at TAS commented that the $47,000 MBL 101e's, when complemented by all of MBL's reference equipment- the $20,000 preamp, the $75,000 monoblocks, the $XXX transport and DAC- sounds "fool-you real on select cuts at select moments", which means that it very occasionally sounds like a real venue. Only after the consumer has spent $200,000 (not including cables, power conditioning, and acoustical treatments). Also note that reviewers constantly, constantly remark that though a component may lack in detail, or low-end authority, or [insert quality here], it is highly "musical", or it is "immensely pleasurable".

I think that the deepest satisfaction in audio playback has little to do with venturing to create holographic images of recording venues. The studio engineers and the component manufacturers designing $1000 amps knows this. The most successful stereo systems have have an almost imperceptible quality about them that, every time one sits down, with any kind of music, makes them immensely pleasurable, relaxing, and very involving. They can be systems costing well under $5000, even budget systems. It's that "special something" that happens when the components synergize with the right speakers in the right room. This pleasure is not commensurate with the amount of money spent. I was more moved listening to a system with B&W 803s, Pathos Classic One MkII, and Rega Jupiter, than I was by the Wilson Alexandria X-2s with a complete Spectral front-end. I'm not criticizing the higher-end of hi-fi- a lot of the components are remarkable designs and a lot of brilliant ideas and experience is necessary to create this stuff. New ground is usually only broken in the state-of-the-art. Also that technology trickles down into the more affordable circuits.

I am a poor college student, and my system can only barely pass as hi-fi. I'm also aware that for many of you, I'm simply preaching to the choir. But, I think that it's important that the hi-fi community remember how this industry came into being. It wasn't because McIntosh, Dynaco, or Marantz were perfectly re-creating live venues. It was because the gear was capable of projecting the "essence" of the music.

Modernaire
02-24-2006, 11:28 PM
Thanks for the enjoyable read.

As a new very low budget lover of MUSIC and as someone who actually hasn't had much HI-FI listening experince, I learned a bit with your post.

To my ears, my very humble system sounds quiet great to me and I find it immensly enjoyable. Maybe thats key, stay immune to the higher end stuff, the enjoyment of music might get distracted.

The issues you discuss remind me of the actual makind of making music. There are many musicians or producers who obsess over the computer or technology rather than the craft of MAKING the actual music. Very similar issues, getting blinded or side tracked from songwriting and performance, emotion etc, rather than the latest OS or plug-in update.

Thanks again!

gonefishin
02-25-2006, 04:43 AM
Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you :p

dan

Bernd
02-25-2006, 04:51 AM
Thanks for an enjoyable read.
I think there are more variables why people buy what they buy. I love music first and foremost, but I also strive to create the sound in my room that in my opinion comes close to the original master tape and manipulated work of the recording engineer.Again just my perception. Unless you buy some recordings from the Direct to Disc line you will always have to content yourself with the work of the mixing desk operator. I have been upgrading for more years than I care to remeber and I am pretty sure that I have finally reached the level I always aspired to. But the pleasure of the music was always in the forefront of my mind.
True I can enjoy a good tune anywhere, but to enjoy the performance and appreciate the techniques involved you need to listen to something fairly decent.
As for more enjoyment through Vinyl as compared tp digital. An awful lot has been written about this and people have their own idea and beliefs.
One analogie that sticks in my mind was this: Take two fillet steaks and mince one. Then try and shape the minced one back into the shape of the steak. You will not end up with two steaks, but one steak and one hamburger i.e. Analogue and Digital= continuous and bits.

Bernd

A final thought (just for fun): "Digital preserves music the way Formaldehyde preserves Frogs. You kill it, and it lasts forever."

Feanor
02-25-2006, 05:28 AM
Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you :p

dan
Everyone like to feel that theirs is the right perspective: how about you?

Florian
02-25-2006, 08:35 AM
Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you :p

danI agree with that :)

gonefishin
02-25-2006, 10:29 AM
Hi Feanor,

Your right...I was being too harsh. I apologize for that SweetLaserXP.


I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

He also made comments regarding a persons who buys more expensive gear has worse hearing than those who spend less money on their systems. This is also what I was referring to.

He continues to put down other groups as well...and his claims are substantiated as poorly as the other examples above. In fact...it seems that every individual has poor hearing except those in his group.



Everyone like to feel that theirs is the right perspective: how about you?

I don't know about that. Sometimes I end up being right...sometimes wrong. Other times I end up simply just expressing my opinion. But saying that someone unlike myself suffers from a disabling injury/illness. No...I don't believe I do that too often. That would be B^llsh!T ;)


I should have worded nicer...sorry.

dan

Feanor
02-25-2006, 02:53 PM
...

I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

... ;)

dan
People's motivations for our hobby are complex. We shouldn't be judgemental.

Personally I like to listen to music: I like to listen to good music (of the types that I like) and I like it to sound good. Am I a music lover? It would be presumptuous of me to claim that because I have no real music training; I don't read music and I don't play an instrument. Also, I really don't care about musical history, the lives of composers or famous performers, nor about the music industry. Nope, I just like to listen to music.

Beyond that, I do have a non-obsesive interest in things technical, what they can do, not how they do it. I know that different devices reproduce sound more or less well, and I enjoy the search for those that work well without costing too much.

hermanv
02-25-2006, 03:12 PM
My god, I find myself agreeing with GoneFishin, we may as well close the forum :).

It is possible to be all those things; an equipment snob, a hunter for exquisite details in sound reproduction and a music lover all at the same time.

As a young man I played a lot of music, but as young people do, it was usually in a crowd surrounded by friends. As I grew older I found myself listening to music at night by myself or with my wife. My neighbor describes it as "active listening" more like you do at a concert. The music has your full attention.

I noticed that I was loosing interest; the music no longer captivated me the way it used to. It took me years and a couple of visits to audiophile's homes to discover that it was basically "listener fatigue". By spending a lot of time reading the audio magazines, spending a lot of money on equipment and spending a great deal of effort to optimize my listening room and the synergy of various pieces of equipment I was able to get back to a state where I could listen for long hours, captivated once again by the artistry of the musicians and the music. My wife and I usually spend a couple of nights a week, no TV, maybe some candles and just listen, a real joy.

It was necessary (for me at least) to significantly improve the reproduction system to re-capture that enjoyment of music. Yes, I still listen in my car, thank god I can't afford a car stereo as good as my home system. It would be so distracting as to make my driving quite dangerous.

A good system compels one to listen to the music. Once you heard this, once you've been that close to the music, the standard home stereo just won't do.

It is perfectly posible to enjoy the hobby AND the music.

Geoffcin
02-25-2006, 03:13 PM
Hi Feanor,

Your right...I was being too harsh. I apologize for that SweetLaserXP.


I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

He also made comments regarding a persons who buys more expensive gear has worse hearing than those who spend less money on their systems. This is also what I was referring to.

He continues to put down other groups as well...and his claims are substantiated as poorly as the other examples above. In fact...it seems that every individual has poor hearing except those in his group.




I don't know about that. Sometimes I end up being right...sometimes wrong. Other times I end up simply just expressing my opinion. But saying that someone unlike myself suffers from a disabling injury/illness. No...I don't believe I do that too often. That would be B^llsh!T ;)


I should have worded nicer...sorry.

dan

While I don't agree with the original post entirely, it did strike some points well. Feanor has it correct when he says that this is a mulit-faceted hobby. Even those of us that lean one way often also enjoy the others. For me it's mostly about music enjoyment. I still like cool gear though, and I have switched out several speakers in the last few year, along with components. So what? It was fun, and I enjoyed doing it. The minute I start obsessing about things to the point where it doesn't become fun then it's time to move on. I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

Oh, I agree that the guy is realy ego-centric. He doesn't hold a candle to Florian though! ;)

emaidel
02-27-2006, 06:18 AM
The concept that died-in-the-wool audiophiles, or "tweaks" as they were once called listen to their systems, and not to the music is as old as this hobby/industry itself is.

Fortunately, it's entirely possible to be an audio enthusiast (which is what I consider myself) and also one who greatly appreciates music. During the heyday of direct-to-disc recordings, much of the recorded material, though sparkling clear insofar as sonics, was just plain horrible when it came to musical interpretation. Fortunately, today, one can experience both sonic and musical nirvana on a good system.

Also, the debate as to whether analog or digital is better than the other is an argument that simply will never end. I am a believer that digital has the potential to be the superior medium, but often is not. I flatly refuse to believe that digital is to recording as Scientology is to religion, or anything else along those lines. I own over 1,000 LP's and 1,000 CD's, and NO classical LP that I own comes even remotely close to the sonics and musical fidelity as do many of my over 100 Telarc CD's.

The total lack of surface noise on a CD adds an immeasurable amount of pleasure when listening to a classical piece that has an extremely wide dynamic range. The eerily quiet introduction of the chorus in the spectacular Mahler "Resurrection" symphony is one such piece of music that demonstrates (at least insofar as the benefit of no background noise) how good digital recording can be.

I've invested "only" about $10K into my system, and prefer the sound of CD's to LP's when listening to it. Are there better sounding vinyl systems out there? Certainly, but having to refinance my house in order to own a ClearAudio turntable/cartridge/head amp combination is somewhere I refuse to go.

There is no "absolute" answer as to the never-ending debate over analog vs. digital. I prefer the digital domain, and others do not. I also love sushi, and others hate it. Am I right and the others wrong? Or are they right, and myself wrong? Ultimately, the debate settles into the realm of the question, "Is day or night better?" There isn't any answer. At least, not yet.

Florian
02-27-2006, 06:50 AM
Oh, I agree that the guy is realy ego-centric. He doesn't hold a candle to Florian though! ;)

Yup, i am priceless! By the way tough, i have my friends 80$ speakers and 90$ Receiver here and removed the DIVA from its stand and enjoyed his system too for an evening. Pictures comming soon!

PS: Some buy equipment for the equipments sacke, some buy it because they feel the normal stuff is a whip in the musics face. Music deserves the best!

Bernd
02-27-2006, 08:05 AM
Quote (The total lack of surface noise on a CD adds an immeasurable amount of pleasure when listening to a classical piece that has an extremely wide dynamic range. The eerily quiet introduction of the chorus in the spectacular Mahler "Resurrection" symphony is one such piece of music that demonstrates (at least insofar as the benefit of no background noise) how good digital recording can be.)

Well made point. Just like to add that on a good, properly set up vinyl replay front end playing cleaned vinyl, there is no surface noise audible, but boy some dynamics that CD is still dreaming about.The easiest thing to do is play a record incorectly. Also a performance in a concert hall is never deadly quiet. There is always some ambience and background noise that digital (unfortunatly) lacks for now.Maybe that is the reason I prefer Analogue over Digital. But like you said, there is no right or wrong just preference for whatever reason.
I recently heard a CD set up (Zanden Transport and D/A) that almost had me convinced, and showed me what is possible. Just got to find the spare change now.

Bernd

GMichael
02-27-2006, 08:20 AM
Are you trying to say that if I were to spend more money on equipment, then I wouldn't like music as much? OK, time to go back to my AM radio.

Feanor
02-27-2006, 08:20 AM
...

Also, the debate as to whether analog or digital is better than the other is an argument that simply will never end. I am a believer that digital has the potential to be the superior medium, but often is not. I flatly refuse to believe that digital is to recording as Scientology is to religion, or anything else along those lines. I own over 1,000 LP's and 1,000 CD's, and NO classical LP that I own comes even remotely close to the sonics and musical fidelity as do many of my over 100 Telarc CD's.
....

There is no "absolute" answer as to the never-ending debate over analog vs. digital. I prefer the digital domain, and others do not. I also love sushi, and others hate it. Am I right and the others wrong? Or are they right, and myself wrong? Ultimately, the debate settles into the realm of the question, "Is day or night better?" There isn't any answer. At least, not yet.
Digital rules. I left vinyl without a backwards glance about 1983. I did't miss the rice krispies; I didn't miss the turntable set-up fuss; I didn't miss the broken stylii that cost $500+ to replace. And I didn't really miss the the vinyl sound. Back in those days CDPs sounded a little sharp but had more detail and better bass. With good recordings on more recent players the sound is better than you'll get on any vinyl set up under 3x the cost.

People who like vinyl tend to like tube equipment too. Why? My thesis is that they like a sugar-coated sound that, while pleasant, is less accurate. That's OK: they are entitled to that, but they shoudn't talk about "high fidelity" in the same breath.

Bernd
02-27-2006, 08:25 AM
Are you trying to say that if I were to spend more money on equipment, then I wouldn't like music as much? OK, time to go back to my AM radio.

Who? Me? Noooooooooooo. You got the wrong guy. I like music wherever it hit's me.

Bernd

Bernd
02-27-2006, 08:40 AM
Digital rules. I left vinyl without a backwards glance about 1983. I did't miss the rice krispies; I didn't miss the turntable set-up fuss; I didn't miss the broken stylii that cost $500+ to replace. And I didn't really miss the the vinyl sound. Back in those days CDPs sounded a little sharp but had more detail and better bass. With good recordings on more recent players the sound is better than you'll get on any vinyl set up under 3x the cost.

People who like vinyl tend to like tube equipment too. Why? My thesis is that they like a sugar-coated sound that, while pleasant, is less accurate. That's OK: they are entitled to that, but they shoudn't talk about "high fidelity" in the same breath.

Good for you.
The TT and phono amps and MCs from 1983, when you left vinyl, bare no resemblance to a modern set up.
And yes I agree playing a record needs a bit more effort and care then simply pressing a "Play" button. I like that, some like the convinience of a press and forget.I don't even have a remote.It doesn't mean you shouldn't have one.
As for "sugar coated sound" modern valve equipment is far from that (some are).I would hate that, having some artifical warmth or cold introduced.
Most Guitar amps use valves and many recording studios too. There has to be a reason for that.
Most importantly-enjoy the music whatever it is.

Bernd

Bernd
02-27-2006, 08:44 AM
I tweak therefore I am. Not having as much money as I have love of music tweaking has raised my system to a higher level. Cable swapping, turntable mods, diffraction control around the tweeters and speaker placement have enabled me to get closer to the music. If I owned megabuck equipment I would still tweak. I love to listen to music but I also love doing what I can to increase my joy. I like taking an active part in a passive hobby.

Agree completely. Amen to that.
I used to drive my wife crazy with tweaking (the System). But now-my own room and bliss.
How is everything your way?

Peace

Bernd

JohnMichael
02-27-2006, 08:46 AM
I tweak therefore I am. Not having as much money as I have love of music tweaking has raised my system to a higher level. Cable swapping, turntable mods, diffraction control around the tweeters and speaker placement have enabled me to get closer to the music. If I owned megabuck equipment I would still tweak. I love to listen to music but I also love doing what I can to increase my joy. I like taking an active part in a passive hobby.

topspeed
02-27-2006, 09:24 AM
Lessee...first post and the guy has hit on:

1) Gear geek vs. music lover
2) Analog vs. digital
3) Haves vs. have nots

Throw in Molly Ringwald and some railroad tracks and we've got the makings of great John Hughes movie!

Florian
02-27-2006, 09:37 AM
Lets make him happy. Free BOSE Alarm clocks for everyone!

On a side note, Vinyl kills CD in sound quality.

JohnMichael
02-27-2006, 10:13 AM
Lets make him happy. Free BOSE Alarm clocks for everyone!

On a side note, Vinyl kills CD in sound quality.

You are correct, Sir.
I will forfeit my Bose Radio, thanks anyway.
I hope our poor college student is not a communications major.

GMichael
02-27-2006, 10:25 AM
Who? Me? Noooooooooooo. You got the wrong guy. I like music wherever it hit's me.

Bernd

No sir. I don't believe that you implied that at all.

I just don't want to stop liking music. Now I fear that as I upgrade my system, I may loose my love of music. Do you think that I may stop liking movies and TV also?

What will I do with my time?

theaudiohobby
02-27-2006, 10:28 AM
Lessee...first post and the guy has hit on:

1) Gear geek vs. music lover
2) Analog vs. digital
3) Haves vs. have nots

Throw in Molly Ringwald and some railroad tracks and we've got the makings of great John Hughes movie!

You sure go that right, the truth is somewhere in the middle obscured from view, whilst those with extreme opinions on both sides of the various divides slug it out to no avail. :eek:

JohnMichael
02-27-2006, 10:32 AM
No sir. I don't believe that you implied that at all.

I just don't want to stop liking music. Now I fear that as I upgrade my system, I may loose my love of music. Do you think that I may stop liking movies and TV also?

What will I do with my time?

You could always branch out more to new web pages and opine.

Florian
02-27-2006, 10:52 AM
Now where did i leave my old Fisher all in one stereo......i have a big expensive system and hate music....what should i do?

BRANDONH
02-27-2006, 11:05 AM
Good for you.
The TT and phono amps and MCs from 1983, when you left vinyl, bare no resemblance to a modern set up.
And yes I agree playing a record needs a bit more effort and care then simply pressing a "Play" button. I like that, some like the convinience of a press and forget.I don't even have a remote.It doesn't mean you shouldn't have one.
As for "sugar coated sound" modern valve equipment is far from that (some are).I would hate that, having some artifical warmth or cold introduced.
Most Guitar amps use valves and many recording studios too. There has to be a reason for that.
Most importantly-enjoy the music whatever it is.

Bernd
Amen to that brother Bernd.
Although I do not have any valve equipment I do use studio amps.
And my TT rig sounds very very very close to a live venue in fact shockingly close especially on D2D.
I have a good CD Transport (PD-65) not great but good and no way does it even come close to the Vinyl.
The vinyl leaves the CD behind after a 1000 watts (stereo) once beyond that power range LOOK OUT my vinyl system really comes alive.

BRANDONH
02-27-2006, 11:14 AM
Now where did i leave my old Fisher all in one stereo......i have a big expensive system and hate music....what should i do?
lol I had almost forgot about those Fisher units (those where the days hugh?) lol

Florian
02-27-2006, 11:31 AM
lol I had almost forgot about those Fisher units (those where the days hugh?) lolYup, those were the days before i spend 30hrs building room acoustics (lenses, bass traps etc..) and moved the close to 300lbs speakers in in. over the floor while looking at my real time analyzer and ALL that just for the sake of enjoying music to the max. :-)

GMichael
02-27-2006, 11:49 AM
Yup, those were the days before i spend 30hrs building room acoustics (lenses, bass traps etc..) and moved the close to 300lbs speakers in in. over the floor while looking at my real time analyzer and ALL that just for the sake of enjoying music to the max. :-)

How could you enjoy music with all that? You must be hating it by now. Tell you what I'm gonna do. Sinse we've been friends for so long, I'm going to do you a favor. Just pack up all that crap and send it to me. All you have to pay is the frieght. I'll send you a Bose Wave system to replace it so you can go back to enjoying music again.
Ain't I the best?

GMichael
02-27-2006, 11:51 AM
You could always branch out more to new web pages and opine.

What kind of web pages? The all nude all the time pages?

Florian
02-27-2006, 11:55 AM
How could you enjoy music with all that? You must be hating it by now. Tell you what I'm gonna do. Sinse we've been friends for so long, I'm going to do you a favor. Just pack up all that crap and send it to me. All you have to pay is the frieght. I'll send you a Bose Wave system to replace it so you can go back to enjoying music again.
Ain't I the best?Mmh, i dont know. I think the Waveradio is actually too good for me. Dont you have something else? You know, like my old Fisher?

GMichael
02-27-2006, 11:59 AM
Mmh, i dont know. I think the Waveradio is actually too good for me. Dont you have something else? You know, like my old Fisher?

I have an old Panny from the 70's. It has AM/FM/short wave, casset & 8 track recorder & record changer all in one. But I think it sounds better than the Bosewaves. I also have a hand held Sony AM/FM casset player. It's mono. Will that do?

Florian
02-27-2006, 12:03 PM
Mmmg, the Mono Sony sounds good. Well, let me build a few crates to pack all my ****! :-)

But seriously, how dumb is this thread? On a scale from 1 to 10..... my vote goes for 7.5 since Spanky holds the record with 10 and we got some fun from this one.

GMichael
02-27-2006, 12:06 PM
Mmmg, the Mono Sony sounds good. Well, let me build a few crates to pack all my ****! :-)

But seriously, how dumb is this thread? On a scale from 1 to 10..... my vote goes for 7.5 since Spanky holds the record with 10 and we got some fun from this one.

Poor Spanky lost his cat & his cottonwood tree. He does hold the record for the all time funniest thread. Soundideas ran a close second though.

Florian
02-27-2006, 12:12 PM
Yeah i know, and thousands of people die everyday because of no food and no water. SoundIdeas, the creator of magic pixie snot and ultra snot is tied for first tough.

GMichael
02-27-2006, 12:16 PM
Yeah i know, and thousands of people die everyday because of no food and no water. SoundIdeas, the creator of magic pixie snot and ultra snot is tied for first tough.


Wow, no sympathy for the little guy huh? But he made us laugh so much.

I have 3 cups of coffee. Can you tell me with one would burn my privates the most?

Florian
02-27-2006, 12:19 PM
Wow, no sympathy for the little guy huh? But he made us laugh so much.

I have 3 cups of coffee. Can you tell me with one would burn my privates the most?
No, i do feel sorry for his loss. No question there, but people create 4 page threads over their dead cats, dogs etc.. and when a national dissaster hits or 500 people die from missguided bombs, crippled children or raped civilists by a large army etc... then noone writes as much. Funny, reality eh?

*I dont know, dont drink coffee :-)

GMichael
02-27-2006, 12:38 PM
No, i do feel sorry for his loss. No question there, but people create 4 page threads over their dead cats, dogs etc.. and when a national dissaster hits or 500 people die from missguided bombs, crippled children or raped civilists by a large army etc... then noone writes as much. Funny, reality eh?

*I dont know, dont drink coffee :-)

It just seems to happen so much that few people write anything unless they knew someone it happened to. We live in a world where people will burn down buildings to protest a cartoon. If you stand on a street corner with a sign saying that you'll work for food you'll get nothing. But if you stand on that same corner with a sign saying that your dog is hungry you'll make megabucks.

Don't drink coffee? What are you, anti American?

Feanor
02-27-2006, 12:42 PM
...
Most Guitar amps use valves and many recording studios too. There has to be a reason for that
....
Bernd
The one or two that I know admit that they use tube amps because they love the particular sound when the tubes are driven to distortion; admittedly solid state can't be used this way. Music creation has difference criteria that sound reproduction.

I have a Bebringer T1951 equalizer with tube circuitry. Behringer's claims for the tube circuitry are similar to what people make for MF's X10v3 tube buffer; (more warmth, musicality, harmonic richness, etc.). The difference is that Behringer is up front that this is the result of induced harmonic distortion; they even have a dial that lets you tune the amount of "warmth" you want ;)

In fact this device works: I often tune up the "warmth" on the raunchier recordings I own. Indeed, it does smooth the sound; there is little or no loss of resolution and only a small reduction in microdynamics. It is superfluous with better recordings however.

Florian
02-27-2006, 12:43 PM
Heheh, an Anti-American making 1600 posts over years in an american forum. LOL, na i like coffee but am more chicken and drink Tea! Hehe, my friend is the owner of Blue Mountain Coffee in Jamaica :p

I took a picture once when i was in NY where i saw a women looking for food in the garbage can infront of the NY Millenium Hilton across from Ground Zero and to the left a Mercedes CL55AMG......mmmh i can see that starting in Berlin now too. We all have to watch out.

JohnMichael
02-27-2006, 12:47 PM
How could you enjoy music with all that? You must be hating it by now. Tell you what I'm gonna do. Sinse we've been friends for so long, I'm going to do you a favor. Just pack up all that crap and send it to me. All you have to pay is the frieght. I'll send you a Bose Wave system to replace it so you can go back to enjoying music again.
Ain't I the best?

GMichael you are quite a guy helping Flo that way. Once you've gone Bose how do you go back?

Florian
02-27-2006, 12:56 PM
GMichael you are quite a guy helping Flo that way. Once you've gone Bose how do you go back?Well what he doesnt know is that once you apply some Ultra Super Snot to the BOSE Waveradio it will transfer to a Ultimate 901 Edition ;-)

GMichael
02-27-2006, 01:05 PM
GMichael you are quite a guy helping Flo that way. Once you've gone Bose how do you go back?

I know, but I'm willing to make the sacrifice.

GMichael
02-27-2006, 01:08 PM
Well what he doesnt know is that once you apply some Ultra Super Snot to the BOSE Waveradio it will transfer to a Ultimate 901 Edition ;-)

If you use my home made platunum ultra-gold silver plated super-ultra snot, it will turn those 901's into an Emerson, all in one system with the auto toaster option.

GMichael
02-27-2006, 01:13 PM
Heheh, an Anti-American making 1600 posts over years in an american forum. LOL, na i like coffee but am more chicken and drink Tea! Hehe, my friend is the owner of Blue Mountain Coffee in Jamaica :p

I took a picture once when i was in NY where i saw a women looking for food in the garbage can infront of the NY Millenium Hilton across from Ground Zero and to the left a Mercedes CL55AMG......mmmh i can see that starting in Berlin now too. We all have to watch out.

It's something to see alright. NYC is where the very poor & very rich live side by side.

theaudiohobby
02-27-2006, 02:15 PM
I have a Bebringer T1951 equalizer with tube circuitry. Behringer's claims for the tube circuitry are similar to what people make for MF's X10v3 tube buffer; (more warmth, musicality, harmonic richness, etc.). The difference is that Behringer is up front that this is the result of induced harmonic distortion; they even have a dial that lets you tune the amount of "warmth" you want ;)

Precisely...and that is the way to go, the current trend in the high-end where folks basically argue against objective logic, excusing objective logic on the basis of subjective evaluation is painful...:eek: IMO, the attitude is doing more harm than good...

emaidel
02-27-2006, 03:39 PM
we've got the makings of great John Hughes movie!


There's no such thing as a "great" John Hughes movie!

emaidel
02-27-2006, 03:58 PM
.

Also a performance in a concert hall is never deadly quiet. There is always some ambience and background noise that digital (unfortunatly) lacks for now.

Bernd

This is an argument with which I must respectfully disagree, and disagree strongly. I've heard it said by some that the clicks, pops and other "Rice Krispies" sounds from vinyl are an "acceptable substitute" for the ambient noise one normally hears in a concert hall. I think such an argument is inherently wrong and misguided.

An ideal recording should not only faithfully reproduce the individual sounds of an orchestra, but should also reproduce the ambient sound of the hall or auditorium in which the recording was made - not the sounds of people talking, opening up plastic bags, coughing, sneezing etc. those sounds to a concertgoer, like myself, are annoying, and have no place on any recording. This is why I sometimes actually prefer to listen to my system, than to attend a live performance, especially a live performance of a relatively quiet piece, though I have to admit that I've attended a few concerts where the performers were so astonishingly good, that you could all but hear a pin drop during their singing/playing. As to whether digital or analog does a better job of capturing the sound of a recording hall, that too is the subject of another endless debate.

emaidel
02-27-2006, 04:05 PM
Had to throw this in too, for good measure. I own a Bose "Acoustic Wave" Radio/CD player. I didn't buy it, but got it free as part of a promotion when I leased a Nissan Pathfinder (which had a Bose stereo system in it). I think it sounds very nice. But that's about the best accolade I can muster - just "very nice." Is it worth the retail price of $1,200?

Is "Plan 9 From Outer Space" the best movie ever made?

Each question gets the same answer...

GMichael
02-27-2006, 04:32 PM
Is it worth the retail price of $1,200?

Is "Plan 9 From Outer Space" the best movie ever made?

Each question gets the same answer...

Ooh ooh ooh, can I answer that one?

"What the h.ll are you talking about?!"

Is that close?

emaidel
02-27-2006, 06:33 PM
Ooh ooh ooh, can I answer that one?

"What the h.ll are you talking about?!"

Is that close?

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Are you toying with me, or just annoyed? Hopefully, I just confused you.

Is the Bose Acoustic Wave worth $1,200? H*ll no!

Is "Plan 9 From Outer Space" the best movie ever made? Also, "H*ll no," As a matter of fact, a recent poll placed it at the very top of the "worst movies of all time" list.

Two different questions. Same answer to both.

Mike Anderson
02-27-2006, 10:03 PM
By the way tough, i have my friends 80$ speakers and 90$ Receiver here and removed the DIVA from its stand and enjoyed his system too for an evening. Pictures comming soon!


Oh, so you finally got together with Spanking Vanilla Ice, eh?

That's great Florian, but I think I speak for all of us when I say PLEASE DON'T POST THE PICTURES!


:p

Bernd
02-28-2006, 03:15 AM
Precisely...and that is the way to go, the current trend in the high-end where folks basically argue against objective logic, excusing objective logic on the basis of subjective evaluation is painful...:eek: IMO, the attitude is doing more harm than good...

I agree. Blind faith in whatever shape or form does more harm than good. I just prefer Clean Vinyl through a decent TT and Valve amp.
I also respect musicians that are involved from beginning to end like Neil Young.
He prefers Analogue and Vinyl and lot's of his back catalogue has only recently been made available on CD (Record company pressure no doubt. Like Coldplay.They wanted to release their last album only on Vinyl, but the mighty bottom line stopped that).

CD's were a mistake from the beginning. At first everyone was impressed-as I was- by the lack of surface noise, but shortly after that, I became aware of the lack of sound and everything you associate with the air. That's where the surface noise and the tape hiss lived: on the sound floor. It's not the loud stuff that gets affected, it's the quiet stuff. When you take something like a long fade and turn that up on CD, if you have a big amp, by the time you get to the end of the fade, you're listening to the worst sound that's ever been sold.That's my objection. I don't like what digital is adding to the finished medium.
Again just my observation and not meant as the only way. Still looking for that one.
As I said before I was recently exposed to the Zanden CDP and D/A and loved it. So we'll see.

Peace

Bernd

Florian
02-28-2006, 05:19 AM
Oh, so you finally got together with Spanking Vanilla Ice, eh?

That's great Florian, but I think I speak for all of us when I say PLEASE DON'T POST THE PICTURES!


:pDon't worry, they are comming. I will call it Florian's HIFI outreach to the less fortunate and win the prize of "biggest jerk on the forum" Muahha!

GMichael
02-28-2006, 06:06 AM
I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Are you toying with me, or just annoyed? Hopefully, I just confused you.

Is the Bose Acoustic Wave worth $1,200? H*ll no!

Is "Plan 9 From Outer Space" the best movie ever made? Also, "H*ll no," As a matter of fact, a recent poll placed it at the very top of the "worst movies of all time" list.

Two different questions. Same answer to both.

Just playing along with you. I'm kinda saying that, "What the h.ll are you talking about?" equals, "H.ll no."

Sorry to have not been clear on that.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
02-28-2006, 06:49 AM
CD's were a mistake from the beginning. At first everyone was impressed-as I was- by the lack of surface noise, but shortly after that, I became aware of the lack of sound and everything you associate with the air. That's where the surface noise and the tape hiss lived: on the sound floor. It's not the loud stuff that gets affected, it's the quiet stuff. When you take something like a long fade and turn that up on CD, if you have a big amp, by the time you get to the end of the fade, you're listening to the worst sound that's ever been sold.That's my objection. I don't like what digital is adding to the finished medium.
Again just my observation and not meant as the only way. Still looking for that one.
As I said before I was recently exposed to the Zanden CDP and D/A and loved it. So we'll see.

Actually I disagree that CD was a mistake. What was a mistake was the choice of 16bit resolution and a 44.1khz sample rate. As far as the long fade, as you fade downward you are using less bits. Less bits means poor sound. However fades are not ment to be heard that way. Had CD come out with 24bit resolution, a sample rate of 70khz and better made D/A conversion, vinyl would have met its death alot earlier.


Peace

Bernd[/QUOTE]

Bernd
02-28-2006, 07:00 AM
Actually I disagree that CD was a mistake. What was a mistake was the choice of 16bit resolution and a 44.1khz sample rate. As far as the long fade, as you fade downward you are using less bits. Less bits means poor sound. However fades are not ment to be heard that way. Had CD come out with 24bit resolution, a sample rate of 70khz and better made D/A conversion, vinyl would have met its death alot earlier.


Peace

Bernd[/QUOTE]

Apologies (it was early morning). I did mean the 16bit 44.1khz sample rate. But on this premise we got fed the bogus advertising claim "Perfect sound forever" and unfortunatly too many fell for it.I know that fades are not be heard that way, but what about the subconscious registering those sounds as in Super tweeters. Maybe thats why some people are just not convinced by Digital.And I am sure you can get used to it.
By the way-Vinyl is not dead. Sales are increasing year by year.
Ever thought how it would have panned out if CD was here first and then Vinyl reply was invented after that. I wonder sometimes how the arguement would go then. Maybe not change at all.But I am sure Vinyl would have been celebrated as the new all conquering medium. People like what they like. I just don't get the emotional involvement with Digi bits that I get with Analogue.

Peace

Bernd

GMichael
02-28-2006, 07:36 AM
Apologies (it was early morning). I did mean the 16bit 44.1khz sample rate. But on this premise we got fed the bogus advertising claim "Perfect sound forever" and unfortunatly too many fell for it.I know that fades are not be heard that way, but what about the subconscious registering those sounds as in Super tweeters. Maybe thats why some people are just not convinced by Digital.And I am sure you can get used to it.
By the way-Vinyl is not dead. Sales are increasing year by year.
Ever thought how it would have panned out if CD was here first and then Vinyl reply was invented after that. I wonder sometimes how the arguement would go then. Maybe not change at all.But I am sure Vinyl would have been celebrated as the new all conquering medium. People like what they like. I just don't get the emotional involvement with Digi bits that I get with Analogue.

Peace

Bernd[/QUOTE]

Both have their advantages as well as disadvantages. Vinyl (analog) does have a certain smoothness or quality of essence. Analog is how real life works. But CD's are much more convenient to use. Being digital does make them last longer than vinyl. I got tied of the crackles & pops. Both have their place in my heart and both will be around for a while. I vote for.....



BOTH!!!!!

Bernd
02-28-2006, 07:56 AM
Apologies (it was early morning). I did mean the 16bit 44.1khz sample rate. But on this premise we got fed the bogus advertising claim "Perfect sound forever" and unfortunatly too many fell for it.I know that fades are not be heard that way, but what about the subconscious registering those sounds as in Super tweeters. Maybe thats why some people are just not convinced by Digital.And I am sure you can get used to it.
By the way-Vinyl is not dead. Sales are increasing year by year.
Ever thought how it would have panned out if CD was here first and then Vinyl reply was invented after that. I wonder sometimes how the arguement would go then. Maybe not change at all.But I am sure Vinyl would have been celebrated as the new all conquering medium. People like what they like. I just don't get the emotional involvement with Digi bits that I get with Analogue.

Peace

Bernd

Both have their advantages as well as disadvantages. Vinyl (analog) does have a certain smoothness or quality of essence. Analog is how real life works. But CD's are much more convenient to use. Being digital does make them last longer than vinyl. I got tied of the crackles & pops. Both have their place in my heart and both will be around for a while. I vote for.....



BOTH!!!!![/QUOTE]

ME TOO!!! 49/51

theaudiohobby
02-28-2006, 08:48 AM
Both have their advantages as well as disadvantages. Vinyl (analog) does have a certain smoothness or quality of essence. Analog is how real life works.


Analog is NOT how real life works, if you doubt that, read about check neurons in brain cell activity, or neutrons, electrons and photons in physics, some things are continuous, but many other things are actually discrete in their most elementary form, a fact that is the basis of a whole branch of study referred to as Quantum Physics.

GMichael
02-28-2006, 08:51 AM
Analog is NOT how real life works, if you doubt that, read about check neurons in brain cell activity, or neutrons, electrons and photons in physics, some things are continuous, but many other things are actually discrete in their most elementary form, a fact that is the basis of a whole branch of study referred to as Quantum Physics.

Very interesting. I'll look into it. But I bet that the bit rate is off the scale.

emaidel
02-28-2006, 09:01 AM
I never thought I'd see the day! Two AR members agreeing that BOTH analog and digital are viable sound sources!

Most of the time, however, the two opposing camps are steadfast in their beliefs, refusing to even acknowledge that the "other side" may even have merit. Most supporters of CD's, for example, use practical and tangible items to justify their support of the medium: no surface noise; no annoying ticks. clicks and pops; no inner-groove distortion; no mistracking of loud passages; no warpage; no deterioration with age; no annoying pre-echo; and the like.

Those in the vinyl camp are more attuned to sonic attributes and intangible stuff, such as "warmth," "fluidity," and, without ever acknowledging the aforementioned benefits of a CD, attack the medium as the sonic equivalent of toxic, nuclear waste. I'll readily admit that the two have merits and disadvantages, but this view is somewhat extreme.

The fact that there exists such strong dissention between these camps illustrates the very nature of the audio business, and that is its subjectivity. In a "perfect" world, all items along the audio chain - from source, through amplification to loudspeakers - would result in a ruler-flat frequency response from 20 to 20,000HZ, would have immeasurable harmonic distortion levels, would have a boundless dynamic range, etc., etc. Perhaps it is the "perfection" of digital sound that so many find unappealing.

Specifically, no phono cartridge made by anyone has the ruler-flat frequency response of the digital medium. More importantly, many cartridges are this way by design. A slight rise in high frequencies of about 1/2 to 3/4db starting at about 12KHZ to 20KHZ adds 'brightness," clarity" and "sparkle" to the recorded material. In an A/B comparison to the identical material recorded in the digital domain, the flat response of that medium would result in a sound that was decidedly more "dull," lackluster," and "uninvolving."

Moreover, if the response curve of the cartridge had a deliberate boost in the upper-bass (around 500HZ) and a dip in the mids (around 1KHZ to 2KHZ), the resultant sound would be "lush, "warm" and "full." In the same A/B comparison as previously stated, the CD of the same material would be "thin," "harsh" and - this one's my favorite - "clinical."

Another area of measured response that (and I might be wrong on this one) seems rarely to have been mentioned in the "war" betweeen the two mediums, is square wave response. Ideally, the measured square wave response should be just that - a perfect square, with little or no rise time; no overshoot; no ringing; and a rapid falloff at the end. Again, no cartridge anywhere exhibits a "perfect" square wave, but the digital medium does. And also again, deviations from the norm are often built in purposely.

Many moving coil cartridges have a deliberate overshoot on the initial rise of the square, and this adds a very pleasant "bite" or "attack" to musical transients. A slow falloff at the end, adds a sense of "warmth" to the music as well. No digital recording has any of these characteristics, and again an A/B between identical source material in the two mediums result in a less exciting sound from the CD than from the LP.

So, in terms of measured performance, the CD may be superior. In terms of subjective performance, those deviations from the mean, usually deliberate, offer a coloration or even a form of harmonic distortion that many audiophiles prefer, and miss terribly when listening to material in the digital domain.

Hardly earth-shattering news, or even something that will end the battle, but points I think have merit, and which, I hope, readers found interesting.

GMichael
02-28-2006, 09:13 AM
I never thought I'd see the day! Two AR members agreeing that BOTH analog and digital are viable sound sources!

Most of the time, however, the two opposing camps are steadfast in their beliefs, refusing to even acknowledge that the "other side" may even have merit. Most supporters of CD's, for example, use practical and tangible items to justify their support of the medium: no surface noise; no annoying ticks. clicks and pops; no inner-groove distortion; no mistracking of loud passages; no warpage; no deterioration with age; no annoying pre-echo; and the like.

Those in the vinyl camp are more attuned to sonic attributes and intangible stuff, such as "warmth," "fluidity," and, without ever acknowledging the aforementioned benefits of a CD, attack the medium as the sonic equivalent of toxic, nuclear waste. I'll readily admit that the two have merits and disadvantages, but this view is somewhat extreme.

The fact that there exists such strong dissention between these camps illustrates the very nature of the audio business, and that is its subjectivity. In a "perfect" world, all items along the audio chain - from source, through amplification to loudspeakers - would result in a ruler-flat frequency response from 20 to 20,000HZ, would have immeasurable harmonic distortion levels, would have a boundless dynamic range, etc., etc. Perhaps it is the "perfection" of digital sound that so many find unappealing.

Specifically, no phono cartridge made by anyone has the ruler-flat frequency response of the digital medium. More importantly, many cartridges are this way by design. A slight rise in high frequencies of about 1/2 to 3/4db starting at about 12KHZ to 20KHZ adds 'brightness," clarity" and "sparkle" to the recorded material. In an A/B comparison to the identical material recorded in the digital domain, the flat response of that medium would result in a sound that was decidedly more "dull," lackluster," and "uninvolving."

Moreover, if the response curve of the cartridge had a deliberate boost in the upper-bass (around 500HZ) and a dip in the mids (around 1KHZ to 2KHZ), the resultant sound would be "lush, "warm" and "full." In the same A/B comparison as previously stated, the CD of the same material would be "thin," "harsh" and - this one's my favorite - "clinical."

Another area of measured response that (and I might be wrong on this one) seems rarely to have been mentioned in the "war" betweeen the two mediums, is square wave response. Ideally, the measured square wave response should be just that - a perfect square, with little or no rise time; no overshoot; no ringing; and a rapid falloff at the end. Again, no cartridge anywhere exhibits a "perfect" square wave, but the digital medium does. And also again, deviations from the norm are often built in purposely.

Many moving coil cartridges have a deliberate overshoot on the initial rise of the square, and this adds a very pleasant "bite" or "attack" to musical transients. A slow falloff at the end, adds a sense of "warmth" to the music as well. No digital recording has any of these characteristics, and again an A/B between identical source material in the two mediums result in a less exciting sound from the CD than from the LP.

So, in terms of measured performance, the CD may be superior. In terms of subjective performance, those deviations from the mean, usually deliberate, offer a coloration or even a form of harmonic distortion that many audiophiles prefer, and miss terribly when listening to material in the digital domain.

Hardly earth-shattering news, or even something that will end the battle, but points I think have merit, and which, I hope, readers found interesting.

And then comes, tube amps vs digi-amps......

topspeed
02-28-2006, 09:22 AM
I can't believe I'm getting involved in this, but what the heck...

I read something somewhere that made a heck of a lot of sense regarding the viability of cd's. The person, who was a pretty well respected guy in the industry, noted that the cd is completely viable, it just hasn't been executed correctly.

Case in point: He asks; Have you ever heard a cd that was so pristine, so emotionally involving, so right that you said "Wow!" If so, then the cd is viable. Whether it was the rig, the recording, the dac's, whatever. The fact remains that the digital medium was capable of transporting the listener to that special place that vinyl proponents claim only analog can. I don't know of one audiophile, including vinyl junkies, that will admit that they have never heard a cd...somewhere, sometime...fit that description.

Mike Anderson
02-28-2006, 10:12 AM
I read something somewhere that made a heck of a lot of sense regarding the viability of cd's. The person, who was a pretty well respected guy in the industry, noted that the cd is completely viable, it just hasn't been executed correctly.


I agree with this. I have quite a few CDs (most of them mastered fairly recently) that sound gorgeous on my setup.

When CDs were first rolled out, they sounded like crap to me. Nobody really knew how to properly master an album for that format. A lot of people wrote them off at that point.

These days, they can sound pretty damned good, at least to my ears, and on my rig.

Bernd
02-28-2006, 10:14 AM
Very interesting. I'll look into it. But I bet that the bit rate is off the scale.

I agree. Extremely interesting. Please keep me informed what you find out. Maybe quark oversampling. I am feeling random already.

Peace

Bernd

emaidel
02-28-2006, 10:34 AM
I have quite a few CDs (most of them mastered fairly recently) that sound gorgeous on my setup.



These days, they can sound pretty damned good, at least to my ears, and on my rig.


I too have purchased a slew of new CD's recently - mostly classical - that range from downright horrible, to absolutely remarkable. Strangely, that very gamut was run on one label (Phillips) and with the same conductor (Valery Gergiev). His interpretation of Berlioz' "Smphonie Fantastique" is hands down the very best I've ever heard, both in terms of musical composition, and sonics. And it's the best of all those I currently own (three LP's, and five CD's).

Unfortunately, his rendition of Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherezade," while musically fine, is the perfect example of how awful CD's can sound - harsh, "in your face" and just plain too much. I guess "overmodulation" is something its engineers simply disregarded.

On the other hand, many new purchases of Telarc CD's, using the DSD medium, and transferred from that format to "standard" CD via a "Direct Mapping" process have been pretty outstanding. A compilation of choral suites by Miklos Rosza from "Ben Hur," "Quo Vadis" and "King of Kings" not only illustrates that movie music can also be good music, but how good such music can sound too.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
02-28-2006, 12:15 PM
I agree with this. I have quite a few CDs (most of them mastered fairly recently) that sound gorgeous on my setup.

When CDs were first rolled out, they sounded like crap to me. Nobody really knew how to properly master an album for that format. A lot of people wrote them off at that point.

These days, they can sound pretty damned good, at least to my ears, and on my rig.

Actually they were using the same master tapes for both the CD and Vinyl release. They mastered for the vinyl playback system, and used that master for the CD. Sounded great on Vinyl, but the EQ should ALWAYS be different for CD.

Geoffcin
02-28-2006, 12:44 PM
On the other hand, many new purchases of Telarc CD's, using the DSD medium, and transferred from that format to "standard" CD via a "Direct Mapping" process have been pretty outstanding. A compilation of choral suites by Miklos Rosza from "Ben Hur," "Quo Vadis" and "King of Kings" not only illustrates that movie music can also be good music, but how good such music can sound too.

On of the reasons that I bought my CD player is that I heard it playing a HDCD disk. If your player decodes this format I suggest getting a few.

hermanv
02-28-2006, 01:55 PM
Again, no cartridge anywhere exhibits a "perfect" square wave, but the digital medium does. Maybe I can beat jneutron to the punch.

Although it seems possible to describe a perfect square wave with the bits, the reconstructed signal will not be a perfect square wave. A perfect square wave contains all odd harmonics to frequency infinity, obviously limiting the response to 22KHz will leave you a long way from a perfect square wave. For example the Redbook standard can only encode a 20KHz signal as a sine wave, a 20KHz or even 10KHz square wave is impossible to encode with a 44.1KHz sample rate.

As the fundamental frequency goes lower and lower, the square wave reproduction gets better and better.

hermanv
02-28-2006, 02:03 PM
On of the reasons that I bought my CD player is that I heard it playing a HDCD disk. If your player decodes this format I suggest getting a few.

Since Microsoft bought the rights to HDCD I can find no master list of titles, I agree they sound noticably better and would love to purchase more of them.

On e-bay there are a number of artists available in HDCD from Hong Kong, do you know if they really are HDCD, have you listened to any?

Florian
02-28-2006, 03:34 PM
I am a Vinyl and CD Fan. To me, the way the old music was recorded is a lot more realistic in their texture, bloom and color then the modern CD recordings. It takes a lot more then the standard commercial equipment to judge both formats, in my book.

Feanor
03-01-2006, 08:05 AM
I am a Vinyl and CD Fan. To me, the way the old music was recorded is a lot more realistic in their texture, bloom and color then the modern CD recordings. It takes a lot more then the standard commercial equipment to judge both formats, in my book.
"The old music" means what? Recordings from the fifties, sixties? Some recordings from this era are good, some not. Some current recordings are good, some not. But IMO, its pure folklore that the old recordings, in general, are better than the new. Furthmore the best more recordings are outstanding and beat the best of the old recordings -- I'm talking not only SACDs but CDs too. (I am speaking of classical music.)

musicoverall
03-01-2006, 10:04 AM
People who like vinyl tend to like tube equipment too. Why? My thesis is that they like a sugar-coated sound that, while pleasant, is less accurate. That's OK: they are entitled to that, but they shoudn't talk about "high fidelity" in the same breath.

I gave up using this term quite awhile ago because I discovered that I really didn't know what it meant. Is "high fidelity" using components that measure well but make the best recordings sound unlistenable? That's been my experience.

My belief is that unless we happen to be Sir Terrence (and who among us doesn't want to be? After years playing around with various gear, my only equipment envy is the console and therefore the guy behind it... besides, Sir T already knows the sh*t most of us are still trying to learn - but I digress...) how do we know what high fidelity to the source sounds like?

I've been fortunate enough to hear 3 master tapes in my lifetime. The playback equipment had ZERO tubes in it and sounded fantastic. The resultant CD sounded like garbage, with or without tubes. Ditto the fact that I've been in a live venue during a concert that was being recorded and after listening to the CD, I don't remember the screechy highs that would have driven me from the room (HF sensitivity is awful, folks!).

So I buy equipment that makes the recordings I listen to at home sound more like my memory/idea of live music. As a result, I've got more tubes in my system than transistors by a factor of 10. I also listen to vinyl and I tend to prefer it a little more than half the time. Whether that means CD's are getting better overall or that I'm just getting used to their distortions remains a question. The notion that CD's are garbage is garbage itself. Some of them sound wonderful to me.

At any rate, high fidelity exists in my vocabulary only as a nebulous concept. The SACD's I own sound like they may be high fidelity. Sir T might know but I don't. Nor do I care. When high fidelity means superior sound, I'm in. As of now, it's a crapshoot. Quite frankly, if I loved equipment more than music, I'd own fewer than half the CD's I now own.

On a positive note, I've heard some jaw-dropping things from multichannel audio. Also some terrifyingly bad things. But if it can be done well, it can be done well - and should be. This is an area I plan on exploring more in the future.

musicoverall
03-01-2006, 10:10 AM
"The old music" means what? Recordings from the fifties, sixties? Some recordings from this era are good, some not. Some current recordings are good, some not. But IMO, its pure folklore that the old recordings, in general, are better than the new. Furthmore the best more recordings are outstanding and beat the best of the old recordings -- I'm talking not only SACDs but CDs too. (I am speaking of classical music.)

Well said. In jazz, there was a "romance" and "color" with the old Blue Note (label) recordings and they do have a "live" sound to them. Also, there is that old Contemporary (label) classic of Sonny Rollins "Way Out West" that sounded awesome back then and, interestingly enough, has been made even better through recent remastering on CD.

In jazz (IMHO) the folks in the recording studio were artists in their own right in the 50's and 60's. I think today they are forced to pander to those who pay the bills and recordings suffer.

I'll take modern classical over 1960's classical 4 times out of 5.

I would agree with you that it's best not to generalize (even though I just did! :) oops!) about what's better. I don't, however, have a problem generalizing about what I personally prefer.

Feanor
03-01-2006, 10:28 AM
Well said. In jazz, there was a "romance" and "color" with the old Blue Note (label) recordings and they do have a "live" sound to them. Also, there is that old Contemporary (label) classic of Sonny Rollins "Way Out West" that sounded awesome back then and, interestingly enough, has been made even better through recent remastering on CD.

....
I very recently purchased the Sonny Rollins remaster you refer to and it is excellent. :) I don't have the LP for comparison, though.

Florian
03-01-2006, 10:45 AM
Well i think that i was too soft in my explenation, since i am trying to be nice ;-)

In order to JUDGE a format you need to first establish a point of reference. A reference is what other equipment is measured by! Unfortunatly their are those who can't hear a difference between a Rat Shack speaker cable and a Magnan Flatline. My personal reference Analog setup is the Forsell Air Reference with FlyWheel and the Tiger Eye Platinum catridge using the Manley Phono Reference Pre-Amp. For digital, it would be the full stacked DCS conditioner, processor, transport and upsampler.

Now we take a scene of music and record it in analog and one in digital and press it on both medium. That allows us to hear what the formats and processing equipment does. Of course we need a reference speaker, one that is neutral and has either one membrane or seperate membranes of the same material and drivers. This gives us Acoustats, SoundLabs, Apogee and Perigee to my knowledge. First choice would be Acoustats (non-curved), second Soundlab (curved multi driver array), third Perigee and Apogee. From a Frequency and Dynamic point of view it would be Perigee, Apogee, Soundlab and Acoustat. Take your pic they are all wonderfull!

Not to forget the electronics, we have a problem. Some of the best measuring amps sound like ****! Take the Haflers for instance, they were one of the view in the beginning who only cared about power and cloe to no distortion. How did they sound? Like ****!
I guess on electronics we would have to match it to the speakers, the Soundlabs need a amp that doesnt bother with huge impedance swings. The Apogees love current, but are ultra linear in their impedance responce. The Acoustats are like the Soundlabs and need a amp that can handle the swings. The Perigee is the most dynamic, most efficent speaker with the most vast frequency responce. With sensitivities over 100db we can use wonderfull tube amp.

So take your pic, and then we listen. Wow, you hear something different then me? Can't be! I am always right and you know it°

Bottom line, choose whichever format you like. None of us have the pleasure of owning the best this world has to offer. Some of us are close speaker wise and a long way of electronics and room wise. None of us can judge these formats, none of us have the perfect combination and the unlimited funds. But what we do have is emotions, and BOTH formats can do a wonderull job getting them going.

-Flo

SlumpBuster
03-01-2006, 12:31 PM
Now we take a scene of music and record it in analog and one in digital and press it on both medium. That allows us to hear what the formats and processing equipment does.


But what we do have is emotions, and BOTH formats can do a wonderull job getting them going.

-Flo


Flo reaches the right conclusion. Flo's hypothetical does and exellent job exposing why of a comparison of vinyl and digital is ultimately frivolous, but not for the ultimate reason he outlines.

Assume you have the hypothetical reference system, everything is in place as Flo describes. The one part of the process he overlooked is the one part of the process that will prevent a true analoug vs. digital evaluation from ever occuring: the mastering process.
Assuming that your goal is to evaluate the ability of the format is to faithfully render the sound event, the mastering process will alway interfere with that. The mastering process is different for digital and analoug. Additionally, it involves discretionary decisions and aesthetic choices by the masterer (is that a word?).

musicoverall
03-01-2006, 01:52 PM
I very recently purchased the Sonny Rollins remaster you refer to and it is excellent. :) I don't have the LP for comparison, though.

The LP is excellent and has been lauded by audiophiles since it was first on the market (or since there were audiophiles - whichever came second). The CD remaster takes the outstanding original to another level. Shell out $50 for a clean copy of the vinyl only if you want a fun comparison. :) I was an Analog First kind of guy and that CD really turned my head around. I used to blame the format and called it such things as "flawed". I still prefer the vinyl in some cases but the plain truth is that it is as people have been saying for years... it's not the format, it's the recording/mastering.

topspeed
03-01-2006, 02:51 PM
Wow.

1 post = 4 pages & 80 responses

Good troll.



To the respondents: Nice job! No flame suits required, which is amazing.

What happened to the old AR.com :p

GMichael
03-01-2006, 02:59 PM
Wow.

1 post = 4 pages & 80 responses

Good troll.



To the respondents: Nice job! No flame suits required, which is amazing.

What happened to the old AR.com :p

They've been whipped into shape, or banned.

Florian
03-01-2006, 03:08 PM
No, its still the same. I made a perfectly normal comment and got called a piece of ****. Its still the same.

-Flo

Woochifer
03-01-2006, 03:50 PM
The LP is excellent and has been lauded by audiophiles since it was first on the market (or since there were audiophiles - whichever came second). The CD remaster takes the outstanding original to another level. Shell out $50 for a clean copy of the vinyl only if you want a fun comparison. :) I was an Analog First kind of guy and that CD really turned my head around. I used to blame the format and called it such things as "flawed". I still prefer the vinyl in some cases but the plain truth is that it is as people have been saying for years... it's not the format, it's the recording/mastering.

Excellent summation!

I would add that the Rudy Van Gelder remastered CDs that I've heard on Blue Note (mostly Freddie Hubbard albums) also sound very clean and smooth. I've also read complaints that other RVG remasters lopped off too much of the highs and tinkered with the L/R balances, but the examples I've heard point to the improvement that's possible with more careful repurposing of the master source. Earlier Blue Note CDs in my collection sounded harsh compared to the DMM pressings that Blue Note was issuing at the same time. (And DMM is yet another subject altogether, because LPs remastered using the DMM process sound notably different than other versions mastered using the normal lacquer cutting method)

Anytime these format discussions pop up, I just shake my head because it's all too easy to pull examples out of my own collection that support both arguments. If I can easily identify cases where a vinyl version sounds better than the CD, or where the CD sounds better than the LP, then obviously factors other than the format itself are at work. And the only way to definitively infer the superiority of one format over another is to compare to the master source. Since most of us on this board do not have access to original studio masters (or even heard a live board feed before), the vinyl vs. CD arguments IMO are absurd wastes of bandwidth.

Bernd
03-02-2006, 12:33 AM
Yes-good Troll and a decent debate.

Just like to add

Flo made a goint point, however in the real world we (hopefuly) taylor our systems to our likes and are governed by our budget constraints. Musical enjoyment doesn't depent on the medium.

I prefer Vinyl over Digital. That does not make it the universal truth.If a digital set up speaks to you and moves you and first and foremost brings you enjoyment and does what you were looking for, then that is the right one for you.
However once you experienced what moves you it would be foolish to follow what somebody else percieves as true. I would say that it is benefical to try and listen to a truly great set-up from the opposite site of what you have to give you some idea what is possible. I was more than a little impressed recently by a great CDP and D/A set up.

But the physical and emotional involvment that Vinyl has, lacks in CD. Firstly I enjoy handling the 12 inch size (who doesn't), the artwork and readability of the lyrics. Also Vinyl does not come in a crappy plastic case. But one of the most important aspects, to me, for sticking with Vinyl is this. Consider the importance of Track running order. So often the great tracks are found at the end of side 1 and the beginning of side 2. I welcome a short break by having to get up and turn the record over. Take Pink Floyd's-The Wall. End of side 1 is "Mother "an emotional heavy song that realy demands a little reflection. Same with DSOM. Or Lou Reeds Transformer, Walk on the Wild Side again demands that break to fully appreciate the quality of the song. This point was ilustrated really well by Tom Petty's-Full Moon Fever. After track 5 (end of side 1 on vinyl), Tom makes a spoken word anouncement "CD listeners there will be a short break while those who listen on Vinyl will have to turn the Record over." Then comes a little silence and then another word from Tom."Here is Side 2". And it really works to recapture that bit of magic, CD has taken away and gives you that pause to digest.

These are some of the things I get from Vinyl and miss from CD. But I suppose on a very long piece, it works better on CD due to the physical limitations of how much you can put on one Side of Vinyl. So I guess for Classical (also I know very little of this genre) this works in CD's favour.


I feel that sometimes these exchanges turn into a competition of, mine is better than yours or I have more knowledge or money, etc then you. Bull. The intented transfer of knowledge dies in those circumstances.

So enjoy what you like and be proud of what each of us have achieved on their quest.

Peace

Bernd

musicoverall
03-02-2006, 05:37 AM
Excellent summation!

I would add that the Rudy Van Gelder remastered CDs that I've heard on Blue Note (mostly Freddie Hubbard albums) also sound very clean and smooth. I've also read complaints that other RVG remasters lopped off too much of the highs and tinkered with the L/R balances, but the examples I've heard point to the improvement that's possible with more careful repurposing of the master source. Earlier Blue Note CDs in my collection sounded harsh compared to the DMM pressings that Blue Note was issuing at the same time. (And DMM is yet another subject altogether, because LPs remastered using the DMM process sound notably different than other versions mastered using the normal lacquer cutting method)

Anytime these format discussions pop up, I just shake my head because it's all too easy to pull examples out of my own collection that support both arguments. If I can easily identify cases where a vinyl version sounds better than the CD, or where the CD sounds better than the LP, then obviously factors other than the format itself are at work. And the only way to definitively infer the superiority of one format over another is to compare to the master source. Since most of us on this board do not have access to original studio masters (or even heard a live board feed before), the vinyl vs. CD arguments IMO are absurd wastes of bandwidth.

Look at all the FUN people are getting out of arguing LP vs CD. And you want to take that away! :)

Had to laugh at your comment (well, not AT it - because of it) about pulling examples out of your collection that supports both arguments. I laughed because even back when I was an LP guy, I had excellent examples of CD... and I don't remember how I reconciled that! Perhaps I told myself "they got lucky with that one". :D

Just goes to show that if a person believes an argument strongly enough, mere evidence against the argument just isn't enough. :)

Bernd
03-02-2006, 07:08 AM
There have always been stories of artists agonizing over programming and track order. Ziggy Stardust always stuck out for me as a good example of a couple well programmed sides.

Also, I might be remembering this wrong, but in the movie "Hi-Fidelity" the guys in the record store were arguing "best side ever."

Yeah-Ziggy is often quoted. But there are many more. I know that Peter Gabriel takes great care in choosing the running order and continues to release his material on fantastic sounding vinyl while embracing new technology. That's the way to go I think.
You could be right with the movie. Haven't watched it for a while. It could become a good topic though. "Best side ever".

Bernd

SlumpBuster
03-02-2006, 07:09 AM
But the physical and emotional involvment that Vinyl has, lacks in CD. Firstly I enjoy handling the 12 inch size (who doesn't), the artwork and readability of the lyrics. Also Vinyl does not come in a crappy plastic case. But one of the most important aspects, to me, for sticking with Vinyl is this. Consider the importance of Track running order. So often the great tracks are found at the end of side 1 and the beginning of side 2. I welcome a short break by having to get up and turn the record over. Take Pink Floyd's-The Wall. End of side 1 is "Mother "an emotional heavy song that realy demands a little reflection. Same with DSOM. Or Lou Reeds Transformer, Walk on the Wild Side again demands that break to fully appreciate the quality of the song. This point was ilustrated really well by Tom Petty's-Full Moon Fever. After track 5 (end of side 1 on vinyl), Tom makes a spoken word anouncement "CD listeners there will be a short break while those who listen on Vinyl will have to turn the Record over." Then comes a little silence and then another word from Tom."Here is Side 2". And it really works to recapture that bit of magic, CD has taken away and gives you that pause to digest.



There have always been stories of artists agonizing over programming and track order. Ziggy Stardust always stuck out for me as a good example of a couple well programmed sides.

Also, I might be remembering this wrong, but in the movie "Hi-Fidelity" the guys in the record store were arguing "best side ever."

Resident Loser
03-02-2006, 07:24 AM
No, its still the same. I made a perfectly normal comment and got called a piece of ****. Its still the same.

-Flo

...and under what circumstance did that occur?

jimHJJ(...think hard now...)

emaidel
03-02-2006, 07:33 AM
But the physical and emotional involvment that Vinyl has, lacks in CD. Firstly I enjoy handling the 12 inch size (who doesn't), the artwork and readability of the lyrics. Also Vinyl does not come in a crappy plastic case. But one of the most important aspects, to me, for sticking with Vinyl is this. Consider the importance of Track running order. So often the great tracks are found at the end of side 1 and the beginning of side 2. I welcome a short break by having to get up and turn the record over. Take Pink Floyd's-The Wall. End of side 1 is "Mother "an emotional heavy song that realy demands a little reflection. Same with DSOM. Or Lou Reeds Transformer, Walk on the Wild Side again demands that break to fully appreciate the quality of the song. This point was ilustrated really well by Tom Petty's-Full Moon Fever. After track 5 (end of side 1 on vinyl), Tom makes a spoken word anouncement "CD listeners there will be a short break while those who listen on Vinyl will have to turn the Record over." Then comes a little silence and then another word from Tom."Here is Side 2". And it really works to recapture that bit of magic, CD has taken away and gives you that pause to digest.





I'll do my best to be polite and non condescending. Aside from the comment regarding the readbility of lyrics and the appreciation of cover art,I don't agree whatseover with anything else in the above post. I think Petty's insertion was more for amusement than anything else, and never felt that there was any "need" for a pause while turning a record over. If a user feels such a need, there is the "pause" button on the CD player's remote.

I won't try to argue whether one format is better than the other, and agree heartily that it is indeed the mastering that makes the difference (as has been posted on this thread), but aside from the loss of cover art on vinyl and the difficulty in reading lyrics (try reading the lyrics to either of the original cast CD's of "Phantom of the Opera," or "Les Miserables" for example), the "pleasure" of having to get up and turn over an LP is something that completely escapes me, and has since I owned my first record player back in the 50's.

Bernd
03-02-2006, 07:43 AM
I'll do my best to be polite and non condescending. Aside from the comment regarding the readbility of lyrics and the appreciation of cover art,I don't agree whatseover with anything else in the above post. I think Petty's insertion was more for amusement than anything else, and never felt that there was any "need" for a pause while turning a record over. If a user feels such a need, there is the "pause" button on the CD player's remote.

I won't try to argue whether one format is better than the other, and agree heartily that it is indeed the mastering that makes the difference (as has been posted on this thread), but aside from the loss of cover art on vinyl and the difficulty in reading lyrics (try reading the lyrics to either of the original cast CD's of "Phantom of the Opera," or "Les Miserables" for example), the "pleasure" of having to get up and turn over an LP is something that completely escapes me, and has since I owned my first record player back in the 50's.

Thanks for staying polite.Disagreement is healthy and makes the whole thing exciting. Just imagine if we would all be "Company Men", or falling wholesale for the next "BIG" thing..

I was talking about the selection of the order of songs. And this is up to the artist and played an important part in the Vinyl only time, but matters less so and to my mind is a loss of the enjoyment. How could you as a listener know when the little break was needed. It was part of the release of a record (or should have been).
If you never got it that is great. I, one the other hand ,miss it with CD on many releases.

Peace

Bernd

musicoverall
03-02-2006, 08:07 AM
Thanks for staying polite.Disagreement is healthy and makes the whole thing exciting. Just imagine if we would all be "Company Men", or falling wholesale for the next "BIG" thing..

I was talking about the selection of the order of songs. And this is up to the artist and played an important part in the Vinyl only time, but matters less so and to my mind is a loss of the enjoyment. How could you as a listener know when the little break was needed. It was part of the release of a record (or should have been).
If you never got it that is great. I, one the other hand ,miss it with CD on many releases.

Peace

Bernd

This kind of goes with SlumpBuster's post above.

One of the things I appreciate and yet do not is CD boxed sets of the "complete" music of a particular artist. This may be more true in jazz than other genres but let's take the Complete Atlantic Recordings of Ornette Coleman as an example (and it matters not if you like Ornette or if you've even heard of him).

The boxed set covers about 8 LP's, 2 of which I could never find. The other 6 I owned. The problem was the track order. I was so used to listening to the tracks from the LP's in a certain order and the CD places them in chronological order by recording date. Hence, tracks from one LP are mixed in with tracks from another LP very often. I found that annoying... all the while I was rejoicing that I now had found the music from the 2 LP's I was missing. But some of the "synergy" from the old LP's was missing.

Now I now this may sound like something stupid to ***** about and it probably is. It also has nothing to do with format sound quality. But I run into this kind of thing often. I think the best way would be to take the original LP's and make a corresponding CD for each to include in the boxed set.

Go ahead and laugh - I deserve it. :)

Bernd
03-02-2006, 08:15 AM
This kind of goes with SlumpBuster's post above.

One of the things I appreciate and yet do not is CD boxed sets of the "complete" music of a particular artist. This may be more true in jazz than other genres but let's take the Complete Atlantic Recordings of Ornette Coleman as an example (and it matters not if you like Ornette or if you've even heard of him).

The boxed set covers about 8 LP's, 2 of which I could never find. The other 6 I owned. The problem was the track order. I was so used to listening to the tracks from the LP's in a certain order and the CD places them in chronological order by recording date. Hence, tracks from one LP are mixed in with tracks from another LP very often. I found that annoying... all the while I was rejoicing that I now had found the music from the 2 LP's I was missing. But some of the "synergy" from the old LP's was missing.

Now I now this may sound like something stupid to ***** about and it probably is. It also has nothing to do with format sound quality. But I run into this kind of thing often. I think the best way would be to take the original LP's and make a corresponding CD for each to include in the boxed set.

Go ahead and laugh - I deserve it. :)

Is not funny at all. Well just a little. But you're not alone. It surely has something to do with Linguistic Programing.
But be that as it may. I have a boxed set of "CCRs" complete 7 inch releases and also a copy of their greatest hits on Vinyl and CD. If playing a 7 inch at random the brain tells you what should be next.Freaky!
Here is another one. Ever tried to write down a complete copy of a lyric without the music playing. I found it almost impossible.

Bernd

Florian
03-02-2006, 08:37 AM
...and under what circumstance did that occur?

jimHJJ(...think hard now...)I simply stated "like a few before me in the same thread" that as a reviewer he should use a reference quality setup. I commented that his system is a good typical system for a family man who either doesn't want or can't spend mega bucks on a system. What is so bad about that comment that ONE SINGLE person, YOU get off telling me that i am a piece of ****? What a suprise the moderators dont read those.

-Flo

emaidel
03-02-2006, 09:26 AM
Thanks for staying polite.Disagreement is healthy and makes the whole thing exciting. Just imagine if we would all be "Company Men", or falling wholesale for the next "BIG" thing..

I was talking about the selection of the order of songs. And this is up to the artist and played an important part in the Vinyl only time, but matters less so and to my mind is a loss of the enjoyment. How could you as a listener know when the little break was needed. It was part of the release of a record (or should have been).
If you never got it that is great. I, one the other hand ,miss it with CD on many releases.

Peace

Bernd

I'm still in total disagreement with you, but, as I said initially, I'll try to be polite.

I have an extensive collection of both LP's and CD's, and my musical tastes run quite a wide gamut: from Santana, The Doobie Brothers, The Eagles, The Moody Blues, Joan Baez, Paul Simon, et. al., to the great classical composers. My classical CD collection alone is close to 1,000 titles, and it is the CD medium that, to me, most benefits classical music.

Take, for example, any of the following three pieces: Beethoven's 9th; Mahler's 2nd and Mahler's 3rd Symphonies. The power and majesty of all three pieces is best attained by listening to the entire piece, without interruption, and vinyl recordings of any of these provide more "interruptions" than a lover of such music (such as myself) is willing to accept.

In live performances of all of these pieces (which I have attended on many an occasion) there is no intermission, but only a brief pause between movements, mostly to allow musicians to rearrange their scores in front of them for the next movement, or to just get a bit more comfortable in their seats. The pause between tracks on CD's of these pieces is about that same length, at least with those I own. And, since the Mahler pieces are considerably longer than the Beethoven, they are on 2 discs, and not just one. The time a CD changer takes to change discs is a bit longer than the pause between tracks, but no where near as long as having to get up, remove a record from the turntable platter, put it back in its sleeve, and then place a different record on the platter, put the tonearm down, and return to one's listening position - usually a second or two after the music's begun.

When I first bought a CD player back in 1983, and purchased CD transfers of LP's I owned, I was a bit surprised to hear that which I knew to be the first track of side 2 so quickly after hearing what had been the last track of side 1, but I came to enjoy this after a while, since it didn't require me to get up and turn the record over. And, if I felt that there was a needed pause between these tracks, then all I had to do was press "Pause."

Bernd
03-02-2006, 10:31 AM
I'm still in total disagreement with you, but, as I said initially, I'll try to be polite.

I have an extensive collection of both LP's and CD's, and my musical tastes run quite a wide gamut: from Santana, The Doobie Brothers, The Eagles, The Moody Blues, Joan Baez, Paul Simon, et. al., to the great classical composers. My classical CD collection alone is close to 1,000 titles, and it is the CD medium that, to me, most benefits classical music.

Take, for example, any of the following three pieces: Beethoven's 9th; Mahler's 2nd and Mahler's 3rd Symphonies. The power and majesty of all three pieces is best attained by listening to the entire piece, without interruption, and vinyl recordings of any of these provide more "interruptions" than a lover of such music (such as myself) is willing to accept.

In live performances of all of these pieces (which I have attended on many an occasion) there is no intermission, but only a brief pause between movements, mostly to allow musicians to rearrange their scores in front of them for the next movement, or to just get a bit more comfortable in their seats. The pause between tracks on CD's of these pieces is about that same length, at least with those I own. And, since the Mahler pieces are considerably longer than the Beethoven, they are on 2 discs, and not just one. The time a CD changer takes to change discs is a bit longer than the pause between tracks, but no where near as long as having to get up, remove a record from the turntable platter, put it back in its sleeve, and then place a different record on the platter, put the tonearm down, and return to one's listening position - usually a second or two after the music's begun.

When I first bought a CD player back in 1983, and purchased CD transfers of LP's I owned, I was a bit surprised to hear that which I knew to be the first track of side 2 so quickly after hearing what had been the last track of side 1, but I came to enjoy this after a while, since it didn't require me to get up and turn the record over. And, if I felt that there was a needed pause between these tracks, then all I had to do was press "Pause."

You hit the nail on the head. As I said before Classical pieces and especially long ones do benefit from CDs ability to hold that much more info.
It's great to read about your collection and varied tastes. I just haven't managed to explore Classical music or got moved by Jazz for that matter but still manage to have a 5000+ (stopped counting at that milestone) music collection split roughly 70/30 in favour of Vinyl.Blues,Rock,Rockn'Roll and Singer/Songwriter and others.

You and I just place different importance on different things. I would miss the enforced break and it is now a part of the joy of my listening habit. And knowing that the artist took care, and considered, his/her song selection makes it even that much sweeter.

Take care

Bernd

hermanv
03-02-2006, 11:23 AM
There seems to be a lot of discussion about CD vs. LP and what can be ultimately acheived, while that is interesting its hardly the whole picture.

Not a lot of discussion about conveinience here, with an LP you've got to clean it carefully if you want the most out of it, there also that irritating vertical tracking angle problem. Yes once the turnrtable and the LP are both properly prepared things can be wonderfull. Then the cartridge needs to be replaced or the stylus and the whole set-up nightmare repeats, takes about a year to everything just exactly right. Then some heavy footed clomper walks accross your wood floor and god, it comes out the speakers or "gasp" the record skips.

Now the CD on the other hand plays the same everytime, good ones stay good, bad ones stay bad. This seems to be true year in year out where the LP slowly becomes worn out.

There is something to said for getting pleasure from listening without all that effort required for best LP playback.

There is one other dimension, cost. Pretty decent CD sound can be had in the $1,000 to $2,000 range. An LP system that equals or betters that sound, turntable, cartridge and phono amp easily exceeds that amount and we aren't even including that there are twice as many expensive cables.

GMichael
03-02-2006, 11:38 AM
There seems to be a lot of discussion about CD vs. LP and what can be ultimately acheived, while that is interesting its hardly the whole picture.

Not a lot of discussion about conveinience here, with an LP you've got to clean it carefully if you want the most out of it, there also that irritating vertical tracking angle problem. Yes once the turnrtable and the LP are both properly prepared things can be wonderfull. Then the cartridge needs to be replaced or the stylus and the whole set-up nightmare repeats, takes about a year to everything just exactly right. Then some heavy footed clomper walks accross your wood floor and god, it comes out the speakers or "gasp" the record skips.

Now the CD on the other hand plays the same everytime, good ones stay good, bad ones stay bad. This seems to be true year in year out where the LP slowly becomes worn out.

There is something to said for getting pleasure from listening without all that effort required for best LP playback.

There is one other dimension, cost. Pretty decent CD sound can be had in the $1,000 to $2,000 range. An LP system that equals or betters that sound, turntable, cartridge and phono amp easily exceeds that amount and we aren't even including that there are twice as many expensive cables.

Don't get me wrong, I love CD's. I can't remember the last time I bothered to go through the trouble of loading up an LP. But some people love all that extra stuff. It's nostalgia to them. It gives them a satisfaction that throwing in a CD will never replace for them, no matter how convenient it is.
Let's see them spin those LP's in their car though.

Feanor
03-02-2006, 11:52 AM
....

But the physical and emotional involvment that Vinyl has, lacks in CD. Firstly I enjoy handling the 12 inch size (who doesn't), the artwork and readability of the lyrics. Also Vinyl does not come in a crappy plastic case. But one of the most important aspects, to me, for sticking with Vinyl is this. Consider the importance of Track running order. So often the great tracks are found at the end of side 1 and the beginning of side 2. I welcome a short break by having to get up and turn the record over.
...

Peace

Bernd
Vinyl's little riduals are what I miss least about the medium. The fastiduous removal of the disc from the sleeve and placing it on the playing surface, the time consuming de-staticing of the disc, cleaning the stylus, the moments of concentration and trepitation when you lift the stylus on and off, the bobbing up and down every 15-20 minutes to change sides. CD hughly simplified these issues. And the multi-disc changer be came feasible once again :)

Better yet, CDs are easily ripped to hard disc and managed with the likes of iTunes. Here content select and sequence becomes trivial and last. Ever you ever considered ripping you LPs to computer disc? This should be only a little more tedious that for CDs.

According to some, digital recordings of vinyl are essentially indistinguishable from the original. (Provining that sound wasn't the issue with the medium at all, but a matter of the recording appraoch.) The only thing you'd miss would be all that TLC.

Bernd
03-03-2006, 12:43 AM
Hi,

The 12" line was meant as a joke.

I,ve never considered putting music on a Computer. It is of no interest to me, can't see the point.Then there is pride of ownership of realy great performing and great looking audio equipment. I do not get that from a PC or Laptop. I marvel at the quality of workmanship of a great Moving Coil cartridge etc.I don't get that from some mass produced box with a screen. All that is part of the enjoyment to me. I am not looking for instant gratification, thats not my nature. I do not mind putting some time and effort into it and realy enjoy the end result of superb sound.
I have collected records over half of my life and have created a listening room for the sole purpose of enjoying my records. The reasons why I like records I have already given. This is really not a competition and I am completely open to new things.I do own a CD Player. Unfortunatly to my mind nothing has come by yet to replace my enjoyment of Vinyl replay. In the early 80s I fell for the hype "Perfect sound forever" and sold almost all of my then collection of vinyl only to be dissapointed. I have manged to replace 90% of that over the last 20 years and they will not leave my ownership again for the next "Perfect sound forever" thing, that's for sure.
If every music fan and every magazine and every forum would suddenly say that LP is bad and CD is good, I would still enjoy playing, cleaning (got a RCM) and handling my records aswell as setting up the TT. I enjoy that! And to these ears it sounds better and gives me much more emotional involvement. Never been a follower of the masses. The whole situation of being involved I find relaxing and stimulating much more so then to press a "Play" button and forget about it.
In my office I only listen to CD as it is right for that environment. And I enjoy it and enjoy the convenience of that medium.
As long as the listener enjoys what he/she hears from their system that is the right one for them.
I am sure that many listeners had negative experiences with Vinyl 20+ years back. The TTs were not that good then and on an all in one system (which were oh so popular) back then the TT sat on top and was an after thought and of course CD will wipe the floor with that thing on sound alone.

Different Strokes for different folkes.

I enjoy what I own and what I listen to, I hope you do too.

Peace

Bernd

Bernd
03-03-2006, 05:18 AM
Then some heavy footed clomper walks accross your wood floor and god, it comes out the speakers or "gasp" the record skips.

.

No such problem here. My house is build of bricks and mortar with concrete floors and the equipment sits on a decent isolation rack.

Bernd

SlumpBuster
03-03-2006, 10:30 AM
Let's see them spin those LP's in their car though.

Precisely the point I've made before in other threads. When I sit down at home to do some listening, 90 time out of 100 it will be an LP. Of the remaining 10 times, it will be a mishmash of concert DVDs, cassettes, minidisks or 8 tracks. Yes I said 8 track damn it! 1 out of a 100 will be a CD. I have plenty of time for CDs in the car or at work. The other formats can only be listened to at home.

But as for spinning in my car, let me schools alls yalls. Feast on this factory option, baby!
http://ookworld.com/hiwayhifi.html

Mike Anderson
03-04-2006, 08:17 AM
I,ve never considered putting music on a Computer. It is of no interest to me, can't see the point.Then there is pride of ownership of realy great performing and great looking audio equipment. I do not get that from a PC or Laptop.

Bernd, I have all my music on my computer, and I wish you could be here to see and hear, it, because I bet you'd see the point pretty quickly.

It's true I'm not looking at a finely crafted piece of audio equipment, per se, and I guess you'll never really get that out of a computer.

But what I can get absolutely blows away every other medium, including vinyl.

(1) Audio quality. Using the computer with an off-board DAC, I can get any level of sound quality I want. If I wanted to, I could take your vinyl setup and burn it to my hard drive in a 24 bit, 192 khz format. That would provide all the warmth and life of a vinyl recording, I absolutely guarantee it. In fact I bet you'd be extremely hard pressed to tell the difference in a blind test.

But I can also get recordings made in 24 bit resolution taken from the original masters. That's going to give far better sound than your vinyl, provided it's mastered properly.

Even using 16bit, 44khz CD quality sound - my computer setup with a Benchmark DAC1 sounds every bit as good as a $10k transport and DAC used to sound a couple years ago.

(2) Convenience. You can look down on it if you want, and view it as superficial; or I suppose you can enjoy the rituals of handling records.

But ya know... there's something really, really valuable about being able to access one of tens of thousands of songs in a couple seconds without getting out of my chair. Or putting together a playlist several hours long for when company comes over or I host a party. Or putting it on random, or an intelligent version of random, and hearing a song I haven't heard in years just because it hadn't occurred to me to get out the album and play it. Or being able to take my entire music collection to the gym with me, or on a long car ride, or to work, or my friends house, or the airplane, or wherever I want!

At some point, you have to acknowledge that convenience is actually worth something. In fact, it goes beyond convenience - its powerful.

Just wait a few years, when technology is evolved to the point when digital music is all 24 bit, 96 khz, when the mastering has caught up with it, and when everybody can take 100,000 songs with them wherever they go on an iPod. Eventually, even the most diehard vinyl enthusiasts will have to recognize the raw power and audio quality behind digital.

Bernd
03-04-2006, 09:02 AM
Hello Mike,

Thanks for a well argued point. I have just finished cleaning 120 Records and listened to the Radio (as random as it gets).As for the car I listen to the radio and I haven't seen the inside of a gym for years as my work takes me into the great outdoors and plenty of exercise.
And you are right I would love to hear your set up, and the invite goes for you too. And believe me if I would be convinced I would go and invest in the technology (I even went with a friend recently to a multi media exhibition, very impressive, but ultimatly it left me cold). Even in my Office I do not listen to my PC but to a Teac 300 system and often on Compact Cassette. Just as a point, my son, a 17 year old computer geek, has some incredible PC and stores his music on it. He challenged me a while ago and we connected it up to my amp with a program (the name eludes me at the moment) and yes it sounds respectable and I guess if somebody never experienced a real high end Vinyl replay set up, and the joy of physicaly owning the medium, it will do nicely.
But as you said, I enjoy everything that is requiered to reply Vinyl properly.I had my room build just for that.
As for Digital coming close to analogue, I recently auditioned a Zanden CDT and D/A and it blew me away. It run my SME20/2A, series V Special and Transfiguration Temper V very close, but the cost for the Zanden is £ 31.500. So a lot of money and something I will have to seriously think about.
I do not look down on convenience, but I do not have background music on when I have friends over. It somehow distracts me from the conversation and I want to listen to the music. So a conflict for me. Also I like to controll what I listen to.
All said and done, I have not heard a digital set up that betters the sound of Vinyl.
To me it's the same with Red Wine. I like several mid price Varieties, but when I really want a tasty hit and experience some artistry I go for an upmarket one from the cellar.
Also I really enjoy a superbly crafted piece of Audio Equipment.

Anyway, how are the Maggies settling in?

Have good weekend

Peace

Bernd

Mike Anderson
03-04-2006, 10:37 AM
^^^ I understand completely; a lot of this simply boils down to taste and preferences, things "not open to dispute", as a wise man once said.

The Maggies are truly awesome - I've spent a fair amount of time tweaking my setup, doing room treatment, experimenting with various arrangements, etc. and at the moment they are sounding pristine.

I've got them on right now, just blissing out! All my favorite tunes, which I've heard hundreds of times before, sound totally new and fresh. There are times when something sounds so realistic -- a piece of percussion drops in for a second, or a vocal line comes out of nowhere -- that your ears perk up, and you think "what was that??" as your mind is fooled into thinking there's someone right in front of you!

I'm really enjoying it; it's been well worth all the time and money I've put into it.

Florian
03-04-2006, 09:34 PM
Glad its working for you Mike, and i have to be a bad boy (*you know how i mean it) and tell....its just the beginning of the fun! Enjoy the ride....i enjoyed mine just like that too.

Mike Anderson
03-04-2006, 09:49 PM
^^^ OK, but don't tell my wife!!

Seriously, it's going to be a while before I make any big changes; it's sounding so, so sweet right now, it's hard to imagine anything better.

I've got Miles Davis and John McLaughlin hanging out in my living room with me at the moment, so I've got to run.

BTW, love your new avatar, looks like it was designed for you; where'd you get that? And is there one with 1.6's??

Bernd
03-05-2006, 01:58 AM
Hi Mike,

Sounds like it all came together for you and you're having fun and enjoy the performances. That's what it's all about.
And yes certain things just don't lend themselves to be argued over.
So wishing you many happy enjoyable musical times.
As Flo said-The journey has just begun.

Peace

Bernd

Mike Anderson
03-05-2006, 07:28 AM
^^^ Thanks, and I wish you likewise.

If you guys are ever in the SF Bay Area, you are definitely welcome to drop me a line and come by to check out my set up.

Email: mikeand1 at comcast.net

Florian
03-05-2006, 07:30 AM
Hehe, thats what a good system does. I thought the same way when i had the 1.6 and then the 3.6's..... The Pathos and the Magnepans are a great match and you chose a good DAC too.

Keep on rockin!!!!!!!

PS: I can ask my buddy if he can make a Maggie one! But we are planar freaks so go ahead and use it.

Bernd
03-05-2006, 09:14 AM
Thanks for the invite Mike, I would like to extend the same to you if you ever find yourself in the old Country.
You never know which way the wind blows.

Peace

Bernd