Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 76 to 92 of 92
  1. #76
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    Yes, and this very worthwhile mentioning, however classical and jazz are (unfortunately) a tiny portion of the music market.

    Further, the hi-rez selection is relatively limited even in these genre. For example, ArkivMusic, the classical specialist, has almost 3300 SACDs, but they feature almost 10,700 discontinued CD titles, not to mention tens of thousands of current CDs. HDTracks' classical selection is even less. So the SACD coverage is actually quite low.
    I guess it is also worthwhile to mention that downloads are only about 5 years old, SACD is 13 years old, and the CD is 30 years old. Also HD tracks is but one of many downloading sites that offer classical and Jazz.

    I am sure that vinyl enthusiasts made the same argument about the amount of titles released on CD early in its life.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  2. #77
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy View Post
    no, i am LUCKIER than you.

    This is incorrect: The dynamic range of a CD is far greater than its vinyl counterpart. cd is limited to its top limit after which it is ALL distortion, and its lower limit which cannot capture sounds below the noise floor. analog can go both over the redline with minor diminution in fidelity and below the noise floor where sounds are still captured.

    analog also will yield faster soft to loud transitions and has a greater startle or jump factor. transients also are better captured in analog format than redbook as sometimes the ictus of the transient signal falls after the beginning of one of the 44.1k samples and thereby loses some of its life.

    the luckier part is that i never crumbled to the onslaught of digital with the release of redbook cd playback. i kept my LPs and waited until good sounding affordable cd players were available. i then found out that the same music recording on vinyl sounded better and more real than its cd counterpart (most of the time).

    its not like i don't enjoy my cd collection. they became more valuable when i got my first sacd player due to upsampling and its effect on the sound. that and the fact that sacd sounds much closer to analog than rbcd. i am ready to accept the hi-rez downloads when it becomes a turnkey operation and the software prices fall to affordable levels. i would hope that ALL releases will be done this way thereby reducing the production cost.

    "cd does have more bandwidth than vinyl" i can oly see this statement as incorrect. the upper limit of rbcd is ostensibly 22k and realistically 19k whereas vinyl can go to approximately 40k as was required by CD4 records. its not to say we can hear that but we can hear the freedom from stress when the capability is there.

    here come the flames.
    You are entitled to your preferences. However, you are not correct in stating that CD cannot reproduce anything below the digital noise floor of -90.31 dB. Some audio writers thought that, and some may still believe it. However, Stereophile has routinely measured the low level linearity of CD players down to -120 dB. How is it done? With dither. A dithered signal can resolve well below -90 dB. Here is one example. Check out Fig. 5.

    Sony CDP-XA7ES CD player Measurements | Stereophile.com
    "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
    ------Heraclitus of Ephesis (fl. 504-500 BC), trans. Wheelwright.

  3. #78
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat D View Post
    However, Stereophile has routinely measured the low level linearity of CD players down to -120 dB.
    That must be right. Just look at the square wave response at -90db that is virtually indistinguishable from its original!

  4. #79
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442
    it seems that you are being snide, Ralph.
    ...regards...tr

  5. #80
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy View Post
    it seems that you are being snide, Ralph.
    I prefer "facetious", implying humor. Hence the smiley face.

    That square wave is about as mangled as you can get. Which illustrates your point pretty well I think!

  6. #81
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442
    I'm gonna change your name to Snidely Whilash.

    ;'7
    ...regards...tr

  7. #82
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    This is incorrect: The dynamic range of a CD is far greater than its vinyl counterpart. cd is limited to its top limit after which it is ALL distortion, and its lower limit which cannot capture sounds below the noise floor. analog can go both over the redline with minor diminution in fidelity and below the noise floor where sounds are still captured.
    Analog may be able to do what you say, but not vinyl. The noise floor of the original master analog tape may be below the surface noise of the vinyl disc. With dither, the CD can be as good at capturing the low level detail as analog is.

    You are also mixing dynamic range and bandwidth together here.

    analog also will yield faster soft to loud transitions and has a greater startle or jump factor. transients also are better captured in analog format than redbook as sometimes the ictus of the transient signal falls after the beginning of one of the 44.1k samples and thereby loses some of its life.
    The former is basically a subjective opinion, as there is no evidence to support this. Once again, you are correct about "analog's" ability to capture transients, but there is no evidence that says it applies to the vinyl disc.

    "cd does have more bandwidth than vinyl" i can oly see this statement as incorrect. the upper limit of rbcd is ostensibly 22k and realistically 19k whereas vinyl can go to approximately 40k as was required by CD4 records. its not to say we can hear that but we can hear the freedom from stress when the capability is there.
    You are mixing a specially encoded vinyl disc characteristics with vinyl disc playback in general. That said, the high-frequency response accuracy of vinyl varies tremendously. Frequency deviations of 5-10 dB or greater are not uncommon in the 20 kHz range for many records. Playback of ultrasonic frequencies is still not guaranteed. Many MM cartridges have resonant peaks defined by the preamp loading, or stylus tip resonances defined by the cantilever, that attenuate high-frequency content.(taken from vinyl myths).
    Even if the overtones were preserved all the way to the mastering stage, mono and stereo lacquer cutting equipment typically includes a lowpass filter to avoid overheating the cutting head with ultrasonic frequencies.(also taken from vinyl myths)

    While your observations are correct on analog in relation to tape, they cannot be applied to analog playback systems like vinyl.

    There is no evidence whatsoever that vinyl has any performance advantages over redbook CD. There are tradeoffs on both sides. The one thing that CD has over vinyl, is accuracy and transparency to the original source. CD does not impart a sonic "signature" like vinyl does. It is that signature that vinyl enthusiasts love.

    See Hifi, no need for flames.......
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  8. #83
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy View Post
    I'm gonna change your name to Snidely Whiplash.
    Music from my yute!


  9. #84
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    355
    Use your ears! Judging by the rooms at the recent 2012 CAS, audio retailers realize that analogue is FAR, FAR superior to digital. Systems based on analogue sources and tubes (of course) simply DESTROYED digital and ss systems if you aim for something that sounds like live music.

  10. #85
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by tube fan View Post
    Use your ears! Judging by the rooms at the recent 2012 CAS, audio retailers realize that analogue is FAR, FAR superior to digital. Systems based on analogue sources and tubes (of course) simply DESTROYED digital and ss systems if you aim for something that sounds like live music.
    Here we go again. More blanket, unsubstantiated opinion by one of the most biased members on this forum.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  11. #86
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442
    for what it's worth, when i listen to the analog version of music vs the rbcd version, i nearly always feel that the vinyl represents the music more closely than the redbook rendition.

    i cannot say that about sacd, dvda, or hi-rez downloads. with those formats and a couple of others, reality can be more closely approximated.

    its not to say that rbcd can't sound very good indeed as true progress in that direction has been made.
    ...regards...tr

  12. #87
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    355
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible View Post
    Here we go again. More blanket, unsubstantiated opinion by one of the most biased members on this forum.
    NOT unsubstantiated at all. Even the Magico representative admitted that people stayed in his room FAR longer when he was playing vinyl than they did when he was playing "high rez" digital. DUH!!! I asked him if he agreed with those potential customers. His reply: "Of course great vinyl is better than "high rez" digital, but there are some measurement freaks who have LOVED digital for decades." RGA can confirm that analogue and tubes simply KILLED digital and ss.

  13. #88
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Tube fan

    Everyone I talked to said exactly the same thing - Tape/Vinyl/digital in any guise - in that order.

    I am a lazy butt - I soo want to like computer audio more - because 1) I live in Hong Kong now where space is at a premium and I don;t want to lug records around with me. 2) records are a big ole pain in the ass on a number of fronts. Tape would be even WORSE on that front

    Technically though high res digital is better. So the only thing I can think of that is the impeding factor is the playback equipment. perhaps hi res machines are using crappy output transformers or pathetic power supplied or just something in the conversion to analog is screwing something up.

    I was on two different forums talking about the fact that Madonn's first 4 albums have come out in 24/192 - and very mixed reviews mostly in the "can;t tell it apart from CD" but that's not even the issue because it depends on the CD player.

    But I have all of Madonna's early albums on vinyl most of her singles on 45 and all of her CDs. I was 13 and yes I had a crush on Madonna.

    But the vinyls are so easily better than the CD's and the 45s destroy the full length LPs. So if the reviews are correct and the 24/192 is the same or only marginally better than the CD then the vinyl's are going to kill those too.

    I am also not sure how HD tracks is getting these 24/192 and there seems to be much confusion on the forums as to whether these numbers are merely achieved through upsampling or recording from CD to a Tape and then back off the tape so they can claim 24/192. I don't have the time to really look into it but if it's "around the CD quality" then if you don;t have the vinyl you're seriously missing out.

    Peter Q wrote a piece no longer on the net a long while back frustrated that with all the advances stone age stuff like SET/Tape/Vinyl "sounds much better." Even the recordings of old actually sound live. I find so much of todays stuff even classical by Iso Mike and Chesky sound bloody banal compared to pretty much anything from the 1950s. Soundhounds ran a demo for me of a Chesky recording - the supposed best in the biz for classical and it sounded smooth and detailed and audiophiley good but then he put on a recording of a Victoria artist recorded in his basement that could make you pick your jaw up off the floor. Dynamics and lack of compression is so nice.

    Anyway, I've been talking to a Throsten Loesch owner of a company called AMR that makes hi res systems and he is extremely knowledgeable on this technology and I'm on a waitlist to review one of their new units. I am very excited because they use no oversampling DA conversion and basically appear to be making what Audio Note would make if they made hi res digital. But it's out of my price range so I'll be waiting for an entry levelish unit to get my feet wet but the 777 is calling - especially since Art loved it.

    Abbingdon Music Research - Products - Digital Processor-777

  14. #89
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    SO-o-o-o tedious. The virtue of vinyl is in the ear of the vinyl lover.

    Yes, hi-rez is like CD only a somewhat better -- if you prefer vinyl to CD you aren't going to prefer to hi-rez over vinyl. But note: Sir TofT has said over & over & over again that in his professional experience vinyl colors the music.

    If you feel that vinyl is truer to live performance, fine. There are two explanations: (1) recording practice is often not what it should be, and (2) recollection of live sound is a combination of poor memory and good imagination.
    Last edited by Feanor; 11-02-2012 at 08:04 AM.

  15. #90
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA View Post
    I was on two different forums talking about the fact that Madonn's first 4 albums have come out in 24/192 - and very mixed reviews mostly in the "can;t tell it apart from CD" but that's not even the issue because it depends on the CD player.
    I recently downloaded Like a Virgin and True Blue in 24/96. I have some cuts from the former on CD and the entire album of the latter. While not all of the tracks are of equal quality, I definitely find the 24/96 more extended and less "dry" on top. I also have both albums on vinyl. With my systems, I'm getting equivalent performance between vinyl and 24/96.

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA View Post
    IBut I have all of Madonna's early albums on vinyl most of her singles on 45 and all of her CDs. I was 13 and yes I had a crush on Madonna.
    I too, have about eight of the uncompressed 12" 45 RPM singles. They have incredible dynamics, range and punch. I'd really like to hear those mixes in a high rez digital format. I find it terribly ironic that I have never heard a single CD with that wide a dynamic range. Theoretical performance is great when it is actually implemented.


    Quote Originally Posted by RGA View Post
    as to whether these numbers are merely achieved through upsampling or recording from CD to a Tape and then back off the tape so they can claim 24/192.
    I seriously doubt that. Upsampling cannot retrieve lost data. Only perform better dither.

  16. #91
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    I seriously doubt that. Upsampling cannot retrieve lost data. Only perform better dither.
    I don't think the word "better" is accurate. Additional is probably a better word. There is no good/better dither. Dither is dither. There is such thing as dither that is improperly applied(not enough, or too much). Dither is a necessary evil when downcoverting from a higher resolution to a lower one - but no dither is IMO better.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  17. #92
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible View Post
    Additional is probably a better word.
    Ok.

    Post processing will not, however, magically transform 16/44 content into what it would have been had it been captured in 24/96. The horse left the barn.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •