Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15 16 17 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 426
  1. #351
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by kingdaddykeith
    Sorry if Iím butting in, but considering that many on this thread seem to have experience in pro sound recording and mixing, maybe one of you can either confirm or rebut this statement I recently read.

    Iíll have to paraphrase, the article was a Q&A to 3 top recording/Audio engineers on the subject of Hi-Rez recordings.

    They all unanimously agreed that the highest resolution medium of all time to present is 2Ē analog tape, they claim that there is far more headroom , dynamic range and resolution then SACD, DVD-A, DAT or any analog device. If this is true, I wonder why they donít aim a little higher with these new formats, or just go back to analog, I would try it if I could afford it.
    KDK,

    2" tape is the best for professional recording. But you cannot make a 2" analog tape machine at an affordable price, and any media that actually touches the playback head will cause the tape to deteriorate each time its played. In other words you will continually lose the high frequencies every time you played the tape. This is why DAT, DCC, never really caught on with consumers.

    When encoding to SACD or DVD-A, the losses are pretty minimal, but definately there. To most untrained ears you probably wouldn't hear any difference.

    Also, the tape heads must be properly aligned, the tape cost a bundle, significant modification have to be performed on the machine to lower wow and flutter, and when the recording and playback heads are worn, they must be replaced at a significant cost. As you can see, they are major maintainence.
    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. #352
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Should be quite amusing.


    Actually, you did a great job.

    Maybe you should read it too. As was indicated, Sony had to play games to make SACD better than the CD. They were caught at the demo. Simple.
    So tell me again how that constitutes evidence that under more equitable test conditions, SACD would be transparent to 44.1/16? A pretty simple question that I've been posing to you, and that you continue to evade. I said that I don't have the answer, but you claimed that it was possible to eliminate the resolution as one of the causal factors. You made the assertion, now back it up. You said it was simple to prove your point, so where's the proof? We're still waiting.

    Pretty hypocritical that you only provide implication and inneuendo to back up your assertions, when you demand proof, evidence, and citations from others. How sad when someone can't even live up to their own standards, though it is quite amusing and hilarious to the rest of us.

  3. #353
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    So tell me again how that constitutes evidence that under more equitable test conditions, SACD would be transparent to 44.1/16? A pretty simple question that I've been posing to you, and that you continue to evade. I said that I don't have the answer, but you claimed that it was possible to eliminate the resolution as one of the causal factors. You made the assertion, now back it up. You said it was simple to prove your point, so where's the proof? We're still waiting.

    Pretty hypocritical that you only provide implication and inneuendo to back up your assertions, when you demand proof, evidence, and citations from others. How sad when someone can't even live up to their own standards, though it is quite amusing and hilarious to the rest of us.
    You're asking a different question, Wooch. Sony cheated on a demo some years ago and I think mtry has the article in Audio magazine to show this. Now, if you want to just say it's an invalid test, fine, but Sony is a pretty large outfit and has the resources to do a proper test. Some of us want to know why they did not. The most likely answer seems to be that they had no confidence they could get a positive result. That's the sort of question a historian might ask.

    You are asking mtry to absolutely prove the null hypothesis, which is of course not possible.
    "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
    ------Heraclitus of Ephesis (fl. 504-500 BC), trans. Wheelwright.

  4. #354
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat D
    You're asking a different question, Wooch. Sony cheated on a demo some years ago and I think mtry has the article in Audio magazine to show this. Now, if you want to just say it's an invalid test, fine, but Sony is a pretty large outfit and has the resources to do a proper test. Some of us want to know why they did not. The most likely answer seems to be that they had no confidence they could get a positive result. That's the sort of question a historian might ask.

    You are asking mtry to absolutely prove the null hypothesis, which is of course not possible.
    Big difference though is that I've stated since the beginning of this thread is that as an end user, none of us have the means to make any conclusion about the causal effects of any audible improvements observed based on comparisons between high res discs and their CD versions. I don't have access to DSD or high res PCM master sources, and I don't have equipment that can do the necessary downsampling. All I got is a set of comparison discs that have all sorts of known and unknown variables between them, one of the known variables being the resolution.

    If the improvement is due to the mixing and mastering, great, I have something improves upon the existing version. If the improvement is due to the higher resolution, great, I have something improves upon the existing version. If the improvement is due to a combination of several known and unknown variables, great, I have something improves upon the existing version. The causal effects, whether it's a remastered CD or a high res audio disc, don't mean a thing to me so long as I'm getting something that improves upon the existing version.

    Mtry seems to have a problem with my not eliminating the resolution as one of the causal variables. He's the one that's asserted that any audible differences between high res discs and CDs are due solely to differences in mastering and mixing procedures, and I'm simply asking for evidence to that effect. All he's cited is the Sony test, which to me is nothing more than inneuendo. Just because Sony did not do a proper test does not provide evidence of anything one way or the other, other than a test that still leaves all the variables in play.

  5. #355
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat D
    You're asking a different question, Wooch. Sony cheated on a demo some years ago and I think mtry has the article in Audio magazine to show this. Now, if you want to just say it's an invalid test, fine, but Sony is a pretty large outfit and has the resources to do a proper test. Some of us want to know why they did not. The most likely answer seems to be that they had no confidence they could get a positive result. That's the sort of question a historian might ask.

    You are asking mtry to absolutely prove the null hypothesis, which is of course not possible.
    Pat,

    II do not think the logical answer is that Sony did not have any confidence to get a honest positive result. As you alluded to in your post, Sony is a VERY large company, A more logical reason for this misstep could have been the lack of communication in setting up the test. This has happened to me on a couple of listening test I have done on Dolby Digital and Dts. Sony had to know that they were going to have to prove the technology, so why be foolish to think that you could pull one over other engineers. That doesn't make sense, and is very uncharacteristic of a Japanese company.
    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

  6. #356
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    Lame try.

    BTW, one of TTT's AES references should have been J3. Reading really is fun - just like listening to music. Perhaps some day you will pick that up.

    rw
    Since you are such an expert at reading, please, fill us in what is in that conference presentation. The description has nothing of value to support TTs claims.
    Boyk in the other reference has not shown anything either, certainly not audibility.
    And, since you are so well versed in these things, you would also know the research that has been done to demonstrate audibility of ultrasonics, right? Or, rather the lack of it. You are too much. LOL

    Oh, you do have a nice setup. I guess my boomox may not do to bring over, right
    mtrycrafts

  7. #357
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    once again, mtry covers his ears and yells "LALALALALALALALALALA, I DONT HEAR YOU" typical answer mrt.

    Once again, you have nothing to say, least of all in support of your claimed authority. Interesting.
    mtrycrafts

  8. #358
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    You show evidence, and they discount it immediately because it does not square with their beliefs.

    Evidence? Where? That is what we ask for. You present not much outside of claims.

    When you have people picking and choosing what is right,

    Facts speak for themselves. Not up to cherry picking.

    Mtry and Chris are not going to stop the progress of high rez audio, because too many VERY reputable audio engineers( who have conducted their own DBT and have participated in countless others) are convinced that it sounds better than RBCD(I am on that list)

    We are not here to stop anything. Your perception is flawed as ever.
    Oh, and those self conducted DBTs. Intersting. They should publish so it can be evaluated and, if it has merit, advance the progress of audio. So far, it is no different from Jon Risch's pocked DBT. Worthless.


    Hundreds of audio engineers sing the praises of high rez,

    Why wouldn't they? Hi res is multi channel format, even if it is just 2 ch that is pressed. Besides, as was mentioned, a popularity contest is not how you advance science ansd knowledge. But, it is appropriate for voodoo, mythology, etc.

    [b]and three guys posting on a audio forum think these engineers are imagining things, hearing things, and have no proof it sound any better than redbook. [b]

    Well, who knows what they think they hear? They have not demonstrated what they claim, have they? Where? Hiding in their pockets? At least the cold fusion guys had the balls to tell the whole world of their discovery before a peer publication. Where are they now? That is how it is in science, you win some, you loose some.

    Ears don't count because white papers don't support what you hear (what???)

    Confused again, or still. What counts is what you can demonstrate, not imagine. However, the marketplace doesn't care, the gullibility factor, you know.


    Your hearing is biased, the test were not valid.

    You mean perceptions are facts? Since when?

    but whether the word maybe is used, people are noticing a improvment, and the formats are growing.

    Good. We are not trying to stop anything, only trying to find facts you seem to lack. Nothing wrong with preferences, especially when the format is multi channel which I have supported from day one.
    At least the engineers are not compressing the hi res as they do the CD.



    Mtry, in the end you lost the DD vs Dts arguement from years ago. When DBT from the studio level was conducted, the studio's ended up purchasing encoders, and now Dts is everywhere.

    I did? Were these published? You think Dolby will agree with you on this? Have they published anything? Or, they will just cover it up?
    Or, this will be one of those pocket jobs too.

    In the end all three of you will lose this arguement as well.

    If it is based in fact, that is good.



    You three guys are forum killers.

    That is right, you want obedient readers who don't ask for facts but are happy with voodoo, bs, mythology, urban legends. Too bad.

    It was just the kind of behavior that you three have exibited in this thread that has chased many a experience audio person away from here.

    And who would that be? Audio story tellers? Myth pedlers?

    [b]Nobody with a good understanding of digital audio, and years of hands on experience is interested in having three guys who have never even mixed a single piece of music to tell them that they are hearing things. [b]

    Yes, it can be a rude awakening that perception may not be reality.

    Your picking and choosing what information can been deemed as credible is the height of arrogance, and does a huge disservice to this board, as it serves to only confuse someone when it is not necessary.

    Ah, you want blind obediance, accept anything and everything because one has an EE behind their names, or happen to be sound mixers? LOL.

    The spin jobs you guy do muddles the issue, clouds the subject matter, and has added nothing to further anyone knowledge on this issue.

    Yes, you want blind obedience and acceptance of authority. LOL.



    I asked four other engineers who have done several AES sanctioned DBT

    You keep refering to this. I have serious doubts that AES sanctions anything. They have members who may or may not perform DBT listeing.

    As I said about 30 posts ago, this issue is not going to be decided here.

    Did anyone state that this is the final authority on hi res?

    I think based on the formats growth many have already made up their minds.

    And? That makes it what?

    You guys can sit behind and white paper yourself to death hanging on to an old, dated, and unsufficient format if you desire, but the audio world is leaving you behind. Good luck to all three, and time will whether your are correct, or I am.

    Oh, the multi channel hi res is here to stay, no arguments. You think it is stated otherwise? Or still confused about the discussions here?
    And, just because it is a hit in the market place, you think that makes it factual that hi res on its own is responsible for the sonic differences? Same old story for many, popularity makes it a fact. Such is human nature.
    mtrycrafts

  9. #359
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720

    LOST for WORDS? nt

    nt, nt nt
    mtrycrafts

  10. #360
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    never claimed to be one

    mtrycraft:" least of all in support of your claimed authority"

    i just said that i can HEAR! you consistently demonstrate that you cannot.
    ...regards...tr

  11. #361
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    mtrycraft:" least of all in support of your claimed authority"

    i just said that i can HEAR! you consistently demonstrate that you cannot.
    You can hear? What can you hear? What have you demonstrated to be able to hear, with respect to music? So far, lots of claims but lacking in substance.
    mtrycrafts

  12. #362
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    yes, i can hear

    [QUOTE=mtrycraft]You can hear? What can you hear? What have you demonstrated to be able to hear, with respect to music? So far, lots of claims but lacking in substance.[/QUOTE

    demonstrating it to you is low on my priority list whereas your demonstration of the lack of hearing ability is a constant here. what a buffoon you are.
    ...regards...tr

  13. #363
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    [QUOTE=hifitommy]
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    You can hear? What can you hear? What have you demonstrated to be able to hear, with respect to music? So far, lots of claims but lacking in substance.[/QUOTE

    demonstrating it to you is low on my priority list whereas your demonstration of the lack of hearing ability is a constant here. what a buffoon you are.
    HFT,
    There really is no point in arguing with Mtry. Remember, you are arguing with a person who uses white papers to judge the sound quality of a format. If a white paper doesn't confirm what you hear, you are just imagining it. If every audio engineer doesn't publish the DBT's they perform for their clients and make them available for HIM, they cannot be taken seriously. Chris, Mtry, and Thomas have alot to lean about the music industry, or they wouldn't be making the kind of asinine demands they do.

    Don't waste your time arguing with any of these gentlemen, you will be just going around in circles with them asking the same questions(even though you have already given the answers) and making the same demands over and over. Move on to something else.
    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

  14. #364
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Don't waste your time arguing with any of these gentlemen, you will be just going around in circles with them asking the same questions(even though you have already given the answers) and making the same demands over and over. Move on to something else.
    Kinda reminds me of the Simpsons episode when Bart and Lisa kept asking if they could have a pool over and over, until Homer finally relented and built a pool. It's as if spinning the same questions over and over somehow proves a point (not like asking questions and conjuring up inneuendo constitutes proof of anything).

    Then again, I find it amusing that Mtry derides making unsubstantiated claims, yet when caught in the act after inadvertently making an actual assertion (after that momentary lapse, seems that he's back in his element with voodoo and mythology analogies), all he can muster up is inneuendo when asked to provide the same level of backup that he demands of others.

  15. #365
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Since you are such an expert at reading, please, fill us in what is in that conference presentation.
    I was just lending a helping hand to those who ride in the short bus with figuring out the obvious. Since you apparently prefer to read about life rather than experience it, I'll let you have all the fun with the text.

    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Oh, you do have a nice setup. I guess my boomox may not do to bring over, right
    Bring it on. I would be utterly amazed to discover if there actually is anyone on this planet capable of counting their fingers and toes who cannot tell the difference between such and a high rez system.

    rw

  16. #366
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720

    "what a buffoon you are"

    [QUOTE=hifitommy]
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    You can hear? What can you hear? What have you demonstrated to be able to hear, with respect to music? So far, lots of claims but lacking in substance.[/QUOTE

    demonstrating it to you is low on my priority list whereas your demonstration of the lack of hearing ability is a constant here. what a buffoon you are.

    Showing off your intelligence, again?

    Demonstrating your hearing ability to anyone is a non even for you as it may embarrass you to no end. What else is new.
    mtrycrafts

  17. #367
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720

    There really is no point in arguing with Mtry. Remember, you are arguing with a person who uses white papers to judge the sound quality of a format.


    Yep, evidence is useless to you. Imaginations are what drive it.

    If a white paper doesn't confirm what you hear, you are just imagining it.

    If you cannot demonstrate what you claim, what else is there left but faulty perception or imagination?

    If every audio engineer doesn't publish the DBT's they perform for their clients and make them available for HIM,

    No, not to me, to everyone interested in audio. Simple, isn't it?

    Chris, Mtry, and Thomas have alot to lean about the music industry, or they wouldn't be making the kind of asinine demands they do.

    More useless spouting of nonsense. But it figures, evidence may destroy your beliefs; what a catastrophy.

    Don't waste your time arguing with any of these gentlemen,

    At least you don't resort to name calling, thanks.

    you will be just going around in circles with them asking the same questions(even though you have already given the answers)

    That is the problem no answers to be seen, just speculations.
    mtrycrafts

  18. #368
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    Kinda reminds me of the Simpsons episode when Bart and Lisa kept asking if they could have a pool over and over, until Homer finally relented and built a pool. It's as if spinning the same questions over and over somehow proves a point (not like asking questions and conjuring up inneuendo constitutes proof of anything).

    Then again, I find it amusing that Mtry derides making unsubstantiated claims, yet when caught in the act after inadvertently making an actual assertion (after that momentary lapse, seems that he's back in his element with voodoo and mythology analogies), all he can muster up is inneuendo when asked to provide the same level of backup that he demands of others.
    This is the way a person who picks and chooses what information is correct behaves. Only the evidence they offer up(or in his case not offer up) is valid. Though I must admit its awful novel to enjoy music with your eyes instead of your ears. I wonder if he walks on his hands, or drives with his feet? That would be consistant with the listening with eyes.

    What I think is funny is that he believes that audio engineers are hearing things when the record, mix, and master audio. We must be lucky when we do a good mix, because our hearing is so flawed we couldn't possibly do a good mix by skill and experience. For all that matter why did we graduate from the cassette deck or eight track player/recorder. Since there is no proven audible difference between these formats and CD that have been published, then the compact disc was nothing more than snake oil that the manufacturer sold us. Oh and damn, why didn't we stay with video tape. There hasn't been a published double blind test(we do watch video with our ears since our eyes are too busy listening) that support the fact that we are seeing improved pictures with DVD. Jeez, let's not forget about HDTV, how do we know they didn't just add controlled amounts of edge enhancement or sharpness to the HDTV picture so it subjectively looks better than the analog picture. There has to be DBT performed on every new audio or video improvement, or its all a marketing claim. I think the manufacturers of 2" tape recorders ought to go to hell for selling us a format that has no DBT done on it to compare it to redbook. I mean it is important that some scientist tells me what I am hearing.

    I personally believe that Mtry does DBT while driving. I mean if a ambulance was coming down the street with sirens blaring, statistics must be established that we are really hearing that siren. Absent the studies, how can we really be sure its the siren of a ambulance? A pedestrian crossing the sidewalk must be us seeing things, because absent of studies that cover our ears how can we REALLY be sure they are there?

    The acoustics of your room. How can we really be sure that our instruments are really picking up a resonance without a DBT? Our ears see the spectrum analyzer jumping all over the place, but can they REALLY be relied upon?

    Wooch, I have alot of work to do now. I think it is my job now to go out into the movie and audio industry, and tell them they have been doing this all wrong. No wonder the CD sounds so bad a majority of the time, they have been listening to them rather than looking at them. HUGE mistake. The film guys MUST learn that they have to listen to the film with their ears, the eyes cannot be relied on for detecting flaws. This is going to be tough, and I must get busy.
    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

  19. #369
    DMK
    DMK is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    No wonder the CD sounds so bad a majority of the time, they have been listening to them rather than looking at them. HUGE mistake. .
    Thanks for clearing up a 20+ year mystery!

  20. #370
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    No wonder the CD sounds so bad a majority of the time, they have been listening to them rather than looking at them. .
    Actually, CDs sound bad as many or most are so compressed that it hurts. But you knew that and stated it so, didn't you? So, what is the beef?
    As to the rest of your rhetoric, lame.
    mtrycrafts

  21. #371
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    236
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    What I think is funny is that he believes that audio engineers are hearing things when the record, mix, and master audio. We must be lucky when we do a good mix, because our hearing is so flawed we couldn't possibly do a good mix by skill and experience. For all that matter why did we graduate from the cassette deck or eight track player/recorder. Since there is no proven audible difference between these formats and CD that have been published, then the compact disc was nothing more than snake oil that the manufacturer sold us. Oh and damn, why didn't we stay with video tape. There hasn't been a published double blind test(we do watch video with our ears since our eyes are too busy listening) that support the fact that we are seeing improved pictures with DVD. Jeez, let's not forget about HDTV, how do we know they didn't just add controlled amounts of edge enhancement or sharpness to the HDTV picture so it subjectively looks better than the analog picture. There has to be DBT performed on every new audio or video improvement, or its all a marketing claim. I think the manufacturers of 2" tape recorders ought to go to hell for selling us a format that has no DBT done on it to compare it to redbook. I mean it is important that some scientist tells me what I am hearing.
    Poor coorelations - very poor. In situations where pre-established perceptual studies exist -- it is entirely predictable without a DBT. One exampe are the distortions(IMD and THD[1]), timing variation[2](stretched tape, old deck,e tc.) and signal:noise[3], etc. that are resultant on a cassette deck vs. CD in of your rediculous examples are well known and have been confirmed in prior perceptual testing in isoltated tests.

    [1] Just Detectable Distortion Levels, James Moir, Wireless World, February 1981

    [2] Pitch Perception of Frequency Modulated Tones, Kin, Maurycy J., Renowski, Janusz, AES preprint 4670, Convention 104(1998)

    [3] Signal-To-Noise Ratio Requirement for Digital Transmission Systems, Spikofski, Gerhard, AES preprint 2196, Convention 77(1985)

    You trying to correlate these things to something like RBCD vs. high-res audio bandwidth is dumbfounding. Weak. Yes--- as mtrycraft pointed out rightly so --- LAME. So far you have failed to substantiate any claims of the important issues that I can recollect in this discussion.

    -Chris
    Last edited by WmAx; 07-31-2004 at 07:57 PM.

  22. #372
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Wooch, I have alot of work to do now. I think it is my job now to go out into the movie and audio industry, and tell them they have been doing this all wrong. No wonder the CD sounds so bad a majority of the time, they have been listening to them rather than looking at them. HUGE mistake. The film guys MUST learn that they have to listen to the film with their ears, the eyes cannot be relied on for detecting flaws. This is going to be tough, and I must get busy.
    Hey T-

    Sorry to add to your workload, but you also need to school the industry on the Mtry/naysayer method. Y'know, offer up no answers or solutions, just keep asking questions and demanding proof. It's great because everybody in the industry would no longer need to take responsibility for or learn anything. If a client wants a project to meet certain parameters, just spin the questions, demands for proof, and voodoourbanmythalienabductionpsychic analogies over and over. If the client comes back and says that something sounds like crap, demand that the client to verify that claim by DBT or that they're imagining things. If someone actually addresses the questions and inneuendo, just repeat the questions over and over, even if they've already been answered. Doesn't matter if this approach offers up zero substance or applicability to actual practice, it's all about declaring victory by default. Actually asserting something would be a huge mistake, since it might entail having to listening to something.

    And if someone inadvertently makes a claim, they can just look at this thread and emulate the Mtry approach. Y'know, reply to an inquiry for evidence and proof (basically, the same thing thing demanded of others, but we'll let that slide for now) by offering up some absurdly tangental nonsense and hope that the inquirer will just laugh it off and give up. And if that approach fails, just ignore everything and go back to the original stream of inneuendo, mudslinging, and repetitive questions. I hope this helps your effort to reeducate the industry.

  23. #373
    ISCET CET, FCC CTT, USITT Dual-500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by mtrycraft
    Red book allows for 96 dB dynamic range. Nothing to deal with but the recording practices.
    Bullseye!!!!

    Let me add - "recording practices" = Engineering.

    Poor engineering = poor sound

    Good engineering = good sound.

    I see compression discussed so many times as an "evil" or negative side effect to the recording process.

    Far from the truth.

    Compression can be a positive attribute in virtually every case. It's simply the APPLICATION of the process of compression that somethimes could have been better.

    When dealing with recorded or LIVE sound, compression is used almost universally - not only to deal with shortcomings in the dynamic range of equipment but to add to the overall output.

    Want to hear uncompressed and reinforced live sound? Go to a beer bar or low end club and watch a local garage band playing through a Peavy PA mixing head - when operated properly, fair to good results can be obtained and when operated incorrectly (overloaded) the results are horrible sounding.

    Virtually any live reinforced musical "Event" will use a degree of compression somewhere in the overall mix - much the same as the boys in the studio. After all, a reinforcement sound system also has limitations and can be overloaded. Compression is what allows the vocals to cut through the music and not tear your head off.

    Compression is a tool and should be considered as an integral part of sound engineering. Any discussion of "Compression" should be a sub part of the larger topic of "Engineering".

    With ALL recorded sound and most live sound - what you hear is the as much a result of the engineer as the artist.

  24. #374
    Forum Regular lumiere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    43
    Musical Fidelity A3.2 Integrated Amp, VPI Scout turntable, JMW9 arm, Dynavector DV10x5 cartridge, Wright Sound WPP200C Phono Preamplifier, Marantz SA8001 SACD Player, Totem Arro Speakers

  25. #375
    Forum Regular hifitommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    sylmar, ca. in beautiful so cal earthquake country
    Posts
    1,442

    nice and succinct

    good work. no waste of verbiage.
    ...regards...tr

Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15 16 17 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Simple SACD question!
    By N. Abstentia in forum General Audio
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-01-2011, 03:10 PM
  2. SACD 2 Channel Output - I'm Confused...
    By Sammy EX in forum General Audio
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-18-2004, 02:07 PM
  3. 5.1 sacd analog compatibility?
    By Jottle in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-14-2004, 10:20 PM
  4. Question regarding SACD connections
    By Tyler in forum General Audio
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-29-2004, 05:03 PM
  5. sacd superior to rbcd
    By hifitommy in forum Digital Domain & Computer Audio
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-07-2003, 11:00 AM

Posting Permissions

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