PDA

View Full Version : Cassette's Not Dead, Apparently!



Pages : [1] 2

Beechwoods
06-05-2009, 18:53
I came across this article in the Telegraph trumpeting the resurgence of cassette. Some great comments from our friend David Price (HI-Fi World editor, and occasional contributor to this fine forum :))...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/5261963/Rewind-to-the-1980s-as-the-cassette-tape-makes-a-comeback.html


Internet search engine Yahoo has reported "a bump in searches" for 'blank cassette tapes' (up 210 per cent) and 'music cassette tapes' (up 110 per cent).

I'm sure that's not all down to me!


"There has been a resurgence, partly driven by the high-end music purists market and partly because of what you might call the 'silent majority' of people who still have a cassette player in their kitchen or their car," said David Price, editor of Hi-Fi World magazine.

'High-end music purists' eh? I like that :eyebrows:

The Grand Wazoo
06-05-2009, 18:56
There has been a resurgence, partly driven by the high-end music purists market and partly because of what you might call the 'silent majority' of people who still have a cassette player in their kitchen or their car," said David Price, editor of Hi-Fi World magazine

So................do the silent majority listen to blank cassettes?


.............sounds a bit boring to me. Still I guess when CD was released they told us to listen to the silent background.........maybe they're just taking that to it's logical conclusion!

Marco
06-05-2009, 18:59
High-end purists? Of course, Nicky-boy, I've always said that cassette done well is better than CD!! ;)

The problem is, not many people have heard it 'done well'...

And David has always been a man of some taste and discernment :cool:

Marco.

Spod
06-05-2009, 19:02
Ooh, I'm officially a member of the silent majority! Still use cassettes in the car occasionally - less fiddly than the mp3 player, never need recharging and in my rust-bucket sound quality doesn't really come into it!

Barry
06-05-2009, 19:23
So................do the silent majority listen to blank cassettes?


.............sounds a bit boring to me. Still I guess when CD was released they told us to listen to the silent background.........maybe they're just taking that to it's logical conclusion!

They're probably listening to John Cage's '4:33', or maybe to recordings of the sound of 'one hand clapping'.

Barry

Spectral Morn
06-05-2009, 19:32
Nice article...I still use tapes and I love putting compilations together, not that I have done this for awhile mind you.


Regards D S D L

DSJR
06-05-2009, 20:57
High-end purists? Of course, Nicky-boy, I've always said that cassette done well is better than CD!! ;)

The problem is, not many people have heard it 'done well'...

And David has always been a man of some taste and discernment :cool:

Marco.

Why thank you dear boy... Oh, wrong David....

Please define, "Cassette done well?" I think I've owned or sold many of the very best machines out there...

What I CAN tell you is that cassettes are noisy, unreliable and even well stored, anything but metal (type IV formulations) will lose treble output after a few plays and especially after a few decades in storage. Still got a box full as proof..

Give me a decent high-speed reel to reel, DAT and, better still, a decent CDR anyday (accepting that even some of those can be unreliable if you're unlucky).

niklasthedolphin
06-05-2009, 21:13
I am one of those with a lot of tapes well done and they beat the CD at any time on any CD player.
I also have R2R and sure they are unbeatable.

My tape decks have been playing faultless for decades.
Even my old tapes still remain bright and crisp after 100's of plays and noise floor is very low and only there as the compromise to bring that micro dynamics out of the closet that digital encoding can't.

Sorry to read about people who never understood how to record and treat tapes and what machines to go for to get the best out of them.

"dolph"

Marco
06-05-2009, 21:46
Goodness me, Dolph, for once we're in agreement - get out the flags! :lolsign: ;)

Dave, I'll come back to you later. I'm having a wee 'choon session' at the moment :)

Marco.

darth_vader
06-05-2009, 22:11
Just bought myself a nice sony sports walkman with original headphones still in the box for a tenner off ebay to play the suitcase full of cassette"s that i found in my loft,

Most of them date from the 80"s and they sound pretty good! a tiny bit of tape hiss in the background but enjoyable,

Not used my ipod for nearly a week now!!:)

Beechwoods
07-05-2009, 06:15
Give me a decent high-speed reel to reel, DAT and, better still, a decent CDR anyday (accepting that even some of those can be unreliable if you're unlucky).

Ooooh... don't get me started!

Agreed on the reel to reel point Dave, but in my experience both DAT and CDR are awful for longevity. DAT drops out badly over time, even if not played, and CDR has such reliability issues - I've lost umpteen CDR's from disc oxidisation.

I'm with Dolph on this. All my old tapes seem to be immune to the affects of time. I've played a reasonable number of 35 year old cassette's over the years and they've sounded great. I would have no hopes of DAT or CDR surviving that long in playable condition :)

Prince of Darkness
08-05-2009, 13:01
As an aside to this, the latest edition of Hi-Fi World has a feature, by David Price, celebrating the 30th anniversary of the launch of the Sony Walkman. Provides a fairly comprehensive history of these cassette portables and makes it clear what D P's views are on the matter of sonics.:)
"Properly set up, the top Sonys were second to only high end open reel and vinyl sonically, delivering a body blow to any digital sources. Those who dismiss them don't know what they're missing"

darth_vader
08-05-2009, 19:23
Might have to wire the sony sports up to my main system then!

See if it can keep up with my modded 1210:)

Ive got a couple of hours free tomorrow and the mrs is out......

DSJR
08-05-2009, 19:36
How old are you guys?

The Walkman fluttered terribly when used on batteries and even the 'Pro version so beloved of the "in crowd," had terminal flutter on battery power (sold a few and they were all the same.) The performance was only about baby Nak quality as well - the three head Naks clearly outperforming it. Try recording an oboe at the beginning of a tape on many of these machines and listen to the "tearing" quality the timbre acquires.

I have CDR's going back around 15 years so far and don't have any failures as yet. All my cassettes not recorded on metal tape have Dolby B mistracking errors - Ah:doh: I've just realised that you purists didn't use Dolby, so if the treble gets shaved off it won't be as noticeable :ner:...... But what about the hiss I ask? Well, if you don't think vinyl has a problem, then a noisy cassette won't be too much of a problem I suppose :lolsign::smoking::cool:

Barry
10-05-2009, 20:35
TDK metal tape with die cast aluminium housing, Type MA-R

Following the thread on a reported re-interest in cassette recording, does anybody know of a source of the following?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/3012935240_c93bf96899.jpg?v=0

These are cassettes of TDK MA metal tape housed in a cast-aluminium body. These tapes run more smoothly than versions using the conventional housing, and are thus very good for copying piano, where the slightest trace of wow and flutter can be intrusive. Recordings I have made of piano concertos using this tape are indistinguishable from the source CD.

My Nakamichi cassette recorders are specifically biased for TDK metal tape, so I am looking for a source of these tapes – the MA-R version is the ideal.

I suspect that this might be a fruitless enquiry; I imagine now that TDK stopped making tape, anybody knowing of any sources will be keeping that information to themselves. One can but try and appeal to the tape enthusiasts out there.

Regards
Barry

Alex Nikitin
10-05-2009, 21:46
Well, if you don't think vinyl has a problem, then a noisy cassette won't be too much of a problem I suppose :lolsign::smoking::cool:

Here is a fragment (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/temp1/HD8_fragment.zip) from a recording, made in 1964, digitized (without any processing) in 24 bit 88.2 kHz from a cassette tape recorded in 1989 - I've got it from ebay for a fiver. The file is 60 Mb zipped (2 min long).

44.1 kHz 16 bit - "CD quality" is simply not good enough compared with a quality cassette recording. 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz 24 bit is required.

Alex

Spectral Morn
10-05-2009, 21:59
TDK metal tape with die cast aluminium housing, Type MA-R

Following the thread on a reported re-interest in cassette recording, does anybody know of a source of the following?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/3012935240_c93bf96899.jpg?v=0

These are cassettes of TDK MA metal tape housed in a cast-aluminium body. These tapes run more smoothly than versions using the conventional housing, and are thus very good for copying piano, where the slightest trace of wow and flutter can be intrusive. Recordings I have made of piano concertos using this tape are indistinguishable from the source CD.

My Nakamichi cassette recorders are specifically biased for TDK metal tape, so I am looking for a source of these tapes – the MA-R version is the ideal.

I suspect that this might be a fruitless enquiry; I imagine now that TDK stopped making tape, anybody knowing of any sources will be keeping that information to themselves. One can but try and appeal to the tape enthusiasts out there.

Regards
Barry

These are the holy grail of tapes and thus are now big money on flea bay. If you find a supply you can let Nick and myself know, and we can share the booty ;) or not as the case may be. Seriously I now regret not buying more of these when I had the chance. A number of years ago a local Top tape dealer (remember those)..decided to retire, he ran a record/cd shop as well I dare say he had loads of these and similar for sale, oh to have a time machine. Only a couple of years ago :(:(:(

TDK and all still making tapes as far as I know(someone correct me if I am wrong) stopped making anything like this quite a few years ago. Blank Cd and Mini Disc was the replacement (now these are vanishing to as quality items. Cheap and cheerful now the norm or so it seems). I was able to buy some packs of TDK SA90 made in Japan a few years ago in a record shop in Dundee, but they didn't have any when I went back last year....only ferric. I bought 4 packs of 5. Hind sight is a wonderful thing.


Regards D S D L

Marco
11-05-2009, 10:56
Here is a fragment (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/temp1/HD8_fragment.zip) from a recording, made in 1964, digitized (without any processing) in 24 bit 88.2 kHz from a cassette tape recorded in 1989 - I've got it from ebay for a fiver. The file is 60 Mb zipped (2 min long).

44.1 kHz 16 bit - "CD quality" is simply not good enough compared with a quality cassette recording. 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz 24 bit is required.


Hi Alex,

Apart from your link not working for me (so, sorry, can't listen to the fragment), I'm with you 100% and am in no doubt whatsoever that cassette done well completely outperforms CD done well, much as does vinyl with the latter. Basically, analogue (tape or vinyl) done well is invariably superior to most of what digital has to offer. After all, that's why master tape exists...

Quite simply, analogue is the format which offers the more faithful carrier of music for human ears (not measurement apparatus). I'd rather suffer a few clicks and pops and a little tape hiss than listen to 'crystal clear' music which has been mangled in its transfer to CD.

Dave,

You need to get those 'ol cloth lugs of yours syringed some day soon! :ner: :eyebrows:

Nice tapes, btw. I use those sometimes with my CR-7.

Marco.

P.S Oh, and I'm 43.

niklasthedolphin
11-05-2009, 11:01
I don't think many, if anybody, will disagree with me in the statement that "no matter how we combine gear for listening, it will end up as a compromise".

As is it with the choise between CD or Cassette / digital or analog.
Both choises are compromising.

In general:
The Achilles' heel og analog is noise and hiss.
The Achilles' heel of digital is lack of microdynamic, details and definition of room in the material.

With hiss on tapes you can try to eliminate it as much as possible with a good tape and good machine and craftmanship in the recording procedure.

If you choose to use double ended noise reduction such as Dolby B, C, S, dbx I, II or High Com etc., you will get the same Achilles' heel as in digital encoding; lack of details and microdetails.

These problems will also show up if saturating tape close to the limit.

One trick of great recordings is to saturate close to 0 to +3dB in the peaks measured after eq. on all tapes after as many skilled allignments as possible.
This is a far lower recording saturation than most people will use and recommend.
Some people are surprised of the low level but at the same time surprised about richness, details, dynamics and other positive qualities in my recordings.

If best there will have been done Eq and Rec Level (for each speed if more than one), for each channel and for PB and Recording seperately and Bias (for each speed if more than one) and for each channel and adjustment of azimuth on recording head as well.

Even in the recording procedure there are lots of compromises but it is possible to end up with a sound on a cassette deck on a good tape unbeatable by any CD player in existense present or historical.

HX-pro, Dyneq, Actilinear recording, DNL, dbx 929 and similar single ended NR systems, headroom expanders and other patented technologies are welcomining the greatnes of sound.

Thing is that so very few people ever had the chance to listen to a good cassette machine and even fewer had the chance to listen to a recording made by someone who knew what he was dealing with on this same great cassette machine.

Only a handful or two of brands and specific models of cassette machines qualify for being great.
The rest was merely mediocre or entry level machines.
In the latter case, I'm not surprised that people prefer CD.

"dolph"

Barry
11-05-2009, 11:04
These are the holy grail of tapes and thus are now big money on flea bay. If you find a supply you can let Nick and myself know, and we can share the booty ;) or not as the case may be. Seriously I now regret not buying more of these when I had the chance. A number of years ago a local Top tape dealer (remember those)..decided to retire, he ran a record/cd shop as well I dare say he had loads of these and similar for sale, oh to have a time machine. Only a couple of years ago :(:(:(

TDK and all still making tapes as far as I know(someone correct me if I am wrong) stopped making anything like this quite a few years ago. Blank Cd and Mini Disc was the replacement (now these are vanishing to as quality items. Cheap and cheerful now the norm or so it seems). I was able to buy some packs of TDK SA90 made in Japan a few years ago in a record shop in Dundee, but they didn't have any when I went back last year....only ferric. I bought 4 packs of 5. Hind sight is a wonderful thing.


Regards D S D L

I think the TDK MA-R cassettes cost about £4 each, when I bought a few of them back in the early eighties. Later, I passed up on the opportunity to buy a 10- or a 12- pack of these tapes for about £50; money was short for me in those days!:doh:

For a long time now I have been happy to use TDK FE as a replacement for TDK AR. This is a ferric tape and is/was very cheap: a pack of 5 C90s costing less than £4. I bought loads to to make recordings/compilations for the car, as well as making (illegal) copies of stuff I had borrowed from friends or from the library. I'm starting to run out now and am not sure if it is still available. HMV and Maplins used to sell it. If I can't get any more I'll have to reuse some of the 200 cassettes that I have - there must be some old recordings that I won't be playing any more.

Ah yes - if only we had a time machine, not only would we all be buying up Thorens, Garrard, Decca, Leak and Radford gear; but I for one would go back to 1920's Chicago, armed with a Nagra and some good microphones to make some decent recordings of King Oliver's Creole Jazz Band. There's probably some cosmic principle which would prevent such a thing happening, but it doesn't seem to stop the Doctor.

Oh well, if I can't get any more casssette tape, then it's down to the Nagra. I have about a dozen metal-spooled Ferrograph 'Pyral' tapes to use - I'm sure Nick would approve.

Regards
Barry

Marco
11-05-2009, 11:14
Thing is that so very few people ever had the chance to listen to a good cassette machine and even fewer had the chance to listen to a recording made by someone who knew what he was dealing with on this same great cassette machine.

Only a handful or two of brands and specific models of cassette machines qualify for being great.
The rest was merely mediocre or entry level machines.
In the latter case, I'm not surprised that people prefer CD.


Nicely written, Dolph. That's it in a nutshell, particularly the last bit! :)

Marco.

Beechwoods
11-05-2009, 19:42
Here is a fragment (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/temp1/HD8_fragment.zip) from a recording, made in 1964, digitized (without any processing) in 24 bit 88.2 kHz from a cassette tape recorded in 1989 - I've got it from ebay for a fiver. The file is 60 Mb zipped (2 min long).

44.1 kHz 16 bit - "CD quality" is simply not good enough compared with a quality cassette recording. 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz 24 bit is required.

Alex

That is a fantastic transfer, Alex. It destroys the idea that cassette is necessarily a noisy medium. Can you say something about what you used to play the tape back on? Did you use Dolby NR on playback - if so, it was very well matched to the recording - no signs of the dynamics or top end being affected by any NR mis-alignment.

I'm very impressed.

:youtheman: :youtheman: ;)

Marco
11-05-2009, 20:09
I've got it now... I had to click on 'Save', rather than 'Open' when downloading the requested file. When I clicked before on 'Open', my comp just 'hung' and went nowhere...

Impressive, undoubtedly, but what a large file to save and store on my hard-drive - it took about 3 minutes to download! ;)

Did you have to do the same thing, Beechy?

Marco.

Alex Nikitin
11-05-2009, 20:09
That is a fantastic transfer, Alex. It destroys the idea that cassette is necessarily a noisy medium. Can you say something about what you used to play the tape back on? Did you use Dolby NR on playback - if so, it was very well matched to the recording - no signs of the dynamics or top end being affected by any NR mis-alignment.

I'm very impressed.

:youtheman: :youtheman: ;)

Thank you!

The playback deck was well serviced, aligned and slightly modified Technics RS-M85 (like this one (http://www.thevintageknob.org/TECHNICS/RSM85/RSM85.html)) :smoking: , Dolby NR was not used, EQ - 120us, recorded directly into my (again modified ;) ) RME DIGI 96/8 PAD .

Alex

Beechwoods
11-05-2009, 20:32
Blimey! I'm even more impressed now! Thanks Alex :)

That looks like a very nice deck too. What kind of mods did you do? Something similar to your phono stages?

Beechwoods
11-05-2009, 20:34
Did you have to do the same thing, Beechy?

Marco - I've got a Mac, so it knows intuitively what I want to do and gets on with it without bothering me :) I just clicked it and it started to download ;)

Big files = Patience = Quality :eyebrows:

DSJR
11-05-2009, 20:48
Hi Alex,

Apart from your link not working for me (so, sorry, can't listen to the fragment), I'm with you 100% and am in no doubt whatsoever that cassette done well completely outperforms CD done well, much as does vinyl with the latter. Basically, analogue (tape or vinyl) done well is invariably superior to most of what digital has to offer. After all, that's why master tape exists...

Quite simply, analogue is the format which offers the more faithful carrier of music for human ears (not measurement apparatus). I'd rather suffer a few clicks and pops and a little tape hiss than listen to 'crystal clear' music which has been mangled in its transfer to CD.

Dave,

You need to get those 'ol cloth lugs of yours syringed some day soon! :ner: :eyebrows:

Nice tapes, btw. I use those sometimes with my CR-7.

Marco.

P.S Oh, and I'm 43.

You two talk the most amazing bollix I've ever read :lolsign:

If the music has been mangled in transfer to CD, then it's the mastering engineer's fault. I've heard it, before and after, using real live analogue master tapes! you haven't, obviously :ner: In no way does vinyl come anywhere near the fidelity of the master-tape, even on a proper turntable, although the best ones (if not refining all the energy out in the process of £refining) do a great job, the limiting bits being the sh*tty black plastic played (most of the time) on them. This isn't "just" an opinion Marco, I have had and still have good friends on the pro/mastering side who actually had ears and LISTENED....... Perhaps your speakers or stands (I hate the Mana things I believe you use, having heard similar anihilate some equally big ATC's once or twice) remove all the bass, so you need an SPU or M3D to attempt to put it back........:eyebrows: No wonder CD diesn't sound any good in your system (oh what's the point............................ :()

TDK MA's were very good indeed and do retain most of what was originally recorded on them, but your NAK will alter the azimuth from beginning to end of the tape, mine did a bit (better than the CR4 I had before) - ALL those mechs did to a degree (heard myself and confirmed by a Nakamichi engineer). Try playing back a tape done on a CR7 on a different make of machine and you'll find all sorts of errors. This was sorted by Dolby S, where I understand a Dragon was used as a reference for frequency response accuracy from maker to maker, but by then it was too late.......................................

Alex Nikitin
11-05-2009, 20:48
Blimey! I'm even more impressed now! Thanks Alex :)

That looks like a very nice deck too. What kind of mods did you do? Something similar to your phono stages?

A little bit of that ;) . However I am working on a full playback amp based on my phono stage circuit. It should be very interesting, extremely low noise and good sound. RS-M85 is a very good deck. I now have 3 of these - one will be modified for making alignment tapes and another one will be used as a base for a modified electronics tests and general playback duties.

Alex

Marco
11-05-2009, 20:53
Dave,


Perhaps your speakers or stands (I hate the Mana things I believe you use, having heard similar anihilate some equally big ATC's once or twice) remove all the bass, so you need an SPU or M3D to attempt to put it back........


LOL! That's so far off the mark it's beyond funny :lol:

You are *SO* going to cry into your soup when you hear my system after spouting that nonsense!! :eyebrows:


No wonder CD diesn't sound any good in your system (oh what's the point............................ )


Who said CD doesn't sound good on my system? It sounds excellent - it's just that the Techy (with M3D or 103SA) sounds even more, erm, excellent!

I'll come back and deal with the rest of your "bollix" later, shweety ;)

Marco.

P.S Have you listened to Alex's recording?

Spectral Morn
11-05-2009, 21:18
:popcorn: :popcorn:

:laser: :punch: :dynamite: Ladies and Gentleman....BIG FIGHT, :lol::lolsign:



Regards D S D L

PS I have wanted an excuse to use the above Gif's....;):)

DSJR
12-05-2009, 09:40
Oh to be free........:lol:

Dave Cawley
12-05-2009, 17:29
.
Inspired by this thread I looked out my Sony TCK81 that I bought new only to record NOAA9 Satellite Telemetry. :kiss:

http://www.soundhifi.com/tck81.jpg

So the quest is, what blank tapes do I buy from eBay?

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Beechwoods
12-05-2009, 18:58
Don't forget, folks, that Richer Sounds still sell TDK-SA 90 tapes with a web-price of £1.50 per tape with free delivery, if I remember correctly. For general use SA's are good value. I also have a few Maxell XLII-S unused from the early 90's. And TDK-SAX 60's are available on eBay for around £3 each. I a bit pricey, but OK for a try out.

I recently got hold of a few more unusual tapes which I'm planning on trying out in more 'controlled' comparisons. Some Maxell XL-I 90's, extremely well regarded Type I tapes, 'super-ferric' type formulation, cobalt coated apparently. Near-type Type IV performance on a good Nak I'm told. I've not verified this yet, but am looking forward to :) Also some Sony US-X Turbo Type II tapes, well regarded for their shell construction. And some BASF Maxima Type IV's. And some Maxell UR 90's, which I'm looking forward to trying. I guess my point is to look beyond the obvious ones, particularly if your machine has tune-able bias and eq. Buy individual tapes and try them out in your machine. See how they work for you.

Dave Cawley
14-05-2009, 08:05
Well, there I was thinking how lucky I was to still have a cassette deck. David Painter in June 2009 Hi Fi World says that although Noel Keywood said the Nackamichi CR7E was "the best of all" that "the Sony TCK-81 would give it a run for its money" :kiss:

But the TCK-81 doesn't have a direct drive motor. Worse than that I just bought a Technics RS-B965 that Alex isn't too fond of.......

http://www.soundhifi.com/965.jpg

So guys, what are the best cassette decks ever and why?

Regards

:bag:

Dave

niklasthedolphin
14-05-2009, 09:37
Easy.

Tandberg TCD 910/911

"dolph"

Marco
14-05-2009, 09:47
You missed out the "why", Dolph :)

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
14-05-2009, 10:07
Because it made me sell Nakamichi Dragon, CR7, ZX-9, ZX-1000, Revox B710/215 and all the other crap. (Oooops....kept a Revox for fun)
Because no other Cassette makes it possible to allign this precise for different tape formulations.
Because the sound of recordings and playback is the best.
Because it makes it possible to adjust recording input in analog peak reading after eq.
Because Dyneq and Actilinear recording beats the other NR and Headroom expanders (doesn't beat - just equals the real HX-Pro - not to mix up with the consumer crap Dolby HX).
Because you don't have the compatibility issues as you do with Nakamichi machines that stupidly tried to set own cassette head gap and Eq curve standards. What a faillure............
Because you have manual Rec head azimuth on the fly. And Azimuth of PB is protected to only being available with tools on the 910. Why fuzz around with PB Azimuth on a recording machine.
Azimuth on PB head is on a surface button and on the fly on TCD 911. (Only PB machine)
Because the functions are pro lined up.
Because the grap and release function is eliminating most irregularities in bad precision of the cassette shell and it's running gear.
Because dual capstan close loop with belt drive just makes everything sound better and W/F is NOT an audible issue at all as well as drive train noise from DD is gone.

I could continue almost forever but all of it is just STUPID ANSWERS because it's so obvious.

"dolph"

Marco
14-05-2009, 10:13
It's only "obvious" if you've had the experience. Thanks for the info - most interesting.

Marco.

Alex Nikitin
14-05-2009, 11:14
Out of my 32 decks (including 4 Naks, thought not the top ones) I personally like Aiwa XK-S7000 best (and my guess is XK-S9000 should be even better) for both recording and playback, and Technics RS-M85 for playback duties. BTW, it is a myth about Nakamichi EQ - Naks were actually just following the standard properly, unlike many other manufacturers, and I have measurements to prove it. Many Japanese makes, including top Sony decks, Kenwood and others in the 80th, deliberately rolled off high frequencies in PB EQ by 2-4 dB, compensating in the recording EQ and gaining some S/N ratio this way. Nakamichi, Hitachi, Aiwa usually were very close to the standard PB EQ.

Alex

DSJR
14-05-2009, 20:37
Denon's three head machines (OK, I know they're not quite in the top end of cassette machines) had a playback rise to 14KHz, after which they plummeted. Great for playing back old tired tapes and for "showroom appeal," but play back a Denon recorded cassette on a Nak and the result was awful.

I'm glad someone else said about the NAK playback curve. if it was so far out then Dolby wouldn't have used a Dragon playback eq as a reference for Dolby S, which, for the first time, gave decent noise reduction with the minimum of insertion loss (IMO) and consistancy from maker to maker.

niklasthedolphin
14-05-2009, 21:05
Double ended Noise reduction system are killing any attemp of making great recordings.
That includes Dolby B, C, S, High Com, dbx I & II etc.

"dolph"

Alex Nikitin
17-05-2009, 13:00
I hope this is of some interest - here (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Graphs/FR/album/index.html) are recording-playback frequency response graphs for 7 of my cassette decks.

Few notes:

Scaling on the left is set by the computer sound card input and levels are different for different decks, depending on their output level. However all graphs are explained in the legend on the right hand side. "0dB" graph is for Dolby level, the rest are relative to that. I've used SONY UX-Pro C-90 Type 2 cassette and graphs were made using AudioTester (http://www.audiotester.de/) software, calibrated with an external generator and RMS meter. Graph were taken after decks were serviced and aligned.

Alex

Giant Haystacks
19-05-2009, 01:38
i have good car audio the nakamichi mobile dragon cassette .i also have nakamichi top mobile transport and dac and it just cant competewith the tape
but the metal tapes are terrible bad value for money now

Barry
20-05-2009, 16:29
I hope this is of some interest - here (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Graphs/FR/album/index.html) are recording-playback frequency response graphs for 7 of my cassette decks.

Few notes:

Scaling on the left is set by the computer sound card input and levels are different for different decks, depending on their output level. However all graphs are explained in the legend on the right hand side. "0dB" graph is for Dolby level, the rest are relative to that. I've used SONY UX-Pro C-90 Type 2 cassette and graphs were made using AudioTester (http://www.audiotester.de/) software, calibrated with an external generator and RMS meter. Graph were taken after decks were serviced and aligned.

Alex

Not sure if this is related to the equalisation that Nakamichi use, but for years I have never been happy with the sound of pre-recorded cassettes; always preferring to make my own. Out of over 200 cassettes I have made, only 4 are pre-recorded. The only machine on which they sounded good was the Nakamichi. When I had the bias on my Nak adjusted for TDK metal tape, I mentioned my findings to the man at Bowers and Wilkins, who did/do the servicing for Nakamichi. He replied that this was because it was only Nakamichi and a couple of other manufacturers (I can't remember their names) who had stuck rigorously to the original equalisation specification written by Phillips.

Regarding your measured response curves, the nearest machine that corresponds to my Naks is the BX300E. It's gratifying to see that the response is flat to +/-1dB from 20Hz to 7kHz.

Regards
Barry

Alex Nikitin
25-05-2009, 11:50
Another set of measurements - now it is the distortion of the tape v level (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Graphs/Distortion/album/index.html) at 315 Hz for 26 different cassettes. The behaviour of the distortion curve - both in the low level area and in the saturation - is extremely interesting.

I also added 3 more decks to the frequency responses page (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Graphs/FR/album/index.html).

Alex

Giant Haystacks
25-05-2009, 22:53
all this frensied discussion on cassette is disturbing my service on one of my spare mobile dragon, nakamichi td1200mk2 ,a change of 2 belts should be enough , this machine has automatic azimuth correction anyway,
does anyone know of a tereffic audio tape sight based in australlia i think i found it once and never since .
also i have to come out and admit my guilt i have been hoarding hard out at metal audio cassettes 6 years , so just by chance if someone has a set of pinch rollers for a nakamichi 1000 tri tracer there could be a useful trade aranged
they are very small and i am having trouble finding a set

ronjakcs65
29-05-2009, 12:16
Hi Neil.
Regarding youre post about tdk sa90 cassettes,Richer sounds stock them £0.74p
Each.Made in Taiwan i believe I have about fifty tapes never had a problemwith them,
get stocked up, All the best
ron. s

Spectral Morn
29-05-2009, 15:37
Hi Neil.
Regarding youre post about tdk sa90 cassettes,Richer sounds stock them £0.74p
Each.Made in Taiwan i believe I have about fifty tapes never had a problemwith them,
get stocked up, All the best
ron. s


Thanks....:)



Regards D S D L

Beechwoods
29-05-2009, 16:26
50p if you buy from their online store or quote the online price in their shops. And free delivery.

Dave Cawley
31-05-2009, 18:41
When is Metal not Metal?

http://www.soundhifi.com/b215.jpg

On Alex's advice :kiss: I picked up the rather nice Revox B-215 on Saturday. It came with a TDK tape that said Metal Position, but not that is was actually Metal tape?

Is the very best Metal tape better than say the Sony UX Pro ? And if so in what ways?

Thanks

:bag:

Dave

Beechwoods
31-05-2009, 18:59
Funnily enough I just bought 5 UX-Pro 90's today... I'm looking forward to trying them out versus the other tapes I've got so I can only go by what I've read, and that is that UX-Pro is up there with early 90's TDK SA-X. Of course different tapes perform differently in different decks. You should try your own tests. On the question of 'Metal Position' versus 'Metal Tape', unless used in reference to pre-recorded tapes where metal tape would be used but eq'd for normal bias playback, I think the terms are used interchangeably.

Dave Cawley
31-05-2009, 20:12
Well, you can make metal tape and it's made of metal. :kiss:

Or you can take a non-metal formula and make it bias compatible with metal, but it isn't metal at all, just a marketing trick. 40 years ago I designed early tape heads for a living, but have forgotten all of it.

The question is, is real metal better, and why?

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Giant Haystacks
11-06-2009, 10:15
maybe some of art of sound users interested should take a look on e bay
thats mrx pro 90 minutes metals 10 of 30 pounds at moment and finishing at 12.25 am today short notice unfortunately

Alex Nikitin
11-06-2009, 11:57
maybe some of art of sound users interested should take a look on e bay
thats mrx pro 90 minutes metals 10 of 30 pounds at moment and finishing at 12.25 am today short notice unfortunately

Thank you! ;)

Alex

DSJR
11-06-2009, 16:05
As I remember, "Metal" type IV formulations needed lots of energy to get the signal imprinted on them, but conversely, it took a lot of abuse to shave the signal off, thereby hopefully retaining high frequencies longer. The headroom could be phenominal too.

There were downsides though. Head wear could be an issue with cheaper "permalloy" head types and there was slightly more hiss as well, losing some of the headroom advantage.

RobHolt
12-06-2009, 00:14
As I remember, "Metal" type IV formulations needed lots of energy to get the signal imprinted on them, but conversely, it took a lot of abuse to shave the signal off, thereby hopefully retaining high frequencies longer. The headroom could be phenominal too.

There were downsides though. Head wear could be an issue with cheaper "permalloy" head types and there was slightly more hiss as well, losing some of the headroom advantage.

The problem with many Metal capable machines was head and electronics saturation. The additional bias current required would saturate the head, as would the tendency to push the recording levels up in order to exploit the theoretical additional dynamic range of metal tape.
Most budget and mid priced decks were only nominally 'metal capable' - they could give you a flat frequency response from metal tape but couldn't exploit the full potential because they couldn't get enough level onto the tape. A handful of machines worked very well with metal. The Naks of course, plus the big Revox and Teac machines, and JVC made some very good high end machines in the early days.

I still have a JVC DD9, a massively built three motor, direct drive machine that auto calibrates it's internal circuits for individual tape samples.

Rob.

Alex Nikitin
13-06-2009, 11:45
I've bought more than 40 different cassette decks and a couple of Walkmans over the last year, however I consider my recent purchase a real "score". There is a story behind it. In the autumn of 1986 my father visited Japan for one of his books presentation. He was invited by Masaru Ibuka himself - one of the SONY founders. He had a great time there, brought back lots of photos (I still have somewhere a photo of him together with Mr. Ibuka) and quite a few gadgets, including a solar-powered wrist watches for me and my brother (I still have it on my wrist now) and a "Super-Walkman" - recording WM-R202. I've used this amazing machine for a number of years however at a moment of need I had to sell it and thought that I would never see this model again. I was wrong. A chance ebay auction and this morning I've receved a small package in the post. It looks almost new, it works fine, it sounds great - just as I remember it. It has auto-reverse for both playback and recording, microphone input, Dolby B for playback... . And all of this in the size just a bit larger than a cassette case.

Here is a small album of photos (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Photos/SONY/WMR202/album/index.html). And I am again a happy owner of WM-R202 !

:champagne:

Alex

P.S. - and if you think it is just a toy, download this file (http://www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Sony/WM_R202/blues01.zip) (zipped WAV, 96 kHz 24 bit, 41 Mb) - 1 min of a jazz from a prerecorded tape played on this little thing. It needs some service after 22 years, however even "as is" it is quite impressive, IMHO.

Beechwoods
13-06-2009, 16:37
A lovely looking machine Alex. I'll check out your sample later when I get the chance...

Giant Haystacks
14-06-2009, 09:13
that is so interesting alex the piece of hifi history ,
and your portable is also facanating to me also,
i hope you got the thats metals i saw that they were going very cheap and i did not want to hoard any more ,
on the history scene iin my place of work i sometimes speak to the grandson of marconi,it is so interesting to hear facts we were speaking about the westinghouse factory in canada which was marconi and also there close links with the rca victor factory in canada which they sourced a lot of valves off ,
i have an old nakamichi 250 cassette -pre amp which is 12 volt it was ment as the first high quality car audio and would have been mounted on the tunnel of the older style cars ,there was a more famous news reporter machine called a 550

Alex Nikitin
14-06-2009, 16:37
i hope you got the thats metals i saw that they were going very cheap and i did not want to hoard any more ,
on the history scene iin my place of work i sometimes speak to the grandson of marconi,it is so interesting to hear facts we were speaking about the westinghouse factory in canada which was marconi and also there close links with the rca victor factory in canada which they sourced a lot of valves off ,
i have an old nakamichi 250 cassette -pre amp which is 12 volt it was ment as the first high quality car audio and would have been mounted on the tunnel of the older style cars ,there was a more famous news reporter machine called a 550

Thank you for the metal tapes - I've got these for a very good price.

About old Naks - 550 was a portable version of 500 and I have Nak 500 in my collection, also Goodmans CD100 which is a clone of Nak 500. It is a very nice machine!

Alex

Beechwoods
14-06-2009, 21:03
That was a lovely sample Alex. Nice machine!

Beechwoods
16-06-2009, 22:06
Since Alex has been so brave as to share some of his transfers, here are a couple of mine:

1: Aiwa AD-F450, manual azimuth adjustment, playback of a band demo cassette bought on eBay (the tape was a limited run sent to gig promoters). No Dolby. Recorded to Tascam DA-20 MkII DAT, then transferred to WAV on my G5 Mac via a Sony SDT-9000 SCSI DAT drive with audio enabled firmware. WAV to FLAC with xACT. No tweakery performed.

sample1 (http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/cassette_transfers/takingrefuge_sample.zip) 16 bit 48khz FLAC file, 35 Mb.

I had this deck for years, from about 1998 to 2007. It wasn't particularly special but the transfers I did on it really stand up, IMO...

2. Nakamichi ZX-7, playback of a TDK D60 tape recorded in 1990 on my then 6 year old Sony deck - can't remember the model. The recording was off Radio 2's 'Folk On Two', through an early 70's Heathkit tuner my dad made, with a decent external FM aerial. No Dolby on playback. Recorded to WAV on a Tascam HD-P2 compact flash recorder, WAV to FLAC with xACT. No tweakery :)

sample2 (http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/cassette_transfers/carthy_swarbrick_r2_sample.zip) 24 bit 48khz FLAC file, 64 Mb.

The deck I had back in 1990 was a mid-range component piece from around 1984. I used it to death! The door fell off... what can I say! I remember recording this tape. It came out really nicely, and is one I'm really proud of, given it's humble TDK D origins. Playback on my Nak was done without any azimuth messing about. No Dolby though. Dolby alignment across decks is a complete pain in the ass :)

This is what the tape looks like...

http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/cassette_transfers/Tape_SideA.jpg

tfarney
18-06-2009, 00:22
If I had just come across this thread, without knowing this place, I would have thought it was satire.

Cassette is superior to well-done CD?

The prevailing belief system of the most vocal participants here is based in...I'm not even sure how to put it or where to start, but it has nothing to do with reality, and disagreement only causes reality, measurement, science, engineering, and the hearing and experiences of those who disagree to be questioned, without, of course any substantive arguments, much less evidence, against them.

Dave, you're wasting your breath. It was nice to see you guys, but really, there's not much point in participating here if you don't practice the religion.

Tim

Alex Nikitin
18-06-2009, 01:06
Hi Tim,


Cassette is superior to well-done CD?

Well-done cassette is certainly superior to a well-done CD. Obviously, there are plenty of crappy recordings in both formats.


The prevailing belief system of the most vocal participants here is based in...I'm not even sure how to put it or where to start, but it has nothing to do with reality, and disagreement only causes reality, measurement, science, engineering, and the hearing and experiences of those who disagree to be questioned, without, of course any substantive arguments, much less evidence, against them.

Dave, you're wasting your breath. It was nice to see you guys, but really, there's not much point in participating here if you don't practice the religion.

Tim

There is nothing religious about it. Top quality cassette recording is at least as good as a good 7.5 ips reel-to-reel, if not better. CD is only good on paper, in reality the distortion of a good cassette tape is better than the distortion of CD-format (16 bit 44.1 kHz) for levels below -30 dB (from maximum) in midrange. The only real disadvantage of the tape is noise and I can live with it. On a good cassette a dynamic range over 65 dB is possible without noise reduction and it is not much worse than DR of a good vinyl recording. I can easily tell from a pre-recorded cassette if it was digitally processed or recorded from a CD, compared with a fully analogue recording. CD is just not good enough for a quality sound. To better a good quality cassette you need to go hi-res, 24 bit 96 kHz.

Alex

tfarney
18-06-2009, 03:47
Hi Tim,



Well-done cassette is certainly superior to a well-done CD. Obviously, there are plenty of crappy recordings in both formats.



There is nothing religious about it. Top quality cassette recording is at least as good as a good 7.5 ips reel-to-reel, if not better. CD is only good on paper, in reality the distortion of a good cassette tape is better than the distortion of CD-format (16 bit 44.1 kHz) for levels below -30 dB (from maximum) in midrange. The only real disadvantage of the tape is noise and I can live with it. On a good cassette a dynamic range over 65 dB is possible without noise reduction and it is not much worse than DR of a good vinyl recording. I can easily tell from a pre-recorded cassette if it was digitally processed or recorded from a CD, compared with a fully analogue recording. CD is just not good enough for a quality sound. To better a good quality cassette you need to go hi-res, 24 bit 96 kHz.

Alex

Do you have any data to back that up or is all of it just your subjective observations? If the latter, I have good ears, have owned some very good cassette decks, and we can agree to disagree. If you are claiming the cassette is superior by any measure other than your personal opinion, I'd love to see the numbers.

By the way, I've owned some very good reel-to-reel machines as well, and this statement:


Top quality cassette recording is at least as good as a good 7.5 ips reel-to-reel, if not better.

...lacks credibility based on the basic physics of tape recording. Turn off all processing, equalize the basic quality of the tape and the hardware, and more magnetic material on more tape passing over larger magnets = more signal, higher resolution and lower noise. Every time. If this is what your ears tell you, your faith is ill-placed.

Tim

Beechwoods
18-06-2009, 04:47
Did you bother listening to any of the samples Tim?

Dave Cawley
18-06-2009, 06:04
SACD ? :kiss:

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Marco
18-06-2009, 10:16
Hi Tim,

Unfortunately it looks like we're going to disagree again, but please don't let it bother you. All we can do as human beings is form an opinion on a subject from our respective subjective experiences, and also what we think we *know* by absorbing information from objective research. Your opinion in that respect is as valid as anyone else's :)

My own experience on this matter is threefold:

1) I own an extremely capable high-end CDP and DAC, a very good turntable, and also a Nakamichi CR-7 cassette deck. I also own numerous albums which are both on vinyl and CD; thus I can listen and compare a variety of formats and recordings on different equipment, should I choose to, on a daily basis.

Now if I record one of those albums on vinyl to tape (NOS TDK SA90 - yes NOS tapes are better than the new stock variety ;)), and spend sufficient time making all the right adjustments, paying particular attention to bias and recording levels, and leaving Dolby noise reduction off, the resultant recording in terms of sound quality is significantly better than the CD of the same album played on my Sony CDP.

Aside from tape hiss, which doesn't bother me one iota, as it's only really noticeable between tracks and on quiet passages of music, the dynamic range, clarity, and 'hear through' quality of the tape recording via the CR-7 is no question whatsoever clearly superior to the CD version - even when the recording on CD is exceptionally good, but it is definitely much closer then.

I don't expect you to believe me, but there it is. The only reason I listen to my CDP more often is because of the convenience factor, and the limited amount of music that I've recorded to tape in comparison to the 1000s of CDs I've got - and because the Sony, too, sounds fantastic! I only miss what the CR-7 does when I do those types of comparisons, and its sonic superiority is so obviously showcased.

2) This doesn't have anything to do with tape decks as such, but analogue vs. digital recordings...

I have a friend up in Scotland who can make high quality copies of vinyl onto CD via a sound card and various bits of software, all of which goes a bit over my head, one of which though removes any clicks and pops on records, so that the resultant recording is virtually silent during or between tracks.

Last time I was up visiting, I took my turntable with me and some records (about a dozen in total) and we connected it up to his system and copied the albums onto CD. At the time we didn't get a chance to listen to the results properly in his system, as to do it properly, the recording process is rather time-consuming and afterwards we were too busy chatting, drinking beer and enjoying ourselves to get bogged down with 'serious' hi-fi stuff.

However, when I was in the car listening to the CDs we'd recorded on the journey home, I was stunned at how good they sounded compared to any of the 'bought' CDs I had with me. I won't enter into any of the usual hi-fi hyperbole, because it'll be relatively meaningless to you, but yet again I was faced with evidence that a high quality analogue source used in the recording process (instead of the usual digital entity) produced clearly superior results, reinforcing my opinion that all the 'AAD' recorded CDs in my collection were the best sounding ones for the very same reason as were the vinyl to CD recordings I had just made at my friend's house.

When I got home and played the CDs we'd made from vinyl on my main system, the results were even more obvious. Without going into a long drawn-out story, those dozen or so CDs are amongst the best (if not THE best) sounding in my whole collection - they sound simply awesome.

Lastly...

3) I have two cars - one with a high quality Kenwood CD player and speakers fitted, and the other fitted with an old Blaupunkt tape deck and bog standard, what I would call 'car door' speakers.

If I take a 'bought' CD of a particular album and play it on the Kenwood CD player in one car it sounds what I would consider to be excellent for a decent car CD player.

If however I take the same album recorded from my main system on either vinyl or CD, onto high quality chrome cassette tape via the CR-7, and play it in the other car on the Blaupunkt, aside from the obvious limitations of the poor quality 'car door' speakers, the sound is clearly superior in every way, tape hiss and all. I hear, on a much smaller scale, exactly what I described earlier between identical recordings played on my Sony CDP and on the CR-7 in my main system.

Now, like I said, I don't expect you to believe me, or rather more accurately, believe that the results with tape *were* actually superior - you will simply use your usual objectivist/measurements-based stance, and your own experience, to defend your contrary opinion - and that's fine by me. You are as 'right' as I am. But that will not detract from the validity of my own experiences and what I know I've heard.

I would gladly demonstrate what I've described above to anyone, so that they could judge for themselves and discover how high quality cassette when done well is a valid high-fidelity medium for recorded music.

'Dead' it may be in a commercial sense when compared to CD and vinyl, but it will always remain a treat for discerning connoisseurs with the patience and wherewithal to maximise its sonic potential, and the ability to appreciate its quite special musical qualities.

Marco.

Alex Nikitin
18-06-2009, 10:40
Do you have any data to back that up or is all of it just your subjective observations? If the latter, I have good ears, have owned some very good cassette decks, and we can agree to disagree. If you are claiming the cassette is superior by any measure other than your personal opinion, I'd love to see the numbers.

For example, here is a graph (www.ant-audio.co.uk/Tape_Recording/Tape_v_CD_distortion.gif), showing the measured distortion of a cassette Type 2 tape (Sony UX-Pro) at 400 Hz v level, compared with the ideal distortion of a CD digital format (without added errors of DA and AD conversion, and without taking into the account that digital distortion are wide-band and subjectively much "harder"). I've used a mid-range deck as well, best decks and best tapes would show even better results. As you may see, the digital format shows unnatural rise of the distortion for quieter sounds, and magnetic tape is completely opposite and natural. This low level behaviour is responsible for the ambience of the recording and CD just can not compete - there is not enough resolution.


...lacks credibility based on the basic physics of tape recording. Turn off all processing, equalize the basic quality of the tape and the hardware, and more magnetic material on more tape passing over larger magnets = more signal, higher resolution and lower noise. Every time. If this is what your ears tell you, your faith is ill-placed.

My ears are quite a reliable instrument ;) . However you are oversimplifying the situation. Basic physics of tape recording is not just about more magnetic material, but its qualities as well. And in this respect the quality of best cassette tapes and heads are far better than tapes and heads available for reel to reel recorders. And there is some solid physics behind it. It is much easier to make a thin tape with a better magnetic material - a thick R2R tape of that kind would be too rigid. You need to go to higher speeds and wider tracks on R2R to beat the humble cassette format. 2 track 1/4' at 15 ips would be definitely better, but at a price.

Cheers

Alex

Marco
18-06-2009, 10:51
Hi Alex,


This low level behaviour is responsible for the ambience of the recording and CD just can not compete - there is not enough resolution.


I think that succinctly explains why I hear with tape what I've described in my last post :)

For me, recordings on cassette tape, when done well, have unquestionably higher resolution than comparable recordings on CD.

Marco.

tfarney
18-06-2009, 12:30
Did you bother listening to any of the samples Tim?

The samples are irrelevant to the discussion. The samples could only give witness to the fact that good recordings can be made on cassette. I know that; I've done it. They would not exemplify that such recordings are superior to digital or equal to open reel recordings at 7.5 ips.

Tim

Alex Nikitin
18-06-2009, 12:48
The samples are irrelevant to the discussion. The samples could only give witness to the fact that good recordings can be made on cassette. I know that; I've done it. They would not exemplify that such recordings are superior to digital or equal to open reel recordings at 7.5 ips.

Tim

From a purely technical point of view a good cassette metal tape is equal or better than a good R2R tape at 7.5 ips - from the frequency response (especially at low end, as R2R has some serious problems there) to the dynamic range. Even a good Type 2 cassette is at least as good, with a possible exception of HF headroom. Another matter is that majority of cassette tape decks are nor reaching the limits of the actual tapes by far - usually at least 6 to 10 dB of the DR. However there are some decks which can push the format to the limit and now these are more affordable than ever.


Alex

twelvebears
18-06-2009, 12:58
As someone who made the (now regretted) decision to 'go digital' several years back, and who's now returned to the world of analogue, the situation seems quite clear to me.

While analogue sources may have fallen out of favour for technical reasons, practical limitations and because they are out of place in a digital world, I have no doubt that when done properly, an analogue source, be it vinyl or tape, will sound better than a digital one, at least one which isn't truely high resolution (whatever that means).

Ultimately, voices and instruments generate sound as an analogue waveform, and we listen with analogue ears and what ever way you look at it, anything digital, be it editing, recording or reproduction, involves chopping that wave up and then gluing it back together.

Having also owned several heavyweight (both physically and financially) digital players and recording devices over the years, I have to conceed that regardless of some of their limitations (clicks, pops and hiss) there is a 'life' to analogue sources that I just haven't managed to replicate.

Even though I have hundreds of CDs and only a fraction of the number of records, if you handed my a wodge of cash right now to spend on source equipment, I know which direction I'd head in.

tfarney
18-06-2009, 13:10
Unfortunately it looks like we're going to disagree again, but please don't let it bother you. All we can do as human beings is form an opinion on a subject from our respective subjective experiences, and also what we think we *know* by absorbing information from objective research. Your opinion in that respect is as valid as anyone else's

No problem, Marco. You prefer the sound of analog, that is established, and your preferences are not something subject to debate. I struggle with the way you always describe your preferences in such absolute terms, as if they are not your opinions, but an indisputable fact supported by a mountain of data, even though the opposite is often true (in which case you summarily reject data), but I understand that is the game and once learned to let it pass once. I will re-learn.

Tim

niklasthedolphin
18-06-2009, 13:51
So very few have ever had the chance to listen to well done Cassette tape recordings.
Only very few cassette decks in great recording and playback quality were made.
Of those, very few were in the ownership of people with great gear to connect it to.
Of those very few instances where there is a great quality Cassette Tape Deck connected to other great quality gear, very few owners had the skills to make great sounding recordings.
Of those very few with the machine the gear and the skills, very few had any quality source to record.

I'm not surprised that very few people believe it when I report that even the best CD's played on the best CD players have a hard time compared to some of my cassette tape recordings.

But then when people listen they, for sure, get convinsed.

This is not a debate to win or loose.
This is not a debate that can be argumented for or against with data sheets or dynamic analyzes.

This is about acknowledgement of the fact that there are so many more parameters creating the wholeness of the great soundstage, than what's already defined and connected to know units to measure with.

This is about the acknowledgement of the fact that dynamic is not only the difference between the highest peaking non distorted sound and the lowest peaking audible sound to be heard at the same volume level.
Dynamic is also the understanding of the natural invironmental surrounding noise incooperated in the skills to balance the saturation of a recording to include the finest microdynamics instead of approaching the rutine of digital "black background unnatural noisefree invironment without microdynamics".

This debate is also about acknowledgement of the fact that tape formulations for cassette decks were so way ahead of tape formulations for open reel decks and that maybe 10% of tapes aimed at the high quality recording market were lacking from insufficient quality control and belonged in the bin instead of in the machines.

This debate is in it's substance partly about the well known and beated up dispute of analog versus digital sound quality.

To understand how insane hard it is to to get experience from the best sounding option within Cassette tape decks, only around 40 decks were made of what's consindered the best playback machine and only around 400 were made of what's considered the best recording machine.

To understand how hard it is to get experience with the best sounding CD gear, some tests have been comparing what in certain points of view is considered ultimate with a cheap VHS/DVD combo machine from a local supermarket and verdict was that the cheap won.
Some say it's due to upsampling and some say it's the DAC doing it all. Some say it's the running gear and some say it's all about tubes.
no matter what, the difference in prices on CD gear is unfair considered the little variation in sound quality it gives compared to transducers in a set up.
The variation is exactly limited by the Redbook standard to some mediocre level.

More interesting would be to compare the best cassette with the best24/96, 24/192 or 32/192 hard disc based digital recording units.

I already did the 24/96 and 24/192 comparison to my best cassette solution.
And I also compared it up against Open Reel 15ips, ½-track of the TOTL professional machine.

"dolph"

Alex Nikitin
18-06-2009, 14:23
The variation is exactly limited by the Redbook standard to some mediocre level.


Exactly. Even my crude comparison graph shows that the CD format has got a serious problem at low levels compared even to a medium quality cassette.

Another interesting side of analogue recordings is their long life. Vinyl records are not ageing and I have 45 years old R2R tape recordings in my collection that still sound great - same for some 20-25 year old cassettes. Modern digital recordings on CD-R may not be as reliable as a plain old tape stored properly.

Alex

Marco
18-06-2009, 15:50
Hi Tim,


No problem, Marco. You prefer the sound of analog, that is established, and your preferences are not something subject to debate.


Yep, I prefer analogue because to my ears it reproduces music more accurately and believably than anything so far that I've heard from digital.


I struggle with the way you always describe your preferences in such absolute terms, as if they are not your opinions, but an indisputable fact supported by a mountain of data, even though the opposite is often true (in which case you summarily reject data), but I understand that is the game and once learned to let it pass once. I will re-learn.


First of all, there is no "game". All I do is relate my genuine experiences and opinions based on what my ears tell me. If my opinions come across as "indisputable fact", then I apologise, as this is not my intention. I am passionate about what I believe in and put my points across confidently and robustly - that is just my style :)

Most importantly, though, if you don't know by now Tim, there is little in life which disinterests or bores me more than "a mountain of data", or any kind of measurements in relation to hi-fi, simply because I consider the vast majority of it irrelevant for my needs as an end product user and music lover.

I know that such things are of great influence when forming your opinions on hi-fi, but it's the complete opposite for me, and I think that's a fact we both have to learn to live with here when interacting with each other. There is simply no point in bringing the matter up, as we sing from completely different song sheets.

I trust my discerning ears implicitly, no matter how much of "a mountain of data" exists to 'prove' the contrary of what I hear. Audio is not a perfect science - there are too many things we can genuinely hear, yet not measure, and so for me it's a fallacy to judge audio solely or largely on scientific terms.

I read this today from someone elsewhere which for me neatly sums things up:


There is no correlation between measurement and the musical ability of a product. Measurements are for the designer / the maker and tester / the repairer. For everyone else they are a waste of time, in fact more than that they are potentially a deflection from reality and good choice.


:exactly:

I couldn't agree more!!!! In fact, I almost feel like adding it to our ethos.

I also completely agree with Steve, who for me hits the nail firmly on the head:


Ultimately, voices and instruments generate sound as an analogue waveform, and we listen with analogue ears and what ever way you look at it, anything digital, be it editing, recording or reproduction, involves chopping that wave up and then gluing it back together.


Hear hear! :clap:

... And thus in the process lose a lot of important information responsible for making music sound real, as opposed to a processed sounding poor relation of such, exhibited by its digital counterpart.

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
18-06-2009, 17:32
I've been following this thread since the start. Much of what I think has already been said. But I feel I have to add to what Steve has said (and quoted by Marco above):


Ultimately, voices and instruments generate sound as an analogue waveform, and we listen with analogue ears and what ever way you look at it, anything digital, be it editing, recording or reproduction, involves chopping that wave up and then gluing it back together.

It goes waaaay further than that, though doesn't it? Not only is the wave being chopped up, but most of it is being consigned to virtual landfill.

No matter how much or little you chuck away, what remains can only ever approximate fidelity.

There is so much to music that we don't know how to quantify - show me the oscilloscope that measures musical emotion. You can't quantify it but I know when it's missing.

Spectral Morn
18-06-2009, 17:51
Tim

Nice to see you back posting again...I missed you.


Can I suggest you find an owner of an Otari MX5050 mk3 or mk2 and listen to a recording on that or better still a recording from the Tape Project played back via such a machine modded by the Tape Project( this has been demoed at a number of audio shows in the US recently). At a pinch a good well cared for Revox B77 mk2 or perhaps a Technics RS1500. If these are in full fettle then I think you will be impressed by what is possible. Also try and see if you can hear a Nakamichi CR7 or CR5 (I have one of these) with a properly done recording on NOS Metal tape TDK MAX or the like. There might be a member of Tapeheads.net near where you live ...very friendly guys; the forum is very similar in spirit to AOS. I am sure if you asked someone would help out.

I have yet to hear a Reel to Reel (something I hope to remedy very, very soon;)) but I am very familiar with what my Nakamichi CR5 can do (a wee bit behind Marco's CR7) but I can assure you it is stunningly good.


Can I say this is an excellent thread with some super contributions all of which I have found interesting and (no surprise) I agree with most of them...those that are pro tape.


Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
18-06-2009, 18:39
hi all,
well i have to agree with most of what you guys have said, with the exception where i find in favour of measurements to a degree, test measurements do indeed give an indication to a degree as to what a piece of equipment might perform like, but its what it dosent tell us thats the key to what we hear and feel that provides us with the emotional factor in music.
A...

Marco
18-06-2009, 19:14
with the exception where i find in favour of measurements to a degree, test measurements do indeed give an indication to a degree as to what a piece of equipment might perform like...


Absolutely - you *need* to measure and conduct objective testing as an equipment designer, but I don't need to as a buyer of the finished product, or indeed even require to be concerned with such things. I simply have to listen and judge the results with my ears :)

This is my point, and why measurements or 'scientific data' of any kind influences me not one jot with hi-fi. I form opinions only from my listening experiences.


...but its what it dosent tell us thats the key to what we hear and feel that provides us with the emotional factor in music.


I like that - how profound and how true. No wonder I buy your gear and enjoy it so much, eh? :eyebrows:

Marco.

Marco
18-06-2009, 21:58
Meanwhile, let's all remind ourselves of what a proper music machine looks like:

http://www.hifiworks.co.uk/images_fullsize/nak4.jpg

Feck yer modern tat! ;)

Marco.

Marco
18-06-2009, 23:06
Reel-to-reel rocks, but I personally prefer the humble wee cassette :)

One thing I've always loved though was VU metres - they look cool and, done well, they're accurate.

I hated it when cassette decks moved to those bloody neon light indicator things!

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
18-06-2009, 23:16
Or one of these magical units.

"dolph"

Marco
18-06-2009, 23:23
Tandberg - sheer class! :smoking:

Aside from anything else, you have to marvel at the stunning engineering of these things, which makes plastic digital crap look like the substandard toys they are.

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
18-06-2009, 23:30
Tandberg - sheer class! :smoking:

Aside from anything else, you have to marvel at the stunning engineering of these things, which makes plastic digital crap look like the substandard toys they are.

Marco.

Indeed.

I take from your lack of comments on the R2R that you did not recognize it.

This brand - this machine and another line up from same manufacturer - took over in recording and radio studios from Nagra, Studer, Stellavox, Ampex, Telefunken and other TOTL Professional machines.

"dolph"

tfarney
19-06-2009, 03:09
Most importantly, though, if you don't know by now Tim, there is little in life which disinterests or bores me more than "a mountain of data", or any kind of measurements in relation to hi-fi, simply because I consider the vast majority of it irrelevant for my needs as an end product user and music lover.

You missed my point entirely, Marco. It's not that I think that data is more important than listening or that I expect you to think that data is important, it's that language such as:


the CR-7 is no question whatsoever clearly superior to the CD version


unquestionably higher resolution than comparable recordings on CD


reproduces music more accurately

...has no place in a purely subjective discussion. "Accuracy," "resolution," and "superiority" are not subjective terms, they are terms with specific meanings that sound very much like they come from empirical evidence, not from someone's preferences or tastes. They imply data in support of your opinions, which is never forthcoming. If your intent, as you say, is to merely express your opinion, not to declare it to be fact, they are mis-used in this context.

You also have completely mis-read my relationship with data. I don't use it to form my point of view, that was done by decades of listening to, playing and recording music. I do, however, enjoy the fact that what I hear is supported by the evidence. :cool:

Tim

Beechwoods
19-06-2009, 05:20
Or one of these magical units.

"dolph"

I've come across the Lyrec Frida before, but not heard one in person as it were. I would love to! They are incredibly well spec'd machines, but well out of my price range sadly.

Likewise the Tandberg - I would love to hear a very high-res sample of something off that deck. I know digitisation defeats the object but it's the only realistic way of getting a feel for the capabilities of a machine via the internet... if you were in the UK it'd be great to have a tape Bake-Off - all our machines in one room playing our best tapes through some decent front-end gear!

DSJR
19-06-2009, 08:27
Hi Tim,



Well-done cassette is certainly superior to a well-done CD. Obviously, there are plenty of crappy recordings in both formats.



There is nothing religious about it. Top quality cassette recording is at least as good as a good 7.5 ips reel-to-reel, if not better. CD is only good on paper, in reality the distortion of a good cassette tape is better than the distortion of CD-format (16 bit 44.1 kHz) for levels below -30 dB (from maximum) in midrange. The only real disadvantage of the tape is noise and I can live with it. On a good cassette a dynamic range over 65 dB is possible without noise reduction and it is not much worse than DR of a good vinyl recording. I can easily tell from a pre-recorded cassette if it was digitally processed or recorded from a CD, compared with a fully analogue recording. CD is just not good enough for a quality sound. To better a good quality cassette you need to go hi-res, 24 bit 96 kHz.

Alex

I'm not sure that's correct, but I haven't taken measurements to confirm either way.

Vinyl, in the midrange, has a THIRTY DB dynamic range at best. It's MUCH worse in the bass, but above 1KHz it increases dramatically to give the 60 - 70db you quote. Vinyl distortion is audible on a good system [often in double figures] and not just measurable, especially at end-of-side.

Cassette can sound very good indeed (but almost always slightly different to the source [I owned several big Naks, including a CR7]). It's unstable and not to be relied on, but as a once convenient domestic source, it had its place.

Now this hairy old thing about CD distortion! Apparently, CD distortion isn't too good at minus 70db according to Noel Keyward, but 20 or 24 bit encoding at the recording/mastering stage, together with modern editors has improved the studio end well. [Digital] noise shaping (bit-mapping) has improved quiet midrange signals to the point where they excellent and if 16 bit CD has a problem, it may be in accurately reproducing bass distortion on over-modulated analogue masters, caused by stoned out engineers using the tape as a limiter. Bearing in mind that the dynamic range of most recordings isn't much more than 40db and the fact that VERY few pickup cartridges have stereo separation greater than 30db in the midband, together with the fact that many analogue masters have little musical info above 16KHz or so (distortion and noise yes, but no music) and roll off above 19KHz most often....

Cassettes are a quaint, thankfully long dead domestic format that was a PITA at the time. I'm glad it's gone and that I have few precious recordings on it. The few I have are on metal type tapes and were still playable a few years ago...

The joys of rose tinting old memories.......:lol:

Marco
19-06-2009, 08:42
Tim,


You missed my point entirely, Marco. It's not that I think that data is more important than listening or that I expect you to think that data is important, it's that language such as:


the CR-7 is no question whatsoever clearly superior to the CD version



unquestionably higher resolution than comparable recordings on CD



reproduces music more accurately




LOL. I think we're missing each other's point, Tim! Perhaps I should have added 'to my ears' after each of those statements, because that's exactly what I HEAR when making such comparisons in my system.

Unless specifically stated, everything I write is only my opinion, based on what my ears tell me. Did I say, for example: "IT IS A FACT that analogue equipment reproduces music more accurately" - no. Therefore, it is simply my opinion based on my listening experiences :)


...has no place in a purely subjective discussion. "Accuracy," "resolution," and "superiority" are not subjective terms, they are terms with specific meanings that sound very much like they come from empirical evidence, not from someone's preferences or tastes.


I understand your point, but I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

If I think something sounds subjectively more 'accurate' than something else, then I will say so, and use that terminology when describing why I consider it to be more 'accurate'. I don't need empirical evidence in order to judge "accuracy", "resolution" or "superiority" in that context, even though you may think I do. I simply use my knowledge and experience of listening to both live and recorded music over many years as the benchmark.

Whatever gets nearest to that benchmark is thus deemed by me as being more 'accurate', but of course this is not in any way factual, merely my opinion: it is more 'accurate' to me - and that's all that matters. Others reading who share my subjective opinions will hopefully be able to relate to my version of 'accuracy', which is why I use that particular terminology.

So if you see me use those terms again in posts, just mentally fill in the blanks with the words 'to my ears' ;)

Also - and this is the nub of the matter - as I consider measurement apparatus to be completely useless, outside of its most basic function of measuring certain known electrical parameters, simply because human beings do not hear music in the way that test equipment measures sound (again only my opinion, btw!), the only true form of 'accuracy' is that which is deemed as 'accurate' by an individual listener in the context of his or her system, based on his or her benchmark.

If we agree that not everything in audio which needs to be measured *can* currently be measured (and there's plenty of evidence to suggest this is true - I can supply examples if you wish), then how can we use current measurements as a true benchmark for accuracy?

And by "accuracy" in that context I mean that which makes music sound most like real music, not what most closely resembles certain determined electrical parameters, as indicated by devices such as oscilloscopes or spectrum analysers. Measuring music signals accurately is a very different and much more complex entity which requires an alternative testing methodology.

That's why I use my ears as the arbiter for anything in hi-fi, not test apparatus, and why empirical 'evidence' gleaned from such, influences me not one jot!


You also have completely mis-read my relationship with data. I don't use it to form my point of view, that was done by decades of listening to, playing and recording music.


Ditto with me; apart from the playing bit. You have just described the benchmark from which *you* form your opinion, as I also did earlier. The fact is that neither of our benchmarks is indisputably more 'accurate' or worthy than the other.


I do, however, enjoy the fact that what I hear is supported by the evidence.


I would contend that your 'evidence' is no more 'accurate' than my 'evidence'. You hear what you hear, and I hear what I hear; measurement apparatus also measures what it measures. Nothing or no-one is irrefutably 'proving' what equipment (or process) is most 'accurate' at reproducing recorded music - and that’s a fact! :cool:

Marco.

Marco
19-06-2009, 08:57
Cassettes are a quaint, thankfully long dead domestic format that was a PITA at the time. I'm glad it's gone and that I have few precious recordings on it. The few I have are on metal type tapes and were still playable a few years ago...


Dave, I see that I'm going to have to unleash the CR-7 on you when you come up, too! Jeez, matey, what with that and the Mana thing, you're gonna leave with a whole new education in audio! :lol:

:ner:

;)

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
19-06-2009, 12:21
You missed my point entirely, Marco. It's not that I think that data is more important than listening or that I expect you to think that data is important, it's that language such as:







...has no place in a purely subjective discussion. "Accuracy," "resolution," and "superiority" are not subjective terms, they are terms with specific meanings that sound very much like they come from empirical evidence, not from someone's preferences or tastes. They imply data in support of your opinions, which is never forthcoming. If your intent, as you say, is to merely express your opinion, not to declare it to be fact, they are mis-used in this context.

You also have completely mis-read my relationship with data. I don't use it to form my point of view, that was done by decades of listening to, playing and recording music. I do, however, enjoy the fact that what I hear is supported by the evidence. :cool:

Tim

Everything members write on any HiFi forum regarding their experiences with reproduced sound is meant to be "IMHO".
Even with a debate including data and specs it will remain a subjective debate.

Objectivity is only what constructors can aim at, never acchieve.
Listeners can not even aim at it.
An experience is subjectively influenced by each person, this persons physics, mentality and mind.

"dolph"

niklasthedolphin
19-06-2009, 12:22
I've come across the Lyrec Frida before, but not heard one in person as it were. I would love to! They are incredibly well spec'd machines, but well out of my price range sadly.

Likewise the Tandberg - I would love to hear a very high-res sample of something off that deck. I know digitisation defeats the object but it's the only realistic way of getting a feel for the capabilities of a machine via the internet... if you were in the UK it'd be great to have a tape Bake-Off - all our machines in one room playing our best tapes through some decent front-end gear!

Unfortunately I'm not in UK.
If I were to live outside Denmark, my choise would be at the Med, not UK.
Sorry.

"dolph"

Marco
19-06-2009, 12:30
Everything members write on any HiFi forum regarding their experiences with reproduced sound is meant to be "IMHO".
Even with a debate including data and specs it will remain a subjective debate.

Objectivity is only what constructors can aim at, never acchieve.
Listeners can not even aim at it.
An experience is subjectively influenced by each person, this persons physics, mentality and mind.


:exactly:

Great post, Dolph. :clap:

Marco.

tfarney
19-06-2009, 12:58
Accurate
One entry found.

Main Entry:
ac·cu·rate Listen to the pronunciation of accurate
Pronunciation:
\ˈa-kyə-rət, ˈa-k(ə-)rət\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Latin accuratus, from past participle of accurare to take care of, from ad- + cura care
Date:
1596

1 : free from error especially as the result of care <an accurate diagnosis> 2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact <providing accurate color> 3 : able to give an accurate result <an accurate gauge>
synonyms see correct



2correct
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English, corrected, from Latin correctus, from past participle of corrigere
Date:
1668

1 : conforming to an approved or conventional standard <correct behavior> 2 : conforming to or agreeing with fact, logic, or known truth <a correct response> 3 : conforming to a set figure <enclosed the correct return postage> 4 : conforming to the strict requirements of a specific ideology or set of beliefs or values <environmentally correct> <spiritually correct>

Marco, I think our disagreement, at the moment anyway, may have more to do with English usage than audio. Accurate doesn't work for you, as you reject "known standards" and refuse to accept any "guage" other than your own impressions (which is fine). It seems that correct must be the correct term for what you hear. Well, except for the "approved" or "conventional standard" part, and the stuff about agreeing with "fact, logic or known truth." That sure doesn't work here. But #4 is a near-winner -- "conforming to the strict requirements of a specific ideology or set of beliefs or values" -- if not a clear winner. Just add "of my own making" to the end and you've got it!

Or you could just say you like it. Nothing wrong with that. I would prefer the quiet, clarity and punch of a good digital recording through a well-designed active system over vinyl and valves, regardless of what the measurements might say.

And, by the way, what Dave said. :)

Tim

DSJR
19-06-2009, 12:59
Dave, I see that I'm going to have to unleash the CR-7 on you when you come up, too! Jeez, matey, what with that and the Mana thing, you're gonna leave with a whole new education in audio! :lol:

:ner:

;)

Marco.

Marco, I OWNED a CR7 for a couple of years...

There's little you can tell me about what it can and can't do.

I also owned a Dragon (great toy), an LX5, a 700 original, a 700ZXE and a 682XZ and BX2. I also sold all the others from 1974 to 1995 or whenever they stopped importing them in the UK.

I'm not in the position to do this any more, but it's not just me who needs a severe re-education in audio...:scratch::eyebrows:;) You need to know what the absolute references are and if you did but know it, there have been several knowledgeable posters here and elsewhere who know what they're on about that have been lampooned on the internet, purely because they can't always demonstrate what they're trying to say and their wider view doesn't "fit" with the narrower and purely subjective views of those who know what they like and like what they know.....

I'm off for a cuppa :ner: :gig:

Marco
19-06-2009, 13:04
Marco, I think our disagreement, at the moment anyway, may have more to do with English usage than audio. Accurate doesn't work for you, as you reject "known standards" and refuse to accept any "guage" other than your own impressions (which is fine). It seems that correct must be the correct term for what you hear. Well, except for the "approved" or "conventional standard" part, and the stuff about agreeing with "fact, logic or known truth." That sure doesn't work here. But #4 is a near-winner -- "conforming to the strict requirements of a specific ideology or set of beliefs or values" -- if not a clear winner. Just add "of my own making" to the end and you've got it! Or you could just say you like it.


Hi Tim,

Thanks for that, but if it's all the same with you I'll stick to using the language I choose to describe what I hear - it seems to works fine for everyone else but you :)

As Dolph says, anything one writes on forums, unless specifically stated otherwise, should be read in terms of "IMHO".

"Known standards" for me are flawed, as they don't tell the whole story, for the valid reasons I've outlined.

Marco.

tfarney
19-06-2009, 13:05
Hi Tim,

Thanks for that, but if it's all the same with you I'll stick to the language I choose to use to describe what I hear - it seems to work fine for everyone else but you :)

As Dolph says, anything one writes on forums, unless specifically stated otherwise, should be read in terms of "IMHO".

Marco.

Just trying to help. :smoking:

ON EDIT: What Dave said again.

Tim

Marco
19-06-2009, 13:19
Hi Dave,


Marco, I OWNED a CR7 for a couple of years...

There's little you can tell me about what it can and can't do.


I know you did, Dave, but you also said that about the M3D - and look what happened! ;)

The fact is what you heard with your CR-7 all those years ago is not necessarily what you'll hear with one in my system now - there are too many variables therefore, on that basis, you *may* or may not have to re-evaluate your opinion.


You need to know what the absolute references are and if you did but know it, there have been several knowledgeable posters here and elsewhere who know what they're on about that have been lampooned on the internet, purely because they can't always demonstrate what they're trying to say and their wider view doesn't "fit" with the narrower and purely subjective views of those who know what they like and like what they know.....


The only "absolute references" that matter to me are what I hear in my own system with my own ears - that (and live music) is my benchmark, and thus what I form my opinions on. I will also listen to stuff in systems belonging to friends, which I know almost as intimately as my own, and form opinons based on what I hear there.

Why should I pay any attention to a stranger or what some so-called 'expert' on the subject thinks? They could have cloth ears for all I know!!

With hi-fi I trust my own ears, those of friends whom I know analyse the reproduction of music as I do, or those of people I respect - no other "references" matter to me. However, no-one knows everything, so I'm always willing to learn and add to my experience outside of that arena.

This process for me is entirely normal. What else should I be doing? :)


I'm off for a cuppa

Enjoy. I'm sipping a rather nice glass of chilled rosé :cheers:

Marco.

Marco
19-06-2009, 13:20
Just trying to help. :smoking:


Cheers, but it's really unnecessary old chap :cool:


I would prefer the quiet, clarity and punch of a good digital recording through a well-designed active system over vinyl and valves, regardless of what the measurements might say.


LOL. Now I *know* you've never heard a decent vinyl and valves system! :)

What you've described above is exactly how vinyl and valves sound in my system! There is no lack of clarity and punch whatsoever, and there are a whole lot of other things too going on which are just as important, or more important, than that.

Perhaps the vinyl and valves systems you've heard in the past were lacking in those areas, I don't know, but that's far from the norm when vinyl and valves are done right.

Also, there's a lot more to reproducing music accurately than "clarity and punch"!! If you want clarity and punch though, come and listen to my modified SL-1210 playing 12" dance singles through 30W of pure Class A valve amplification into 95db 15" driver Tannoys in huge cabinets - I'll give you "clarity and punch" you'll never forget, boy! :lol:

Out of interest, Tim, please name the vinyl and valves systems you've heard. I'd like to know what your benchmark is in that area.

Cheers.

Marco.

DSJR
19-06-2009, 13:40
I can't afford wine or beer. The way I feel at present I'd get drunk every day!!!!!!:(

I never ownee an M3D before although a few floated around the shops, but as you found, the N3D stylus isn't quite the same as the N21D we both use and enjoy.

Of course you have a great system to fully exploit what the CR7 can do, but my system with active pro monitors was well able to reproduce the slight losses of the analogue recording medium - one of the "absolutes" I was referring to :)

The absolutes I tried to work towards was what was in the original recording and to get as close to this as the mastering engineer would allow me. In recent times I've relaxed a bit and don't want the "clear, unvarnished, under-a-microscope" vibe of the small active ATC's I still have, much preferring the more relaxed but so lovely (on acoustic music) Spendors. When able, I listen to the BC2's for hours and hours without finding the music pulled apart or "analysed." This suits me fine, but I am aware of their weaknesses by comparison with modern speakers of quality. This "vintage car" vs modern hot-hatch analogy again.

Shopping calls. TTFN :)

Marco
19-06-2009, 13:43
Same here - I have to do some work now (for a change :eyebrows:) so we'll continue this later :smoking:

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
19-06-2009, 15:54
With all this talk about the use of the word 'accurate', I've got to ask the question: Accurate to what?

Assuming we're talking about recorded music, which comes about as a result of a chain of digital or analogue (take your pick) electronics, when you mention accuracy, do you mean an accurate reproduction of:

a) what came out of the speakers in the control room?
b) what's captured on the recording medium?
c) the 'naked' instruments before their output goes down the long disruptive/corruptive path of hardware?
d) live music where the only thing between your ears & the instruments/speakers is fresh air?

I've never heard a hi-fi system yet that I felt accurately reproduced the last one & I don't suppose anyone else has either (though there are plenty of folks who'll swear their gear does exactly that).

Given all of this, surely the use of the word in our context can only ever be taken to have a subjective meaning?

niklasthedolphin
19-06-2009, 16:14
With all this talk about the use of the word 'accurate', I've got to ask the question: Accurate to what?

Assuming we're talking about recorded music, which comes about as a result of a chain of digital or analogue (take your pick) electronics, when you mention accuracy, do you mean an accurate reproduction of:

a) what came out of the speakers in the control room?
b) what's captured on the recording medium?
c) the 'naked' instruments before their output goes down the long disruptive/corruptive path of hardware?
d) live music where the only thing between your ears & the instruments/speakers is fresh air?

I've never heard a hi-fi system yet that I felt accurately reproduced the last one & I don't suppose anyone else has either (though there are plenty of folks who'll swear their gear does exactly that).

Given all of this, surely the use of the word in our context can only ever be taken to have a subjective meaning?


This is close to my reference.

The Analog Reference: The music comming over the rim of the stage at a live event and - not the sound from the monitors - but the sound in the studio as it would be in the "boxes" with acoustic instruments.

This my reference with which I compare when I make master recordings on R2R, Digital Studio HD or DAW.

Result is the choise of R2R with digital HD studio in highest possible resolution as back up.

And from this; as close to "My Reference" Mastertape; I judge the quality of a stereo set-up.

No recording is better than the Original.

The Original being the source even though it might be the concert, the Studio gig, an LP or any other media.

But it is from how close the recording get's to the sound of the original that we can tell if the gear is good and if the Tape Operator is skilled enough.

"dolph"

Marco
19-06-2009, 16:31
Given all of this, surely the use of the word in our context can only ever be taken to have a subjective meaning?


Exactly my view, Chris, but for some reason Tim appears to struggle with this concept... :confused:

In reference to "accurate" - I judge on the basis of my available benchmark (extensive experience of listening to live unamplified music over many years) as to how close any piece of equipment I listen to gets to that level of 'accuracy'.

I'm now waiting for Tim to list the vinyl and valve systems he's heard so that I can attempt to ascertain why they might have lacked clarity and punch.

When you listen to vinyl in your system, does it lack these attributes when your valve amp in is use? I would also ask the same question to anyone else who uses valves and vinyl...

My set-up certainly doesn't suffer from these issues on vinyl or CD, and I've heard plenty of active systems (large and small) over the years with which to make a valid comparison.

Marco.

tfarney
19-06-2009, 16:48
Cheers, but it's really unnecessary old chap :cool:



LOL. Now I *know* you've never heard a decent vinyl and valves system! :)

What you've described above is exactly how vinyl and valves sound in my system! There is no lack of clarity and punch whatsoever, and there are a whole lot of other things too going on which are just as important, or more important, than that.

Perhaps the vinyl and valves systems you've heard in the past were lacking in those areas, I don't know, but that's far from the norm when vinyl and valves are done right.

Also, there's a lot more to reproducing music accurately than "clarity and punch"!! If you want clarity and punch though, come and listen to my modified SL-1210 playing 12" dance singles through 30W of pure Class A valve amplification into 95db 15" driver Tannoys in huge cabinets - I'll give you "clarity and punch" you'll never forget, boy! :lol:

Out of interest, Tim, please name the vinyl and valves systems you've heard. I'd like to know what your benchmark is in that area.

Cheers.

Marco.

I go here reluctantly, suspecting that even as you insist on a subjectivist conversation rooted in the rarely stated MHO, the odds are very good that whatever answer I give you will just fuel your dismissal of my listening experience. Or at least that has been my experience here so far.


LOL. Now I *know* you've never heard a decent vinyl and valves system! :)

Thanks for the obligatory smiley. What you don't know about my listening experience would take up far too much bandwidth on this small forum, and if you're at all serious about the above statement, I can only conclude that our definitions of clarity are as different as our definitions of accurate.

I believe the last "vinyl and valve" system I heard was vintage Thorens, McIntosh and Altec Lansing, but I could hardly recall for you all the vinyl and valve gear I've heard, and in what combinations. Marco, I'm pushing 60 so hard it's rolling away from me, and behind that stone is a lifetime of experience with audio -- midfi, hifi, digital, analog, tape, hard drive -- audiophile, sound reinforcement and recording. There is little I haven't heard, including a pretty broad variety of vinyl and valves, cassette decks and even your latest retro flame, the big vintage horn. I've even heard a few big Tannoys, though it has been a few years. They're a bit rare on this side of the pond.

I know exactly what big, efficient loudspeakers are and are not capable of; I've owned them. I understand them and even understand why the big Tannoys would hold such appeal for you and would work well in your system. Our disagreement is not based in my lack of listening experience, or lack of exposure to equipment. We simply disagree.

Tim

Beechwoods
19-06-2009, 17:34
Cassettes are a quaint, thankfully long dead domestic format that was a PITA at the time. I'm glad it's gone and that I have few precious recordings on it.

:lol: garage sale round my place this weekend chaps. All those CDRs with disc rot were a dream! Digital is definitely the way to preserve those memories ;)

DSJR
19-06-2009, 17:38
There's no point in trying to compare the average home or studio sound setup with the live event, as most just don't and can't compare - Tannoys were ditched decades ago in classical recording because they were just too coloured and even the B&W 801's given to Polygram and EMI by the manufacturers (yes, given!!!) aren't that well thought of - last I heard, Abbey Road used one of theirs as a door-stop...... My beloved ATC 100A's didn't have anything like the dynamic range of the 200A's I was lucky to hear once in a domestic situation (god, they were awsome!!!) and the 100A's have more dynamic shading than 99% of domestic setups (even better in their SL form). My BC2's are fine on timbre yet I know Marco would fined them hugely lacking. That's ok, I can live with that for now (I have to...).

The nearest any of us can get to is what the mastering engineer allows us to hear on the original recording. In the early days of CD, these people would be given eny old taps of whatever generation (even cassettes :D) and asked to do a digital transfer for CD release. Thankfully these days, the best (re)mastering engineers insist on the earliest generation analogue masters and sometimes they strike lucky and get the 2nd generation mixdown masters for each track and digitally re-compile from there, rather than "adjust" the analogue third or fourth generation LP "cutting" master, with its mid boos, mono'd bass and RIAA pre-eq (my early CD of Tago-Mago by Can is so bright due to this eq being uncorrected it hurts - the LP has BASS and so does the remastered CD apparently!)

DSJR
19-06-2009, 17:46
:lol: garage sale round my place this weekend chaps. All those CDRs with disc rot were a dream! Digital is definitely the way to preserve those memories ;)

Over a twenty six year period of collecting CD's, I have a couple of discs (out of around 1500) that have rotted badly (Dove records Ozric Tentacles) which I've replaced with other samples of this mastering which are fine. I have a load of CDR's and a small number have discoloured slightly but shown no further degradation. many of the downloads I've done in the last 10 years are saved on DVD-R and they're fine too right now.

My mastering engineer friend worked at Decca from the mid eighties until the late nineties, when they closed down their own facility and sub-contracted everything. Many of Decca's tapes from the early sixties on were starting to break down and the Tom Jones recordings from the sixties were shedding badly after thirty years in storage. Seventies and early eighties Ampex tapes have to be baked, after which they can be played ONCE only to get a digital copy, although many fifties tapes are fine still. It was a race against time to transfer everything before it fell apart.

Don't you guys tell me that analogue tape is more stable, 'cos it certainly aint!!!!!!!!!!!


There is a tale that when Gus Dugeon was re-mastering the Elton John back-catalogue that a tape shredded before his eyes as it was being wound back to the start, apparently due to a combination of iffy tape and non-rotating guides on the playback machine. Thankfully, there was a digital copy done some years before and they could use that instead..

Marco
19-06-2009, 17:47
Tim,


I go here reluctantly, suspecting that even as you insist on a subjectivist conversation rooted in the rarely stated MHO, the odds are very good that whatever answer I give you will just fuel your dismissal of my listening experience. Or at least that has been my experience here so far.


Whether you come here "reluctantly" or not is up to you. You're very welcome to post here anytime you wish, and do I enjoy our exchanges. However, a subjectivist conversation is all you're likely to get, as I'm a subjectivist and this is a subjectivist-based forum. As such, our conversations will always come back to these issues because our viewpoints are so diametrically opposed.

I'm not dismissing your listening experience - I am merely challenging it. What else do you expect me to do when you make statements which are completely contrary to my own (equally valid) experience? Just shut up and agree with you? :confused:

Forums are for discussing things!

You made a statement of vinyl and valves lacking "clarity and punch", so I merely asked what examples of vinyl and valves you'd heard to come to that conclusion, as it's completely the opposite of what I experience myself in my own set-up. That is hardly dismissing your listening experience; merely seeking some rationale.


Thanks for the obligatory smiley.


I use smileys to indicate the mood I'm in when making a particular remark, not to be in any way flippant or disingenuous as you appear to be implying.


What you don't know about my listening experience would take up far too much bandwidth on this small forum, and if you're at all serious about the above statement, I can only conclude that our definitions of clarity are as different as our definitions of accurate.


All I asked was for some examples of what vinyl and valves systems you'd heard. I didn't ask for an epistle on your sum total of listening experience to date ;)

And yes, I suspect that our respective definitions of "clarity" are different, and that yours is as 'correct' as mine. However, I also have to be honest and say I feel that you have a rather jaundiced view of vinyl and valves which is completely unrepresentative of what I enjoy from them on a daily basis, and probably also what others here do too from theirs.


I believe the last "vinyl and valve" system I heard was vintage Thorens, McIntosh and Altec Lansing...


McIntosh I like very much, Altec I haven't heard, so can't comment, but it's certainly respected and deemed as a 'classic' loudspeaker by aficionados, and it depends what you mean by "vintage Thorens". The only Thorens T/T I rate is the TD-124 (an idler) - if it was some old belt-drive at the helm then these tend to sound rather soft and cuddly, so that could explain the lack of clarity and punch you're referring to.


...but I could hardly recall for you all the vinyl and valve gear I've heard, and in what combinations. Marco, I'm pushing 60 so hard it's rolling away from me, and behind that stone is a lifetime of experience with audio -- midfi, hifi, digital, analog, tape, hard drive -- audiophile, sound reinforcement and recording. There is little I haven't heard, including a pretty broad variety of vinyl and valves, cassette decks and even your latest retro flame, the big vintage horn. I've even heard a few big Tannoys, though it has been a few years. They're a bit rare on this side of the pond.


Like I said, you don't have to write an exhaustive list - just a few examples would have done. It helps me understand better where you're coming from, that's all.


I know exactly what big, efficient loudspeakers are and are not capable of; I've owned them. I understand them and even understand why the big Tannoys would hold such appeal for you and would work well in your system. Our disagreement is not based in my lack of listening experience, or lack of exposure to equipment. We simply disagree.


I have no problem with that whatsoever. Thanks for providing me with a small insight into the level of your experience in that area.

That we always so vehemently disagree on hi-fi is inevitable, and simply testament to our diametrically opposed mindsets. You believe what you believe, and I'll do the same. There is no reason to fall out about it :)

Marco.

Beechwoods
19-06-2009, 17:52
Don't you guys tell me that analogue tape is more stable, 'cos it certainly aint!!!!!!!!!!!

Only joshin 'cos you were so... um... absolute about my old pal the cassette :)

I must admit though that I've lost more CDRs than I have tapes. I feel I can depend on tape but not on burnt discs... I know what you mean about tape shedding, but at least you have a chance of getting signal back. Digital decay is final :(

Spectral Morn
19-06-2009, 17:56
I have a few CDs rotting, most were pressed by PDO. Of all my tapes and I have many, all are still okay...a few have mild print through but are still playable, unlike the CD's which are scrap.

Out of interest does anyone have CDs were the label has gone sticky?



Regards D S D L

Spectral Morn
19-06-2009, 17:59
Only joshin 'cos you were so... um... absolute about my old pal the cassette :)

I must admit though that I've lost more CDRs than I have tapes. I feel I can depend on tape but not on burnt discs... I know what you mean about tape shedding, but at least you have a chance of getting signal back. Digital decay is final :(

It is my understanding (correct me if I am wrong) that NASA save/record to open reel tape all their data....they don't use digital for this information.


Regards D S D L

tfarney
19-06-2009, 18:00
Really. Any discussion that supposes that magnetic tape is the more stable archival vehicle than CD is not serious. MHO. And, as far as I can tell, the HO of the entire professional music industry, which is saving the history of music from the stability of magnetic tape by archiving it digitally.

Tim

Marco
19-06-2009, 18:04
Tannoys were ditched decades ago in classical recording because they were just too coloured...


Interesting, Dave.

I'd say that the vintage 15" Monitor Reds in Lockwood cabinets I'm using (which incidentally are genuine monitor designs, as used for example at Abbey Road in the mixing of Beatles albums) are unquestionably the most uncoloured speakers I've heard - certainly much less coloured than any Spendors I've experienced (and I've heard most of them, and owned many of them, including BC1s), or ATCs, active or otherwise. The limitations of the active amp packs in the latter, for example, are usually obvious to me during critical listening.

So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there, too, as we do with cassette tape :)

Marco.

Marco
19-06-2009, 18:12
Really. Any discussion that supposes that magnetic tape is the more stable archival vehicle than CD is not serious.


That's your opinion of course, Tim ;)

Other people's contrary opinions, as to how "serious" the discussion is in that respect are equally as valid.


And, as far as I can tell, the HO of the entire professional music industry, which is saving the history of music from the stability of magnetic tape by archiving it digitally.


Perhaps that's partly because digital equipment is what's widely available now and cost effective, rather than any inherent superiority of the digital format in terms of stability, per se?

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
19-06-2009, 18:51
My mastering engineer friend worked at Decca from the mid eighties until the late nineties, when they closed down their own facility and sub-contracted everything. Many of Decca's tapes from the early sixties on were starting to break down and the Tom Jones recordings from the sixties were shedding badly after thirty years in storage. Seventies and early eighties Ampex tapes have to be baked, after which they can be played ONCE only to get a digital copy, although many fifties tapes are fine still. It was a race against time to transfer everything before it fell apart.

Don't you guys tell me that analogue tape is more stable, 'cos it certainly aint!!!!!!!!!!!




Scientific examination made in cooperation between Danish State Radio and BBC turned out different than you state here.
Tapes wer concluded to be the best lasting stroring form.

I have tapes way back from 50's and 60's and they all still perform as new.

I have CD's, not few, from 80's, 90's and even this decade, allready starting to loose contents.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree very much with what you just wrote.

However, it's well known for tape operators and enthusiasts, that there were certain tape formulations used by certain companies that were suffering from sticky shed syndrom later on.
This phenomenon is well documented and easy searchable on the web.

"dolph"

Marco
19-06-2009, 19:03
Most interesting, Dolph. It certainly gives another valid angle to the argument :)

Marco.

tfarney
19-06-2009, 19:10
That's your opinion of course, Tim ;)

Other people's contrary opinions, as to how "serious" the discussion is in that respect are equally as valid.

Marco.

I'm not arguing the superiority of the digital format, Marco, but its stability relative to magnetic tape. Not all things are subjective. Only in the world of the grossly uninformed is that one of them.

Tim

Marco
19-06-2009, 19:14
So what do you say to Dolph's last post then, Tim? Perhaps you could address his observations? He appears to know what he's talking about.

And minus any petulant and inconsiderate remarks, please :)

Marco.

anthonyTD
19-06-2009, 21:41
hi all,
well it would seem that if all tape recorded/playback music is thought to be that unstable compared with digital, and should therefore all be transfered over to the digital domain; then for heaven's sake what are they playing it all back on to get it suposedly more acurate than what was used to record it in the first place? i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.
a great deal of the most magical and breath taking recordings we have today were recorded onto master tape!
anthony...

Marco
19-06-2009, 21:47
Good point, Anthony!

Tim, care to comment (after of course you've answered Dolph's post)? :)

Ta!

Marco.

Spectral Morn
19-06-2009, 22:59
hi all,
well it would seem that if all tape recorded/playback music is thought to be that unstable compared with digital, and should therefore all be transfered over to the digital domain; then for heaven's sake what are they playing it all back on to get it suposedly more acurate than what was used to record it in the first place? i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.
a great deal of the most magical and breath taking recordings we have today were recorded onto master tape!
anthony...


Excellent points, I agree totally. The very best recordings are those that are AAA (or should that be AAV) or AAD.


Regards D S D L

tfarney
20-06-2009, 04:30
Good point, Anthony!

Tim, care to comment (after of course you've answered Dolph's post)? :)

Ta!

Marco.

Sure. Anthony is completely confused. The subject at hand isn't increasing the accuracy of analog recordings by transferring them to digital media, but the relative volatility/stability of the two media. Someone stated that magnetic tape was a more stable media than the CD.

If Dolph could provide a link to the study he refers to, I'd look forward to checking it out.

Tim

Marco
20-06-2009, 08:28
Neatly side-stepped there, Tim!

We're discussing many subjects on this thread, not just the one that most tickles your fancy... You and I have just gone 'toe-to-toe' on the subject of 'accuracy' in terms analogue and digital formats, and what we mean by that, so Anthony was merely picking up on this.

I'm sure he'll expand on the volatility/stability aspect of the discussion later, so perhaps in the meantime you could tackle the valid points he made here:


well it would seem that if all tape recorded/playback music is thought to be that unstable compared with digital, and should therefore all be transfered over to the digital domain; then for heaven's sake what are they playing it all back on to get it suposedly more acurate than what was used to record it in the first place? i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.
a great deal of the most magical and breath taking recordings we have today were recorded onto master tape!


Cheers :)

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
20-06-2009, 09:31
Sure. Anthony is completely confused. The subject at hand isn't increasing the accuracy of analog recordings by transferring them to digital media, but the relative volatility/stability of the two media. Someone stated that magnetic tape was a more stable media than the CD.

If Dolph could provide a link to the study he refers to, I'd look forward to checking it out.

Tim


I read articles on the subject in different trustworthy non-tabloid newspapers (Politiken, JP, Berlingske Tidende, Information) here in Denmark as well as on DR's homepage (DR=Danmarks Radio - state Radio/television) about a year or three ago.
I also checked up on the BBC part of this, at that time, as being genuine and sincere.

These media I refer to are the kind of media that state visible excuses in public if they happen to write anything turning out faulty.

However, the conclusion of the scientific survey/examination did not lead DR to start storing everything on tape.
Obviously.

It's also a matter of cost/benefit for DR even though they are a state related station.
It all comes down to money when approaching the digital world of mass produced music and broadcasting.

Do not expect me to spend hours finding direct evidence.
You either trust me or you make all the research yourself.

I am not just a young fool bragging around showing off my bisceps and my designer stereo.

Forgive me my english. It's not my native language.

"dolph"

Marco
20-06-2009, 09:39
It's also a matter of cost/benefit for DR even though they are a state related station.
It all comes down to money when approaching the digital world of mass produced music and broadcasting.


That's exactly my feelings on the matter, certainly in the commercial sector where the vast majority of the 'action' happens - which I why I said earlier in reference to this issue:


Perhaps that's partly because digital equipment is what's widely available now and cost effective, rather than any inherent superiority of the digital format in terms of stability, per se?


I think we can all quote our individual experiences when it comes to either CDs or tapes 'going off' through time, however none of this necessarily proves beyond question which media *is* actually superior for preserving recordings over the years, so the jury's still out for me on this one.

I am totally convinced about which one offers the greatest fidelity, though!

Marco.

DSJR
20-06-2009, 09:41
Interesting, Dave.

I'd say that the vintage 15" Monitor Reds in Lockwood cabinets I'm using (which incidentally are genuine monitor designs, as used for example at Abbey Road in the mixing of Beatles albums) are unquestionably the most uncoloured speakers I've heard - certainly much less coloured than any Spendors I've experienced (and I've heard most of them, and owned many of them, including BC1s), or ATCs, active or otherwise. The limitations of the active amp packs in the latter, for example, are usually obvious to me during critical listening.

So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there, too, as we do with cassette tape :)

Marco.

How do you know with ATC's it's the amps? What's wrong with them? How do you know it isn't the drive units (in pre-SL versions) with too much damping and too much 3rd harmonic distortion? I'f you'd heard the 200A's, I doubt you'd be saying this IMO... The ATC mid-dome went through a sticky (groan) patch with problems as it's used wide open with the crossover problems this can give if the driver isn't exactly to spec - I've discussed this with the ATC guys at the time and they had many headaches ten to twelve years ago with consistancy in manufacture (not in released product I should add).

In comparison with live "acoustic" instruments including voice, it's been proven that "legacy" BBC derived speakers like Spendors and especially the latest Harbeths are in a different league to any Tannoy DC driver (or most other speakers on the market these days). This may not matter to you, as there are (severe in the smaller ones) dynamic compromises elsewhere, but I'd still wished that you'd been able to try the Harbeth 40.1 before Howard and Harbeth parted company for some reason (has he got the hump with this forum too? He never seems to post).

Of course the Beatles stuff was mixed using Tannoy Lockwoods. That's all they had at the time (and bloody ugly things they were too) and the engineers couldn't wait to be rid of them by the end I've been told, because they were getting in the way, but by the late seventies, Tannoy had lost their hold on the pro market to JBL and others with screaming horn tweeters (I forget the names). That's one reason why Tannoy set about completely re-thinking the CD driver and crossover and why the modern "Prestige" models don't shreik and spit at you, even those with the old-fashioned pepperpot tweeters, there purely for the far eastern market I understand, instead of the superior (I understand) tulip style wave-guide.

Marco, I'm not saying that you have a rotten pair of speakers, far from it (I'd love to try some myself and I KNOW I'd enjoy them very much indeed!!!) but you have to understand that your hifi amplification and speakers are currently residing in the early sixties with updated wires and components and with all the compromises of the times. As I've said many times - nothing at all wrong with that - and if you prefer this to something more "modern" then good for you. I'm glad you have the money to indulge yourself. (but on another tack, you "will" find retirement at 50 a rather boring past-time after a year or so..:(.)

I'm having fun with my LP's not because I expect them to "sound better" but because I have many decades worth of music on them that I want to hear again. If I get a really good sound from the odd, carefully cut and pressed LP, then I'm really happy, but I don't purely rely on "fidelity" any more to get the music (Linnies and Naimies never did, did they? :D)

Talking about absolute fidelity to the original source, this brings us back to cassettes..

For Gawd's sake guys, be REALLY careful with any "Walkman Pro's" you buy as they're twenty or more years old and they could be a bit flakey on batteries when new. They really don't sound better in a HiFi system than, say, a two head Nak such as a BX2/BX150E style machine and even the humble three head Nak BX300E wiped the floor with the two head models (abd the ZX7/9, CR4, CR5, Dragon and CR7 were tons better again).

niklasthedolphin
20-06-2009, 10:47
I am aware a lot of Cassette freaks cherish Nakamichi Tape Decks.
I fully understand them.
I used to have a selection of the TOTL Nak's.
Even though I sold them all when I got the TCD machines, I still like the Nakamichi very much.

From the Nakamichi machines I would prefer the ZX9 as the best sounding of the bunch.

The CR7, Dragon, 1000 ZXL and the 680ZX are great machines as well.

"dolph"

symon
20-06-2009, 10:49
All this talk of cassettes has got me almost round to conecting my Revox to my system and seeing what it's like. Hmmm, might have a play this weekend.

Marco
20-06-2009, 10:54
Dave,


How do you know with ATC's it's the amps? What's wrong with them? How do you know it isn't the drive units (in pre-SL versions) with too much damping and too much 3rd harmonic distortion? I'f you'd heard the 200A's, I doubt you'd be saying this IMO... The ATC mid-dome went through a sticky (groan) patch with problems as it's used wide open with the crossover problems this can give if the driver isn't exactly to spec - I've discussed this with the ATC guys at the time and they had many headaches ten to twelve years ago with consistancy in manufacture (not in released product I should add).


Well it's flat, 'grey', dynamically-challenged solid-state, innit? Just like your Crowns are (which I've heard, too - awful things, IMO, sorry!) So how could the ATC amp packs be anything but fatally flawed? :eyebrows: ;)

More seriously, I've heard passive ATCs tri-amped by ECS amplification and the difference compared to the active versions was jaw-dropping, which of course it should be considering the difference in cost, but that doesn't disguise the fact that the built-in amps exist for cost/efficiency purposes rather than out-and-out sonic performance.

Yes you're quite right, the problems I heard could also have been driver related. The fact is, regardless of whatever it was, they certainly don't provide a genuine 'open window' into the music like the Lockwoods do - no way José. Judge for yourself when you come up!


In comparison with live "acoustic" instruments including voice, it's been proven that "legacy" BBC derived speakers like Spendors and especially the latest Harbeths are in a different league to any Tannoy DC driver (or most other speakers on the market these days).


"Proven" how and by whom, Dave? Is it likely to be anyone I know whose ears I trust? If not, then I'm sorry, it has no bearing on my opinion whatsoever. I'm not saying you're 'wrong' - just that unless I've heard the results with my own ears, or someone else whose ears I trust has, then such things for me are completely irrelevant.

What I can say quite categorically is that the Lockwoods blow the SP100s away, and any Spendor loudspeaker I've heard, in every conceivable area including lack of coloration. I've also heard quite a few Harbeths (Compact 7s, and the like), and although I rate them highly, the Lockwoods are just in a totally different league.

The difference between you and I, I've noticed, is that you allow yourself to be influenced by lots of things other than solely what your own ears tell you at this present moment in time (i.e. what you've heard in the past and what others have told you, what 'experts' think, etc). I don't!

Honestly, Dave, we could both waffle on here until the cows come home, but the fact is until you actually hear my system, including the Lockwoods, you don't have a clue what kind of results I'm getting or how 'coloured' or not the Lockwoods are. Until then, continue to generalise if you wish, but you're not proving anything to anyone other than you.


Of course the Beatles stuff was mixed using Tannoy Lockwoods. That's all they had at the time (and bloody ugly things they were too) and the engineers couldn't wait to be rid of them by the end I've been told, because they were getting in the way...


You see, there it is again so "I've been told". No offence, but do you believe everything that you're told? Who knows what agendas were held by whoever told you that. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I wasn't there, but I suspect there's just a little more to the story than what you've highlighted. Practicality issues, changes of equipment and procedures at the time, all of this I suspect would have had a bearing on events.

Ugly? I couldn't give a shit. It's how they sound that matters - and they're bloody stunning!! :ner:


Tannoy had lost their hold on the pro market to JBL and others with screaming horn tweeters (I forget the names). That's one reason why Tannoy set about completely re-thinking the CD driver and crossover and why the modern "Prestige" models don't shriek and spit at you, even those with the old-fashioned pepperpot tweeters, there purely for the far eastern market I understand, instead of the superior (I understand) tulip style wave-guide.


LOL. Sorry, that is complete blinkered nonsense! The Monitor Reds I've got do not in any way "shriek and spit at you" - far from it. Do you really think I'd put up with that? Honestly, reading this sort of stuff is just laughable given what I'm hearing from them at the moment - and nor are the tulip wave-guide tweeters "superior"; that is simply a matter of personal taste, as both have their good points.


Marco, I'm not saying that you have a rotten pair of speakers, far from it (I'd love to try some myself) but you have to understand that your hifi amplification and speakers are currently residing in the early sixties with updated wires and components and with all the compromises of the times.


Eh? I think Anthony would have some issues with your comments there regarding the Copper amp!! Again this is nonsense. Everything in hi-fi is a compromise, Dave, but experience tells me that the best vintage stuff, updated with modern components, has got far less compromises than most of the tat made today. It is indeed rather sobering when you realise first-hand how little in some areas hi-fi equipment has advanced since the 1950s!! In fact, out with of convenience and miniaturisation, it's gone more backwards than forwards...


I'm glad you have the money to indulge yourself. (but on another tack, you "will" find retirement at 50 a rather boring past-time after a year or so..:(.)


I've worked very hard (and smart), Dave, to get to the comfortable position I'm in now. When I retire, I'll have plenty to occupy me, such as travelling the world and indulging in my many passions in life. We have a villa in Italy, so I'll be spending more time there soaking up the sun and slurping vino, so doncha worry about me, shweety! :cool:


I'm having fun with my LP's not because I expect them to "sound better" but because I have many decades worth of music on them that I want to hear again. If I get a really good sound from the odd, carefully cut and pressed LP, then I'm really happy, but I don't purely rely on "fidelity" any more to get the music (Linnies and Naimies never did, did they?


Glad you're having fun, dude. Forums are about sharing our experiences and helping each other - we're all on a learning curve, so I'm glad that some of the info here on AOS has enriched your enjoyment of music. I plan to enrich it even more and dispel some of your deeply-ingrained 'beliefs' when you visit! :gig:

;)

Marco.

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 11:50
Atc's humm........... bass lite, a touch mid band incorrectness and a touch in-soft at the top end.
Tannoy's large scale inexpensive sound, in-offensive, go loud and are fun. Not the last word in bass correctness or top end extension, can be a bit shouty in the mids, if paired wrongly. However entertaining and engaging. Tuff choice for AOS members :lol:

Marco
20-06-2009, 12:01
When am I coming down then to hear your toppy French thingys and Helles Belles amps? :lol: ;)

Marco.

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 12:40
Marco,
I might as well hang myself now :sofa: How I am going to compete with thermionic amplification and rock being dragged around a piece of plastic :confused:. I shall just have to bite the bullet, repent and take that Popeye potion of the hifi world...........kondo, Bathe myself in the light of direct drive turntables, then and only then will I have seen the road to Damascus.
Fore-ever banishing those toppy French transducers, grim digital amplifiers and cast aside slippery serpent manifestations and foo of all types in the pit of damnation, to see it fall onto the 666 layer of the abyss. Where demons and foul creatures of the deep treasure and revere it like war trophy's, brought home after long fought conflicts.
From that point onwards my life with be divine sweetness and beautified mid band presence beyond compare. never again shall; the words 'Superbly texturious, taut, clean articulate and agile bass lines sprang forth from the speakers with silken ease. Nothing has captured those understated bass lines from Geezer Butler like my trusty slop monster' be ever uttered again.
My musical tastes totally redefined in chair rocking sessions with the high priest of thermionic reproduction and analogue infusions from the mid 80's guru's who teachings have spread high and wide over the decades.
Please forgive Marco, my life as I now see it, is just a pale imitation of those who enjoy such divine sonic delights.
My life thus far has just been bitter and twisted, please please help me ascend to the levels that you and the other members of AOS have achieved, I am willing to learn :)
Tony who is feeling mischievous this afternoon (to much web work :lolsign:)

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 12:44
If I have to pay a penance please, do not make me listen to either atc's or pmc's I am afraid that would be akin to euthanasia.

Marco
20-06-2009, 13:12
Hahahahahaha... You're in good form today, Tony! :lolsign:

Marco.

tfarney
20-06-2009, 13:42
Neatly side-stepped there, Tim!
...

I'm sure he'll expand on the volatility/stability aspect of the discussion later, so perhaps in the meantime you could tackle the valid points he made here:

Quote:
well it would seem that if all tape recorded/playback music is thought to be that unstable compared with digital, and should therefore all be transfered over to the digital domain; then for heaven's sake what are they playing it all back on to get it suposedly more acurate than what was used to record it in the first place? i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.
a great deal of the most magical and breath taking recordings we have today were recorded onto master tape!
Cheers

Marco.

Note the emphasis above. As far as the recording engineers who believe in the magic of tape? I agree.

Tim

Marco
20-06-2009, 13:47
So, just to make it clear, you're now saying that you understand that sometimes tape is better?

If so, what a turnaround! :)

Marco.

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 13:55
Depending on the sound the artist is looking for I would agree sometimes the analogue master is better suited, however a good digitally recorded master UNFESTERED with by record companies is pretty special, again this is down to the person. behind the desk and their complete understanding of the technology he/she is using.
This has become very evident in the last 8 months or so, (we have owned a recoding studio for that time).

Spectral Morn
20-06-2009, 14:00
All this talk of cassettes has got me almost round to conecting my Revox to my system and seeing what it's like. Hmmm, might have a play this weekend.


You should absolutely do this and tell us what you think...


Regards D S D L

Marco
20-06-2009, 14:03
Tony,


Depending on the sound the artist is looking for I would agree sometimes the analogue master is better suited...


That again suggests some form of desired coloration, which is not the point being made.

What I'm saying (and I think also my fellow tape enthusiasts) is that often the analogue master is the most faithful (read as 'accurate') format for music to be recorded onto in the first place.

I don't prefer tape (or anything analogue) because I'm seeking some form of specific 'sound'; I prefer it because I consider that it offers the best fidelity (along with vinyl done well) and is the least compromised of all the available media.

Marco.

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 14:07
Marco,

Perhaps that may be the case for a few, however a few bands love to use distortion of varying degrees in their material, I would say that the analogue machines make this more to the bands taste than say digital equivalent.
The interesting thing is, what is recoded in the studio is very rarely recreated in the home.

Alex Nikitin
20-06-2009, 14:08
a good digitally recorded master UNFESTERED with by record companies is pretty special, again this is down to the person. behind the desk and their complete understanding of the technology he/she is using.


In this case we are not talking about 44.1 kHz and 16 bit, I suspect ;) . High-resolution digital audio can be awesome in right hands and so would be the top level analogue audio, like Ultimate Analog (http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/index.html?JRF_mainframe=/JRF_ultimateanalog.html), for example. However a plain CD 44.1kHz/16bit digital audio can not compete even with a good quality cassette, IMHO.

Alex

Marco
20-06-2009, 14:15
Hi Alex,


However a plain CD 44.1kHz/16bit digital audio can not compete even with a good quality cassette, IMHO.


I presume then you've not heard a high quality modified NOS DAC using Philips TDA 1541 chips? You might be quite surprised if you have a listen ;)

However, I do agree, as I've already said, that tape done well is still better than ANY form of digital done well, and so that includes even my very capable Audiocom-modified Sony CDP and 44.1kHz 16bit DAC :)

I rate high-res, too, but the problem is the lack of available music which utilises the format. I will not consider investing in this technology until there are as many new albums released on high-res as there currently are CDs.

Marco.

Alex Nikitin
20-06-2009, 14:31
I presume then you've not heard a high quality modified NOS DAC using Philips TDA 1541 chips? You might be quite surprised if you have a listen ;)

There are some good DACs, however there is nothing a good DAC can do about an inherent lack of low-level resolution and ambience on the CD format. You can paint a dead body to make it look more like a live one, but it can only trick you for a short while ;) .

Alex

Marco
20-06-2009, 14:34
There are some good DACs, however there is nothing a good DAC can do about an inherent lack of low-level resolution and ambience on the CD format.


It's not as simple as that, though, Alex - nothing in audio rarely is! :)

However, that's a discussion for another time and place.

Marco

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 14:38
Alex,

We record from between 24/96khz and 32/352.8khz. If you have the playback equipment as you stated 'awesome' is a apt word, as can analogue if again you have the equipment can sound very special without question.
CD can sound very good, though it is limited.
The implimenation is in the data transfer not the medium imho

DSJR
20-06-2009, 14:58
What I'm saying (and I think also my fellow tape enthusiasts) is that often the analogue master is the most faithful (read as 'accurate') format for music to be recorded onto in the first place.


Marco.

Completely untrue Marco. I'm not saying that ALL digital recording systems are good, but let's put it this way, the best digital recording systems give you what's there, warts and all. Analogue recording systems are very good at slightly smoothing things out and the playback is never *quite* the same as what's going onto the tape. There was a web-link to a comparison by recording engineers, but I can't remember what it was...

DSJR
20-06-2009, 15:00
CD can sound very good, though it is limited.


How so? I'm genuinely interested..

symon
20-06-2009, 15:07
You should absolutely do this and tell us what you think...


Regards D S D L

I have thought about doing write ups. But, I don't really have much to compare to, nor have I enough of the lingo to fully explain what I'm hearing. But, you never know! ;)

Marco
20-06-2009, 15:07
Completely untrue Marco. I'm not saying that ALL digital recording systems are good, but let's put it this way, the best digital recording systems give you what's there, warts and all. Analogue recording systems are very good at slightly smoothing things out and the playback is never *quite* the same as what's going onto the tape.


We'll just have to agree to differ then, Dave (strongly!) There's simply no point in going round and round in circles. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't have the energy, and besides, I'm off now to set-up Dave & Sue's new Nagaoka MP110 for him in his Sumiko headshell, prior to him getting his Techy.

So, amigo, laters! :)

Marco.

Spectral Morn
20-06-2009, 15:14
Completely untrue Marco. I'm not saying that ALL digital recording systems are good, but let's put it this way, the best digital recording systems give you what's there, warts and all. Analogue recording systems are very good at slightly smoothing things out and the playback is never *quite* the same as what's going onto the tape. There was a web-link to a comparison by recording engineers, but I can't remember what it was...


Dave I must disagree strongly...if you look at the way digital truncates the signal wave form ...it simply can't do what you say. Even very high resolution digital recording can't capture all the information....YET(maybe some day) After all DSD and DVD-A both sought to do better than red-book digital, and still while closing the gap a bit, still failed (I refer to this as a technical failure rather than the lack of public interest).

Its not just about relative silences( digital has less obvious noise than analogue) but still has its own compromises. Sadly IMHO digitals compromises do not beat analogue despite its own set of compromises. Digital is about interpretation of data whereas analogue is a mechanical/electrical/vibrational process and perhaps better/matches the way our ears work. I know thats simplistic, but seems right to me. We don't hear digitally. Even the frequency cut offs due to hearing loss don't damage the sound signal in the way digital seems to truncate it. Analogue is natural and digital is artificial.


Regards D S D L

Spectral Morn
20-06-2009, 15:22
I have thought about doing write ups. But, I don't really have much to compare to, nor have I enough of the lingo to fully explain what I'm hearing. But, you never know! ;)


Peter

I would strongly encourage to rise above your imagined lack of writing skill. Please have ago I think you will be surprised. If I can offer any advice PM me, but please have ago. If you do place it in Strokes of Genius.


Regards D S D L

DSJR
20-06-2009, 15:24
Dave,



Well it's flat, 'grey', dynamically-challenged solid-state, innit? Just like your Crowns are (which I've heard, too - awful things, IMO, sorry!) So how could the ATC amp packs be anything but fatally flawed? :eyebrows: ;)

More seriously, I've heard passive ATCs tri-amped by ECS amplification and the difference compared to the active versions was jaw-dropping, which of course it should be considering the difference in cost, but that doesn't disguise the fact that the built-in amps exist for cost/efficiency purposes rather than out-and-out sonic performance.

Yes you're quite right, the problems I heard could also have been driver related. The fact is, regardless of whatever it was, they certainly don't provide a genuine 'open window' into the music like the Lockwoods do - no way José. Judge for yourself when you come up!



"Proven" how and by whom, Dave? Is it likely to be anyone I know whose ears I trust? If not, then I'm sorry, it has no bearing on my opinion whatsoever. I'm not saying you're 'wrong' - just that unless I've heard the results with my own ears, or someone else whose ears I trust has, then such things for me are completely irrelevant.

What I can say quite categorically is that the Lockwoods blow the SP100s away, and any Spendor loudspeaker I've heard, in every conceivable area including lack of coloration. I've also heard quite a few Harbeths (Compact 7s, and the like), and although I rate them highly, the Lockwoods are just in a totally different league.

The difference between you and I, I've noticed, is that you allow yourself to be influenced by lots of things other than solely what your own ears tell you at this present moment in time (i.e. what you've heard in the past and what others have told you, what 'experts' think, etc). I don't!

Honestly, Dave, we could both waffle on here until the cows come home, but the fact is until you actually hear my system, including the Lockwoods, you don't have a clue what kind of results I'm getting or how 'coloured' or not the Lockwoods are. Until then, continue to generalise if you wish, but you're not proving anything to anyone other than you.



You see, there it is again so "I've been told". No offence, but do you believe everything that you're told? Who knows what agendas were held by whoever told you that. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I wasn't there, but I suspect there's just a little more to the story than what you've highlighted. Practicality issues, changes of equipment and procedures at the time, all of this I suspect would have had a bearing on events.

Ugly? I couldn't give a shit. It's how they sound that matters - and they're bloody stunning!! :ner:



LOL. Sorry, that is complete blinkered nonsense! The Monitor Reds I've got do not in any way "shriek and spit at you" - far from it. Do you really think I'd put up with that? Honestly, reading this sort of stuff is just laughable given what I'm hearing from them at the moment - and nor are the tulip wave-guide tweeters "superior"; that is simply a matter of personal taste, as both have their good points.



Eh? I think Anthony would have some issues with your comments there regarding the Copper amp!! Again this is nonsense. Everything in hi-fi is a compromise, Dave, but experience tells me that the best vintage stuff, updated with modern components, has got far less compromises than most of the tat made today. It is indeed rather sobering when you realise first-hand how little in some areas hi-fi equipment has advanced since the 1950s!! In fact, out with of convenience and miniaturisation, it's gone more backwards than forwards...



I've worked very hard (and smart), Dave, to get to the comfortable position I'm in now. When I retire, I'll have plenty to occupy me, such as travelling the world and indulging in my many passions in life. We have a villa in Italy, so I'll be spending more time there soaking up the sun and slurping vino, so doncha worry about me, shweety! :cool:



Glad you're having fun, dude. Forums are about sharing our experiences and helping each other - we're all on a learning curve, so I'm glad that some of the info here on AOS has enriched your enjoyment of music. I plan to enrich it even more and dispel some of your deeply-ingrained 'beliefs' when you visit! :gig:

;)

Marco.

I don't even know where to start here, so I won't make a big issue out of the above post, but I do find the tone rather patronising Marco - aren't you learning new things either, or do you know it all by now?

I have spent the last forty plus years "learning" about this industry and some of the products sold within it. I have also had the great priviledge to talk at length on occasion with some of the "people who know and design" the stuff - not just Ivor or Julian either. The one gent I wish I had met was Peter Walker, as he had so much common sense and in his day, wasn't afraid to try different routes to get where he needed to go with a design (I think he'd taken a back seat by the time the 405 came along, but could be wrong there and he had FAR more knowledge than Ivor and Julian added together IMO...)

One thing though, which classic era Crowns have you heard? D-60's, D-150's, 150A's, 150A mk2's or DC300A's. I'd like to know as they all sound different, the sound getting "greyer" as you went up the range (although the D150A driving big IMF's has to be heard on master tape to be believed where bass is concerned..) The D-60 is nothing like the bigger ones (we compared them all at the time) and bridged D-60's are slightly different again, as they have headroom lacking in a single amp (they don't like 4 Ohm loads either, but that isn't a problem with what I have).

Back to ATC. Their bigger products have faded from the domestic scene since Ash's day and unless they've changed, there's no way that you can tri-amp the 50's or 100's in passive form unless you butcher the crossover first. The mid driver is such a fussy beggar that there is NO WAY that a passive crossover can properly match it to the bass unit on the one hand, or the tweeter on the other, as the phasing is all wrong, giving a "smothered" effect. I'd also expand on what I was trying to say about the 50A's and 100A's compared to the 200A's - the 200A's had masses more power available and the sound output in the bass and lower mid was shared between two 12" bass units. F's up the imagery in a small room no end, but half the cone excursion for the same sound volume plus at least 50% more power each driver was a VERY good thing for these drivers IMO. I'm not saying that this is the correct way to go (over-damped bass unit, heavy doped mid dome and a standard tweeter in smaller models), but at the time it was excellent.

Regarding Tannoy Pepperpots - I don't have responses on the old units you have, but there are many available on the HPD series drivers as well as the Lancasters, Chatsworth's and York era. All of these show the pepperpot taking off at 3KHz (long ago sorted) and also being very ragged above 9KHz (giving a tinsel effect on the 12" models especially). The whole reason for the tulip waveguide I read was in an attempt to improve the treble response, not make it cheaper. Alnico magnets can "go off" over the decades too, due to the working of the driver coil somehow de-magnetising the Alnico I understand. Whether this really is an issue I don't know, but it's all on the web, if you care to look as I did last year.

You know Marco, your comments above and Mr C's too ruined a rather good listening session this afternoon and I had to switch off (without shutting down either...) and leave it for a while. All the cr@p I seem to be posting on here is via 35 - 40 years of personal experience and, more recently, online research. Your opinion and system seems to transcend all of this and make it worthless..

Ah well... I'm willing to listen, are you? :confused:

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 15:29
How so? I'm genuinely interested..

Hello Dave,

Fair question, lets look at CD's basic spec's

16 bits resolution, 44100 samples per second bandwidth 20hz to 20Khz (the limit of inspec human hearing :eyebrows:)

simplistically thats a 'window size of 16 bits wide' and 44100 samples per window (per second)
Now virtually all recordings these days are of a minimum of 24bits/96khz, most commercial studio's use 24/192 khz, some go even further.
So if you like 24 bits now gives you a much broader window (144db S to N ratio), the sample rate is at least 2.5times to 4.5 times greater (so more samples per second giving a more accurate interpolation of the analogue wave form (more dots on the curve)
Now this this the RAW recorded format (24 bits 192khz), after mixing and band disagreements about who's amp is at number 11 :lol:) and the mastering is complete.
You now have a finished digital master copy.
To get the the master file is to cd format,it has to be 'down-sampled' and resolution adjusted to fit the red book format (16 bits and 44.1Khz) this is completed in the digital domain and a new' CD master file is created
So basically you start with a large box (24/192khz) and make 100 times smaller :laser: or from 24/96Khz you make 50 times less information.
The difference between a cd master file and a studio 24/96khz master file is like listening to a boom box in your kids bedroom compared to £5K cd player/TT. set up in fairly expensive system.
Now a lot of CD players/dac's up-sample/oversample using SRC's so that they 'up' the resolution from say 16 bits to 24 or 32 bits, they do this by 'adding' random bits of noise 'dither' to the signal, which also re-sampling incoming frequency from 44.1khz up to 192khz (they can also re-clock the incoming data stream by using a dual or enhanced PLL (phase lock loop circuit)
This is NOT the same as utilizing a genuine high resolution format file.
I have a demonstration for this, we have a world class digital replay system on demonstration transport/dac/ultra accurate word clock.
The Transport is one of the very best available, now if I use our server based system, feeding the same dac/cables with a direct CD master copy (Flac) and compare it to the genuine CD copy and level match the PC system is another league above it (this is just basic Flac copies)
even when I up-sample the raw data to output 176.4khz into the dac from the transport, the server is still much more real.
Now interestingly CD has a data rate of 1.411Mps, yet the comparison Flac file is only at 898Kps :doh::lol:
When inputing basic studio masters at 24/96khz CD is made to sound like a wasp in jar.
The sense of sheer realism and being there is totally transposed to you.
Not a hint of digitalaris, deep rich flowing textures, incredible dynamics, sheer believability, with a rich smooth yet immediate sound.
Personally the only time I listen to CD's or Vinyl is when I perform demonstrations for clients, I have over 1200 albums on Flac or high res formats.
At the moment I will agree there are not that many 'know' artists however the list is growing weekly.
High resolution audio does not have to cost a fortune either.
Hope that helps Dave

REM
20-06-2009, 15:31
No no no, thrice no.

You're all way off the mark, as any one with ears to hear will tell you the only real recordings are those made in the true golden age of audio before the advent of such artifice as electricity:-
http://www.sandybrownjazz.co.uk/forumclpgsrecordings.html
:smoking:

ps I bet they all had a ripping good time, don't ya know, daddy-o:lol:

http://www.clpgs.org.uk/

Spectral Morn
20-06-2009, 15:32
I have a lot of time for Art Dudley as he is now in Stereophile (I don't know much about the Listener..I only have one copy and thats the last issue). In this months Stereophile (June 2009)he writes this and I quote.

Hes talking in context of getting older "I confess to hearing more, not less, in the way of musical differences between analog and digital playback as time goes by: differences in their abilities to convey momentum, pacing, flow, melody, harmony, and overall intellectual and emotional involvement. And, again, the older I get, the less I find I can tolerate average-quality digital sound, even for background music-even as the opposite seems to be the case among so many of my friends, and even as my hearing continues its natural and inexorable decline"


I think that says it all and covers analogue recording/playback too...if done and reproduced on top flight gear.


Regards D S D L

Marco
20-06-2009, 15:48
Dave,

Regarding you're last post, I don't have the time to go into it in detail. Of course I'm still learning, as is anyone else - I've already said this on numerous occasions.

*But* when you write (in a seemingly authoritative) style things about the Lockwoods and Pepperpot tweeters, etc, which are COMPLETELY CONTRARY (as in NIGHT AND DAY) to what I'm hearing, I have no choice but to comment and explain it as I'm hearing it in REALITY, not conjecture or what's written wherever you've researched the subject.

If they sounded as you described do you honestly think I could live with them? If the answers is yes, then you really don't know me at all. I'm afraid the fact is you won't realise the mistake you've made on this until you hear the results for yourself :)

Anyway, please accept my apologies for spoiling your listening session. I wish you many happy ones for the rest of day :smoking:

Ok, gotta shoot - laters! :cool:

Marco.

anthonyTD
20-06-2009, 17:25
Depending on the sound the artist is looking for I would agree sometimes the analogue master is better suited, however a good digitally recorded master UNFESTERED with by record companies is pretty special, again this is down to the person. behind the desk and their complete understanding of the technology he/she is using.
This has become very evident in the last 8 months or so, (we have owned a recoding studio for that time).
very well put mr C...
PS, your last post [ http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2737&page=14 ]was priceless...:lol::lol::lol:
A...

Mr. C
20-06-2009, 17:42
A..

Just feeling a touch flamboyant today.

Marco
20-06-2009, 18:01
Is it because of your new dress? :eyebrows:

Marco.

DSJR
20-06-2009, 18:04
Hello Dave,

Fair question, lets look at CD's basic spec's

16 bits resolution, 44100 samples per second bandwidth 20hz to 20Khz (the limit of inspec human hearing :eyebrows:)

simplistically thats a 'window size of 16 bits wide' and 44100 samples per window (per second)
Now virtually all recordings these days are of a minimum of 24bits/96khz, most commercial studio's use 24/192 khz, some go even further.
So if you like 24 bits now gives you a much broader window, the sample rate is at least 2.5times to 4.5 times greater (so more samples per second giving a more accurate interpolation of the analogue wave form (more dots on the curve)
Now this this the RAW recorded format (24 bits 192khz), after mixing and band disagreements about who's amp is at number 11 :lol:) and the mastering is complete.
You now have a finished digital master copy.
To get the the master file is to cd format,it has to be 'down-sampled' and resolution adjusted to fit the red book format (16 bits and 44.1Khz) this is completed in the digital domain and a new' CD master file is created
So basically you start with a large box (24/192khz) and make 100 times smaller :laser: or from 24/96Khz you make 50 times less information.
The difference between a cd master file and a studio 24/96khz master file is like listening to a boom box in your kids bedroom compared to £5K cd player/TT. set up in fairly expensive system.
Now a lot of CD players/dac's up-sample/oversample using SRC's so that they 'up' the resolution from say 16 bits to 24 or 32 bits, they do this by 'adding' random bits of noise 'dither' to the signal, which also re-sampling incoming frequency from 44.1khz up to 192khz (they can also re-clock the incoming data stream by using a dual or enhanced PLL (phase lock loop circuit)
This is NOT the same as utilizing a genuine high resolution format file.
I have a demonstration for this, we have a world class digital replay system on demonstration transport/dac/ultra accurate word clock.
The Transport is one of the very best available, now if I use our server based system, feeding the same dac/cables with a direct CD master copy (Flac) and compare it to the genuine CD copy and level match the PC system is another league above it (this is just basic Flac copies)
even when I up-sample the raw data to output 176.4khz into the dac from the transport, the server is still much more real.
Now interestingly CD has a data rate of 1.411Mps, yet the comparison Flac file is only at 898Kps :doh::lol:
When inputing basic studio masters at 24/96khz CD is made to sound like a wasp in jar.
The sense of sheer realism and being there is totally transposed to you.
Not a hint of digitalaris, deep rich flowing textures, incredible dynamics, sheer believability, with a rich smooth yet immediate sound.
Personally the only time I listen to CD's or Vinyl is when I perform demonstrations for clients, I have over 1200 albums on Flac or high res formats.
At the moment I will agree there are not that many 'know' artists however the list is growing weekly.
High resolution audio does not have to cost a fortune either.
Hope that helps Dave

I wish I knew enough to answer back properly on this, but as I understand it, 16 bit gives 96db dynamic range, 24 bit gives something like 120db dynamic range and bearing in mind our ears *apparently* have a sliding scale 50db dynamic range which is almost NEVER fully utilised in the recording and production process, I'd say the extra dynamics from 24 bit isn't really needed at home. be honest, most ambience or reverb in recordings is around minus 30 or minus 40 db (listen to the separation of your average pickup cartridge L on R or R on L to see where this level is relative to the music you play). As I understand or understood it, the extra "resolution" is in the bottom 30db of dynamic range. Pros need it just in case the digital editors mess up low down and SBM deals with midrange info at -90db anyway (according to a test disc I have showing this way of doing things), so what you're often hearing is a cleaner noise floor/less "grainy" sounding tape hiss, rather than more "real" reproduction of acoustic instruments (as I said, I can't argue technically, but others that can have posted about the way the waveform is re-constructed). I'd also contentiously argue that the main benefit of SA-CD is another chance to master the material to a higher standard if it's an old disc, or take extra care if it's a new recording.

I think I can take it as read that we like a really good FM broadcast, say, a Radio 3 live concert. These are 13 bit digital with a brick wall at 15KHz (same as an average cheap to middling cassette deck or lowish res MP3), yet I never read criticism of these broadcasts anywhere.

P.S. Marco, I haven't heard your particular Tannoys yet (maybe the Lockwoods had different crossovers, much larger cabs or the mid is balanced differently where it meets the tweeter, but the tweeter "thing" that I heard in the early 1970's Mon: Golds and the HPD's of a little later is very well documented in various Tannoy sites and I have the HiFi Choice reviews which show the same, especially the Kan-like upper-mid shrillness of the LGM that HiFi Dave bought. With the HPD's I used to play with (12" or 15"), I found at the time I needed to turn the tweeter level down a notch, as well as the roll-off control the same.

Anyways, I'm back to Mandingo's Savage Rite :gig:

Marco
20-06-2009, 18:30
P.S. Marco, I haven't heard your particular Tannoys yet (maybe the Lockwoods had different crossovers, much larger cabs or the mid is balanced differently where it meets the tweeter, but the tweeter "thing" that I heard in the early 1970's Mon: Golds and the HPD's of a little later is very well documented in various Tannoy sites and I have the HiFi Choice reviews which show the same, especially the Kan-like upper-mid shrillness of the LGM that HiFi Dave bought...


Dave, you don't think I'm using them with original Tannoy crossovers do you?

If so, that could be half the problem. The original Tannoy ones are shit. No, the Monitor Reds I'm using came with special crossovers designed by Chris Birchley at Big Ears Audio. They have 'fancy' caps and wire, and all sorts of nice 'bits' in them.

I've no doubt that what you're referring to is 'well documented' on some of these sites, but it is simply not what I'm hearing with the speakers I'm using - that's the whole point. If there was a "Kan-like upper-mid shrillness" or whatever other stuff you've mentioned going on, I most definitely wouldn't have bought them!

What's quite funny is that I read some of this nonsense myself you've mentioned before I bought the Monitor Reds, even things about 'notch filters' being made which apparently tamed this supposed "shrillness". When I mentioned this to Roger at Lockwood, and also Chris, they just laughed and remarked that there isn't half some bullshit written about vintage Tannoys on Internet sites!! :eyebrows:

When I got to hear the Lockwoods for myself, any such concerns were immediately erased, as the totally non-fatiguing, beautifully detailed, textured, and expressive musical sound came flooding out into the listening room... Honestly, these are amongst the finest, most musically revealing speakers I've heard.

And yes, the Lockwoods are big buggers, measuring 44" tall, 28" wide and 18" deep. What size of cabinets have you heard 15" Monitor Reds in before? 15" driver Tannoys ONLY work properly in very large cabinets.

HPDs are a different ball game, and are voiced rather differently to Reds or Golds - certainly the ones I've heard. Berkleys and Devons, I would agree exhibit some of the traits you've described, but the Reds and Golds I've heard are much more even-handed and refined sounding :)

Marco.

Mike
20-06-2009, 18:31
Was there something in this thread about cassettes somewhere (he said with tongue in cheek)? :lol:

Marco
20-06-2009, 18:39
Quite a lot, actually! But we're enjoying a bit of renowned AOS thread drift at the moment.

We can talk about beer and food a bit if you like (why not? :eyebrows:) - I'm just about to indulge in some :cool:

Marco.

Mike
20-06-2009, 18:47
We can talk about beer and food a bit if you like

Nah... I'm too busy cooking two currys. :)

Marco
20-06-2009, 19:00
Sounds good! I'm having Vietnamese chilli chicken with Udon noodles, Pak Choi, and baby sweetcorn - yum! :)

Marco.

Mike
20-06-2009, 19:18
Kashmiri rogan josh, Aloo gosht, Masaledar basmati, and Pyaz ka laccha for us tonight. :) <insert 'rubbing belly' smiley here>

DSJR
20-06-2009, 19:39
Just had a great curry (not home made - my mediocre skills go nowhere near cooking - as long as I can feed the oven and micro-wave I'm fine) and some beer and the Dual finally warmed up - it does you know, not that anyone's bothered except me.

So, the Tannoy crossovers are cr@p and you've got new and better ones. No wonder you're not hearing what I heard... The mid peak was on later Dorsets (reds?) and the review concluded that if this was sorted, there'd be a good speaker in there. The HPD's I knew well and all but ignored until recently were always panned for having a looser bass and too-small resonant boxes giving colouration in the mid..

Anyway - sorted..

I've been enjoying my grey, grainy sounding system with that so-called "fingers-down-a-blackboard" sound that t-internet calls the generic multi-decade Crown "sound" and although I don't think mine do this, I couldn't give a flying fig either way right now :ner:

Marco
20-06-2009, 19:51
So, the Tannoy crossovers are cr@p and you've got new and better ones. No wonder you're not hearing what I heard... Anyway - sorted..


LOL. So we've been arguing over nothing? You should read things more closely, Dave. I did mention that fact some time ago on my 'Journey to Tannoyland' thread! ;)


I've been enjoying my grey, grainy sounding system with that so-called "fingers-down-a-blackboard" sound that t-internet calls the generic multi-dacade Crown "sound" and although I don't think mine do this, I couldn't give a flying fig either way right now :ner:

That's not how I'd describe the Crown sound - it isn't bright, just very 'solid-statey' in its presentation, and so not my thing. All that matters though, mate, is that you're enjoying it! :)

Marco.

REM
20-06-2009, 19:57
Kashmiri rogan josh, Aloo gosht, Masaledar basmati, and Pyaz ka laccha for us tonight. :) <insert 'rubbing belly' smiley here>

What on earth is Masaledar basmati:confused:?
I ask as I have just made Lamb Dansak and am about to put my Asian Bay scented basmati into a very low oven to finish cooking by absorption, ready to eat after myself and Mrs REM return from a jolly evening sampling some of the excellent fine cask ales on offer in all the welcoming hostelries in the local shire.
Yeah, I wish, in fact we're off out in Chav Central, doing battle to get served with all the chavs, chavettes, lowlifes, scroungers and general unwashed that make up the weekend so called revelers round here. Last week there were two fights, an attempted stabbing and a transexual flashing their boobs (5k each apparently) all before 11pm. Wish us luck:cool:

Cheers

Mike
20-06-2009, 20:00
What on earth is Masaledar basmati:confused:?

It translates as 'spiced basmati rice'. Simples<squeek>! :)

DSJR
20-06-2009, 20:01
Spoke to HiFi Dave earlier, who gave me grief 'cos I need to visit him to hear some great new goodies (and also his ill-gotten vintage classic gains on a certain auction site...). I should be able to get my Quad II's going properly again after the visit and use the chunky Ecoflex 10 interconnects I made up for them :)

Marco
20-06-2009, 20:10
It translates as 'spiced basmati rice'. Simples<squeek>! :)

Never mind that, what the feck is Pyaz ka laccha? :confused:

Sounds like a rash you might get from too many 'panty pops'!!

Ralph,

Seems quite eventful where you are. So I take it you'll not be attending one of the wife swapping parties afterwards? Just to feel 'in' with the locals, y'understand :lolsign:

Marco.

Mike
20-06-2009, 20:17
Never mind that, what the feck is Pyaz ka laccha? :confused:

Basically... 'onion relish'!

But not what we Europeans usually think of as a 'relish'. :)

Marco
20-06-2009, 20:35
Mmm... Indeed. I can think of another name for 'gentleman's relish' :eyebrows:

Marco.

tfarney
20-06-2009, 23:30
So, just to make it clear, you're now saying that you understand that sometimes tape is better?

If so, what a turnaround! :)

Marco.

No. I'm saying I agree that some recording engineers, like most AOS members, believe in magic.

ON EDIT: In the spirit, I should add that the above is my opinion.

Tim

Spectral Morn
21-06-2009, 08:26
No. I'm saying I agree that some recording engineers, like most AOS members, believe in magic.

ON EDIT: In the spirit, I should add that the above is my opinion.

Tim

Hi Tim

I think I can speak for those that hold the same view as me, those you are being critical of. No we don't believe in magic...this is not a case of belief or faith, but an acceptance of what we have all heard many times. We sit down to listen to our audio systems and others, and have repeatedly heard the superiority of analogue playback and recording equipment. Now that is not to say that all analogue equipment is equal, but there is a wide spread trend for mid priced well set up Turntables to better much more expensive CD players and for properly used and set up analogue recorders (reel to reel and cassette) to both record and playback a more natural copy of the music than a digital recorder. It should also be noted that even in digital recording there is the issue (which according to objectivists should not happen) that a CDR copy of a CD sounds better than the original...I have heard that too...bits are bits, is not, it would seem the case. Maybe jitter is the answer, but no one to my knowledge has explained this one yet.

You have heard what you have heard and despite analogues short comings (and none of us are saying analogue is not a compromise or perfect) but it consistently replays music in a way that is closer to the original. It captures the following better (I will re-quote Art Dudley again) "I confess to hearing more, not less, in the way of musical differences between analog and digital playback as time goes by: differences in their abilities to convey momentum, pacing, flow, melody, harmony, and overall intellectual and emotional involvement. And, again, the older I get, the less I find I can tolerate average-quality digital sound, even for background music-even as the opposite seems to be the case among so many of my friends, and even as my hearing continues its natural and inexorable decline"

The above is what we are hearing and you are not (I would love to know why you haven't). I can't explain or understand how it is that with your many years of experience you have not once had that sort of realization....that moment that exposes digital for the 2d format it is. Please understand I am not saying that digital can never better analogue just that I and many others have still to hear that....and we are not deluded.

Frankly I find your tone in the above comment to be sailing close to being insulting(in your opinion not with standing) There is no need to take that sort of tone in this discussion IMHO.

Are you willing to seek out the sort of set ups we have mentioned and have a listen again ? If you don't hear it fair enough but stepping out from the yoke of objectivity and becoming more subjective may help open your mind and ears. Measurements does not hold all the answers to what happens during the recording and reproduction of music or the human aspects in performing it or hearing it.

In my experience it is not usually a question of subtlety but of massive and obvious superiority that analogue is better (in the areas that matter most in music replay and recording). To many times I have seen others hear this too. Case in point Steve (Aquapiranha)...with in seconds exclaimed that once again vinyl had beaten CD when hearing my SME Model 20 mk1, Graham Phantom, Ortofon MC7500 against my Moon Andromeda CD player..." I must get myself a turntable" he said. The vinyl playback set up is bar the arm all S/H and at least 20 years old the Andromeda is one of the best CD (modern) players around (it should be noted that some members seem to have achieved this, having spent less money in regard to their TT front-end, than I have; even though some of my kit is S/H) If you want to be ultra critical there are somethings digital does better than analogue(in this case vinyl) but the essence,naturalness, dimension and emotion of the music is preserved and reproduced better to the best of digital and this finding also applies to SACD and DVD-A too ( I have also got both of these at home)


Regards D S D L

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 09:55
No. I'm saying I agree that some recording engineers, like most AOS members, believe in magic.

ON EDIT: In the spirit, I should add that the above is my opinion.

Tim

I can asure you that I'm Atheist/Zen-Buddhist and therefor do NOT believe in magic or destiny.

You can call it what you want but your rhetorics pinpoints that you lack that "magical" experience.
That might be caused by the "specification- and data sheet(shit) religion", sometimes stated as an opinion.

As we all know, AOS members or not, history told us that fundamentalistic religion prevents progress.

"dolph"

Marco
21-06-2009, 10:06
Neil,

Excellent post. This:


...but stepping out from the yoke of objectivity and becoming more subjective may help open your mind and ears. Measurements do not hold all the answers to what happens during the recording and reproduction of music or the human aspects in performing it or hearing it.


...is it in a nutshell. It is something, to the ultimate detriment of his musical enjoyment, a dyed-in-the-wool, blinkered, closed-minded objectivist like Tim will NEVER get. You are wasting your time, as am I. Let him wallow in the digital mediocrity of his ADM9s.

His comment is not sailing close to being insulting - it *is* insulting, and frankly I've had enough of it. This disrespectful attitude is completely unacceptable. I have no problem whatsoever with people holding an alternative viewpoint and robustly expressing/defending it, but to remain a part of this community people *MUST* respect the equally valid opinion of others at ALL times. This is a core part of our ethos.

Tim, your sneering disdain, as evidenced by your 'magic' comment above (and others of a similar nature earlier), of people's valid subjective experiences has no place on this forum, so I must ask you to consider very seriously whether you wish to remain here.

If you do remain, I suggest that you contain your hi-fi contributions within the Digital Impression sector of the forum, where your mindset is obviously more at home, and the likelihood of any further confrontations is thus minimised. Simply visiting AOS occasionally to take some perverse satisfaction in crossing swords with 'the enemy' will no longer be tolerated.

I do hope I make myself clear.

Marco.

DSJR
21-06-2009, 10:20
I must confess that I'm still deeply suspicious of opinions being spouted as facts when the master recording often sounds multi-mono and "dry" and nothing like the syrupy "niceness" that is your average top end vinyl player (not necessarily a Technics SP10 or NAS Spacedeck), where all the "edge" has been "refined" out.

I still feel, rightly or wrongly, that all this "musical" expression, rhythm and "texture" is over-egged in a compressed analogue format like LP, as I never heard this exaggeration listening to music live (or when Revox recorded live concerts were recorded with a crossed pair of Calrecs played back on a half decent system).

I like NAS turntables because, rightly or wrongly, they seem to give the detail and drive without dissecting the playback. They out-tune a "typical" Linn and out-rhythm it too - the latest mods take the fruitbox out of the pricing equation as a full SL1200 or Spacedeck "system is less than the Keel mod). I've not yet heard a fully sorted SL1200 series, but the SP10 used to "do it" too (and that was in the old plinths as well). I've just remembered, our London shop sold the Rock II as well and although our Linn/Naim sales director all but ignored it, we sold a good few of these at the time and got on well with Max. This latter, as Neil may confirm, had a good way with LP's too.

To close on the analogue/digital thing, I remember a senior engineer at Castle Sound Studios (Linn used them loads) coming into our London shop (Linn had a flat in the block above for London visits) and saying just how much better their digital system was at capturing the music (and they did some stunning 30IPS 1/2" analogue masters in their day). I also have a copy of Linns Analogue/Digital LP, one side cut with the usual analogue recording system and the other side cut from a Sony PCM-F1 Betamax(?) digital system. Guess which side most Linn dealers preferred? the DIGITAL one, according to Linn, causing some consternation up in Glasgow I understand.. Calum Malcolm (I think it was, but it could have been Bill - long time ago) brought Linn's pro Numerik into the shop (a modular large 19" rack mounted thing nothing like the domestic model) and it forever banished any feelings that digital was inferior in any way. What gets me is how, for some reason, we still get differences in CD production when the glass master should be the same.

May I deeply and very respectfully respectfully suggest that ADM 9.1's are bought by music lovers, NOT audio enthusiasts who can move their rooms around to accommodate the stereo. It took me nearly five years living here before herself allowed the stereo in the sitting room and I didn't want to shut myself away in another room, away from my family, listening to music as I did when I first got a computer, stuck in an upstairs "office" tapping away ;) I did enough of that when I lived at home (Isobariks as headphones - beat that :ner:)

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 11:04
I must confess that I'm still deeply suspicious of opinions being spouted as facts when the master recording often sounds multi-mono and "dry" and nothing like the syrupy "niceness" that is your average top end vinyl player (not necessarily a Technics SP10 or NAS Spacedeck), where all the "edge" has been "refined" out.

What a confusion this adds to the Cassette debate IMO.

Technics TT's will never get status as top-end in any modification.
I'm sorry. This is my opinion.
Technics made some great entry level and DJ TT's.
And that's it.

But this really belongs in another debate.
And I think it's there to find.


Anyway...................
I wish freedom to speak (and write) were a little wider here.
Tim didn't earn to be banned or censored - again IMO.
Otherwise he will never get to experience the "magic" he mentioned in his last post.

Let's be more "containing" as I used to say in my profession as resocializing heavy criminals.

I mean.........................Tim's statements and opinions are not more frightening and segragating than when there was a debate about microphonics from gear hung on the wall or positioned on the floor - or was it cables touching a wall or not.
OMG!!!

"dolph"

Marco
21-06-2009, 11:32
Dave,

I agree with most of what you've written. There will always be examples where *some* digital recordings are superior to *some* analogue recordings, and vice versa. What pro-analogue people like others and myself contend, and from experience, is that the *best* analogue recordings, when they happen, are unquestionably superior to the *best* digital recordings - that's the difference, but we could go round and round disputing this all day. Therefore, I think it's best just to agree to disagree and move on :)

However this (in bold):


May I deeply and very respectfully respectfully suggest that ADM 9.1's are bought by music lovers, NOT audio enthusiasts who can move their rooms around to accommodate the stereo. It took me nearly five years living here before herself allowed the stereo in the sitting room and I didn't want to shut myself away in another room, away from my family, listening to music as I did when I first got a computer.


...is, with respect, nonsense.

The likes of ADM9s (I'm not solely singling them out - they are just an example of the 'breed') are bought mainly by two different types of people:

1) Those who simply want an up-to-date, neat, cost-effective, decent sounding, all-in-one digital music solution with the minimum amount of fuss.

2) Those that come into the above category and are constrained by space and/or considerations of WAF, and perhaps can't afford anything more expensive that may be better.

That's it. Owning the likes of ADM9s has nothing whatsoever to do with one's status or otherwise as a music lover.

I would agree that there's a fine line between loving music and becoming a 'hi-fi obsessive', and that some manage this challenge better than others. I would contend though that those who are willing to go the extra mile (and own the necessary equipment) to obtain the highest fidelity and 'realism' from recorded music, and who in turn own large music collections as a result of that (that last bit is crucial), are indeed the most genuine music lovers.

I come into this category, and I'm certain that most of our members do too, which is partly why AOS is different from some other audio forums.

As for shutting oneself in a another room away from the family, this is indeed a consideration, but much depends on the layout of one's home and the lifestyle/desires of the people within it.

In my situation, I have a dedicated music room for two main reasons:

1) So that when I want to listen to music I can do so without disturbing my wife watching television, and vice versa.

2) So that I have a space where I can store all my music together and optimise the set-up (and thus performance) of my chosen equipment, which doesn't interfere with the layout of our lounge.

That last bit is quite crucial, because our small Victorian lodge house is full of the antiques we collect and is decorated very much in an 'Olde-Worlde' style, therefore the last thing we'd want is to have an 'ugly' hi-fi system in there spoiling the 'ambience' of the room. Multi-level Mana and huge Tannoy Lockwoods do not mingle harmoniously with Clarice Cliff, Crown Staffordshire porcelain and original oak Welsh dressers! ;)

In fact, let me be even more specific - there would physically be no room for ALL OF THAT and the TV! :)

So........ I have my own little 'den' which accommodates all my audio paraphernalia and music, and where my wife and I often enjoy a nice bottle of wine whilst listening to our favourite tunes. It is also a place where the 'crew' can go, listen to music, and talk about all manner of depravity (:eyebrows:), while their partners indulge in the 'girly' stuff downstairs.

All in all, I am most satisfied with this arrangement. I thus would never consider not having a separate 'den' like this in any house which I lived in. I'm a music lover and also a perfectionist who demands superb sound. I also like the best things in all aspects of life! :cool:

:gig:

Marco.

P.S There is no "syrupy niceness" with a heavily-modifed SL-1210 - just beautiful music heard with minimal possible coloration.

anthonyTD
21-06-2009, 11:33
What a confusion this adds to the Cassette debate IMO.

Technics TT's will never get status as top-end in any modification.
I'm sorry. This is my opinion.
Technics made some great entry level and DJ TT's.
And that's it.

But this really belongs in another debate.
And I think it's there to find.



Anyway...................
I wish freedom to speak (and write) were a little wider here.
Tim didn't earn to be banned or censored - again IMO.
Otherwise he will never get to experience the "magic" he mentioned in his last post.

Let's be more "containing" as I used to say in my profession as resocializing heavy criminals.

I mean.........................Tim's statements and opinions are not more frightening and segragating than when there was a debate about microphonics from gear hung on the wall or positioned on the floor.
OMG!!!

"dolph"
yep,
totally agree with you on this dolph.
A...

Marco
21-06-2009, 11:34
Technics TT's will never get status as top-end in any modification.
I'm sorry. This is my opinion.
Technics made some great entry level and DJ TT's.
And that's it.


LOL! Let's not go there, Dolph ;)

You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine!

Marco.

Marco
21-06-2009, 11:41
yep,
totally agree with you on this dolph.
A...

Did you mean just the last bit about Tim, or the bit too about Technics T/Ts? ;)

Marco.

Marco
21-06-2009, 11:57
I think Anthony can speak for himself, Dolph.

Besides, I already know the answer (he rates it highly) as he's heard my system and the 1210, so my earlier remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek ;)

Marco.

{Edit: ah, I see you've deleted your post now} :eyebrows:

tfarney
21-06-2009, 13:14
Hi Tim

I think I can speak for those that hold the same view as me, those you are being critical of. No we don't believe in magic...this is not a case of belief or faith, but an acceptance of what we have all heard many times. We sit down to listen to our audio systems and others, and have repeatedly heard the superiority of analogue playback and recording equipment. Now that is not to say that all analogue equipment is equal, but there is a wide spread trend for mid priced well set up Turntables to better much more expensive CD players and for properly used and set up analogue recorders (reel to reel and cassette) to both record and playback a more natural copy of the music than a digital recorder. It should also be noted that even in digital recording there is the issue (which according to objectivists should not happen) that a CDR copy of a CD sounds better than the original...I have heard that too...bits are bits, is not, it would seem the case. Maybe jitter is the answer, but no one to my knowledge has explained this one yet.

You have heard what you have heard and despite analogues short comings (and none of us are saying analogue is not a compromise or perfect) but it consistently replays music in a way that is closer to the original. It captures the following better (I will re-quote Art Dudley again) "I confess to hearing more, not less, in the way of musical differences between analog and digital playback as time goes by: differences in their abilities to convey momentum, pacing, flow, melody, harmony, and overall intellectual and emotional involvement. And, again, the older I get, the less I find I can tolerate average-quality digital sound, even for background music-even as the opposite seems to be the case among so many of my friends, and even as my hearing continues its natural and inexorable decline"

The above is what we are hearing and you are not (I would love to know why you haven't). I can't explain or understand how it is that with your many years of experience you have not once had that sort of realization....that moment that exposes digital for the 2d format it is. Please understand I am not saying that digital can never better analogue just that I and many others have still to hear that....and we are not deluded.

Frankly I find your tone in the above comment to be sailing close to being insulting(in your opinion not with standing) There is no need to take that sort of tone in this discussion IMHO.

Are you willing to seek out the sort of set ups we have mentioned and have a listen again ? If you don't hear it fair enough but stepping out from the yoke of objectivity and becoming more subjective may help open your mind and ears. Measurements does not hold all the answers to what happens during the recording and reproduction of music or the human aspects in performing it or hearing it.

In my experience it is not usually a question of subtlety but of massive and obvious superiority that analogue is better (in the areas that matter most in music replay and recording). To many times I have seen others hear this too. Case in point Steve (Aquapiranha)...with in seconds exclaimed that once again vinyl had beaten CD when hearing my SME Model 20 mk1, Graham Phantom, Ortofon MC7500 against my Moon Andromeda CD player..." I must get myself a turntable" he said. The vinyl playback set up is bar the arm all S/H and at least 20 years old the Andromeda is one of the best CD (modern) players around (it should be noted that some members seem to have achieved this, having spent less money in regard to their TT front-end, than I have; even though some of my kit is S/H) If you want to be ultra critical there are somethings digital does better than analogue(in this case vinyl) but the essence,naturalness, dimension and emotion of the music is preserved and reproduced better to the best of digital and this finding also applies to SACD and DVD-A too ( I have also got both of these at home)


Regards D S D L

Dalek, please don't be offended by the "magic" remark. It was a dark joke, a direct response to this comment from Marco:


i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.

But do I think analog lovers are deluded? I came home late last night, to find that a friend had sent me a file: Joni Mitchell singing "Summertime" on Herbie Hancock's album, "Gershwin's World." A file. Sent by email. I have no idea what the compression rate was, but it was obviously compressed. I played it back from my bog-standard Apple laptop through an untweaked Wolfson DAC and a pair of active speakers, bi-amped by big class A/B solid state amps. In other words, a system that is exactly the opposite of what is revered here, a system one would expect, according to the prevailing AOS rhetoric, to be not much better than an ipod and a pair of earbuds.

It was gorgeous, and I'm not just talking about the performance. The instruments and voice that floated, so precisely placed, in the air of my room were stunningly lifelike and present. To believe what is said here, in the most absolute, uncompromising, un-subjective of terms, I am required to not believe my ears. I am required to believe that what I heard late last night was flat, gray, lifeless, hard, ugly, thin, ragged and just plain wrong. I am required to believe that the thin veneer of age and cigarettes on Joni's vocal chords was not a revelation of sonic detail, the communication of deep experience and emotion, but compression distortion and digital artifacts. I am required to imagine the decay of the reverb on the clarinet disintegrating into grainy particles of distortion before it fades into inaudibility. I am required to believe that the compromises of digital are glaring and unbearable and that inner groove distortion, tape hiss, surface noise, clipping valves, the RIAA curve and honking horns are the natural sound of music and that what I heard last night was crap. And i know this is not a popular point in these parts, but I am required to believe it in spite of the fact that the preponderance of measurement and data supports what I hear rather than what I am required to believe. To make matters worse, I am required to believe it by people who declare subjectivism as they dismiss my experience in the most absolute terms.

And you're insulted?


Are you willing to seek out the sort of set ups we have mentioned and have a listen again ?

Why? We have high-end shops; I could go listen to a top-quality vinyl rig this afternoon, but if I didn't experience vinyl sartori, the assumption would be that there was something wrong with the rig; the assumption would be that there was something wrong with my hearing, or taste. I've heard great analog rigs. I've owned great analog rigs. I know they can sound great. I disagree that they can ever sound more "natural" than digital well-done. Listening to another vinyl rig will not change my opinion or ease anyone's discomfort with my disagreement.

With all of that said, you hear what you hear. Enjoy it. I'll sink back into lurking mode now, and leave you to enjoy it. Maybe I'll have the wisdom to stay there this time.

ON EDIT: The above was written before I read Marco's recent posts, though I think it addresses them rather well. No need to ban me, Marco. I'll take care of that myself.

Tim

Marco
21-06-2009, 13:23
Tim,

First of all, this:


i am sure there are many serious recording engineers out there that have worked through the decades of studio recording who would agree that tape despite its obvious draw backs ie, noise, wow flutter etc still has a certain magic and life to it than any digital source could ever capture.


...was a quote belonging to ANTHONY TD, not me! Are you blind as well as blinkered? ;)

Secondly, I have no intention of banning you. As I've said umpteen times in the past, arguing/disagreeing with me, or any other member of admin, is NOT a ban-able offence - far from it.

However, unless you change your attitude and begin to respect valid opinions which are contrary to your own, then you are no longer welcome here. Using AOS as a vehicle to have a pop at people whose approach with hi-fi is different to yours is not acceptable. Therefore, raise your game or go: the ball is in your court.

I'm afraid that snide and unhelpful remarks of yours such as:


Any discussion that supposes that magnetic tape is the more stable archival vehicle than CD is not serious...



I'm not arguing the superiority of the digital format, Marco, but its stability relative to magnetic tape. Not all things are subjective. Only in the world of the grossly uninformed is that one of them.


[Your view on the matter is not an irrefutable fact (such as, for example, 1+1 = 2), therefore how can alternative views be "grossly uniformed"? If evidence is given to support an alternative view, such as Dolph and Alex provided, then their view is equally as valid]. FACT.

and particularly this:


I'm saying I agree that some recording engineers, like most AOS members, believe in magic.


...are neither humorous, nor acceptable within the boundaries of our ethos. Oh, and lastly, I have never once "dismissed" your experience; merely challenged it robustly after you have summarily and disrespectfully dismissed mine. This is the difference/fact you seem unable to comprehend.

Marco.

Spectral Morn
21-06-2009, 13:27
Dalek, please don't be offended by the "magic" remark. It was a dark joke, a direct response to this comment from Marco:



But do I think analog lovers are deluded? I came home late last night, to find that a friend had sent me a file: Joni Mitchell singing "Summertime" on Herbie Hancock's album, "Gershwin's World." A file. Sent by email. I have no idea what the compression rate was, but it was obviously compressed. I played it back from my bog-standard Apple laptop through an untweaked Wolfson DAC and a pair of active speakers, bi-amped by big class A/B solid state amps. In other words, a system that is exactly the opposite of what is revered here, a system one would expect, according to the prevailing AOS rhetoric, to be not much better than an ipod and a pair of earbuds.

It was gorgeous, and I'm not just talking about the performance. The instruments and voice that floated, so precisely placed, in the air of my room were stunningly lifelike and present. To believe what is said here, in the most absolute, uncompromising, un-subjective of terms, I am required to not believe my ears. I am required to believe that what I heard late last night was flat, gray, lifeless, hard, ugly, thin, ragged and just plain wrong. I am required to believe that the thin veneer of age and cigarettes on Joni's vocal chords was not a revelation of sonic detail, the communication of deep experience and emotion, but compression distortion and digital artifacts. I am required to imagine the decay of the reverb on the clarinet disintegrating into grainy particles of distortion before it fades into inaudibility. I am required to believe that the compromises of digital are glaring and unbearable and that inner groove distortion, tape hiss, surface noise, clipping valves, the RIAA curve and honking horns are the natural sound of music and that what I heard last night was crap. And i know this is not a popular point in these parts, but I am required to believe it in spite of the fact that the preponderance of measurement and data supports what I hear rather than what I am required to believe. To make matters worse, I am required to believe it by people who declare subjectivism as they dismiss my experience in the most absolute terms.

And you're insulted?



Why? We have high-end shops; I could go listen to a top-quality vinyl rig this afternoon, but if I didn't experience vinyl sartori, the assumption would be that there was something wrong with the rig; the assumption would be that there was something wrong with my hearing, or taste. I've heard great analog rigs. I've owned great analog rigs. I know they can sound great. I disagree that they can ever sound more "natural" than digital well-done. Listening to another vinyl rig will not change my opinion or ease anyone's discomfort with my disagreement.

With all of that said, you hear what you hear. Enjoy it. I'll sink back into lurking mode now, and leave you to enjoy it. Maybe I'll have the wisdom to stay there this time.

ON EDIT: The above was written before I read Marco's recent posts, though I think it addresses them rather well. No need to ban me, Marco. I'll take care of that myself.

Tim

I think your WHY? question says it all in away. I am forced to conclude that you feel your journeys over and there is no more to hear or learn. Tim I have no problem with you having your view and I would defend your right to have that view, but how you have at times expressed that view is rather rude IMHO and at times lacking in any back up info...unlike the post you have just written. You have explained the details of what you listened to last night. Without hearing your experience I can't comment except to indicate that perhaps I might not have felt the same way...but I wasn't there. I can be moved by music of the TV or a portable radio, which hasn't the same quality of sound I normally look for. But the issue there is what is it in the music which transends the lack of quality but still effects you? That is something worth discussing I feel.

I certainly don't revere any system. My set up is away of getting me closer to the music I love and a set of compromises which works in the room it is positioned in.

I think this is a case of wanting different things from audio...or more likely simply hearing things differently.

However I am not insulting your objectavist stance but I do feel without a degree of balance in the form of subjective listening its a 2 d approach. Lets design it by measurement, not listen to it and put it to market. Measurements don't and never have told the whole story.


I am required to believe that what I heard late last night was flat, gray, lifeless, hard, ugly, thin, ragged and just plain wrong. I am required to believe that the thin veneer of age and cigarettes on Joni's vocal chords was not a revelation of sonic detail, the communication of deep experience and emotion, but compression distortion and digital artifacts. I am required to imagine the decay of the reverb on the clarinet disintegrating into grainy particles of distortion before it fades into inaudibility. I am required to believe that the compromises of digital are glaring and unbearable and that inner groove distortion, tape hiss, surface noise, clipping valves, the RIAA curve and honking horns are the natural sound of music

Much of what you describe above is as a result (and I am not using this as some sort of general defence) but of systems and set ups badly matched and badly set up. No one has said that good digital is crap....just not as good in the important ways of reproducing music IOHO's. My system is very different to Marco's and I don't like horn speakers SO FAR (I have still to hear one I like...doesn't mean they don't exist).

Tim I think you have a journeys over mind set, unlike myself who will admit that the journey is never over and there is always more to learn and experience and as such all you are required to do is have an open mind and express your view without being rude.



Regards Neil

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 13:48
All equipment are compromising the reproduced sound.
The difference from media to media, from source to source, from technology in use to ditto, from digital to analogue is with what characters and in what amount this compromise influence.

Then some people dislike this or that character of compromise and some people tend to value sound quality from what this persons ears tend to like instead of valuing the reproduced sound as being as close as possible to the original, to the analog reference.

A lot of hifi fora members (not only AOS) tend to judge sound quality unambiguous from the dynamic parameter, forgetting that dynamics is one of many known parameters to judge what we hear and certainly the known, defined and unit measurable parameters are just a fragment of the wholeness in which a lot of undefined parameters still remains the be acknowledged.

High Fidelity, for us music enjoyers, must be a term explaining that reproduced music can create an illusion taking the listener to where the music was performed or fooling the listener to imagine the musicians playing the gig in the listening room.

If it is not possible, within that imagination or illusion to pinpoint each musicians physical position on "the stage" then imagination/illusion is somehow ruined.

A lot of parameters are defining this important part of the illusion.
Dynamics is not the most importan one for this.

On the bottom line, I believe that the understanding of this will only have a chance when the religion of data sheets, measurements and specifications are left behind.

This is more about holism.

"dolph"

Marco
21-06-2009, 13:54
On the bottom line, I believe that the understanding of this will only have a chance when the religion of data sheets, measurements and specifications are left behind.

This is more about holism.


How very true. I'm glad that you view science as a 'religion' when applied to audio. This is also my view, because that's exactly what it is: a 'religion'; and often a blinkered one at that. Science, in that effect, is often effectively used as a 'crutch'.

The irony of how one can become a slave to scientific values, just as audiophiles are often a slave to the dogma that afflicts the pursuit of high-end audio, is often lost on objectivists!!

Science in relation to audio unquestionably has a valid purpose, but it is far from being the be all and end all. One must look at the bigger picture.

Apart from the Technics comment, Dolph, you're on a roll - keep it up! ;)

Marco.

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 14:48
How very true. I'm glad that you view science as a 'religion' when applied to audio. This is also my view, because that's exactly what it is: a 'religion'; and often a blinkered one at that. It is often effectively used as a 'crutch'.

The irony of how one can become a slave to scientific values, just as audiophiles are often a slave to the dogma that afflicts the pursuit of high-end audio, is often lost on objectivists!!

Science in relation to audio unquestionably has a valid purpose, but it is far from being the be all and end all. One must look at the bigger picture.

Apart from the Technics comment, Dolph, you're on a roll - keep it up! ;)

Marco.

This is weird?? :scratch:

Technics owners are known worldwide for buying their gear on spec's rather than sound.

Feels a little like enjoying a picture of a great strawberry cake.
:lol:

Just joking now.
Don't censor me.
;-)

"dolph"

Marco
21-06-2009, 15:06
Yes, Dolph, but you should take two facts into consideration:

1) I'm not your average 'Technics owner'.

2) My turntable is not your average Technics.

:eyebrows:

Never forget that... ;)

You have no chance of being censored, my friend!

Marco.

anthonyTD
21-06-2009, 18:52
Did you mean just the last bit about Tim, or the bit too about Technics T/Ts? ;)

Marco.
just the bit below mate;)
A...


Anyway...................
I wish freedom to speak (and write) were a little wider here.
Tim didn't earn to be banned or censored - again IMO.
Otherwise he will never get to experience the "magic" he mentioned in his last post.

Beechwoods
21-06-2009, 19:01
So has anyone heard any good tapes recently ;) :lol:

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 19:11
So has anyone heard any good tapes recently ;) :lol:

As a matter of fact, I'm right now listening to Sonny Rollins Live with a.o. NHØP recorded live in Copenhagen 1965 and never released for sale.
It is, however, Open Reel 15 ips, ½-track.

But earlier today I was listening to Bob Brookmeyer, a very cherised release, recorded from 200g vinyl with a Benz L2, RB700, Whest .20 on a modified Dunlop IV and recorded to Tandberg TCD 910 on Scotch Me tape.
Doesn't get much better.

In comparison, my Audio Analogue Paganini CDP could be used as a doorstop.
;-)

"dolph"

anthonyTD
21-06-2009, 19:16
hi all,
reading through this thread and seeing where it has ended up yet again, i am at a loss,,, i have spent most of my life surounded by music, and electronics, but i have never, ever come close to thinking that i know everything there is to know about either,and even though i have my own views as to what makes a good system i hope i have been and always will be open minded enough to listen and learn by others experiences no matter what my initial thoughts are on the matter before hand. shame others seem to think they are above this, your not,you have just closed your mind to anything but your own opinions and therefore i feel you will have lost forever the ability to be wowed by anything un-expected in life for ever more.:(
A...

niklasthedolphin
21-06-2009, 19:32
hi all,
reading through this thread and seeing where it has ended up yet again, i am at a loss,,, i have spent most of my life surounded by music, and electronics, but i have never, ever come close to thinking that i know everything there is to know about either,and even though i have my own views as to what makes a good system i hope i have been and always will be open minded enough to listen and learn by others experiences no matter what my initial thoughts are on the matter before hand. shame others seem to think they are above this, your not,you have just closed your mind to anything but your own opinions and therefore i feel you will have lost forever the ability to be wowed by anything un-expected in life for ever more.;)
A...

Confusing post.
To me it seams pretty negative.

But for whom was this post meant?

"hi all" it says in the start.
So have we all "closed our minds to anything but our own opinion"?
Have we all "forever lost........................"?

Maybe I'm wrong.
I hope I am.
And if so, please forgive me.
I'm trying my best with the english language.

Please enlighten me.

"dolph"

anthonyTD
21-06-2009, 19:43
Confusing post.
To me it seams pretty negative.

But for whom was this post meant?

"hi all" it says in the start.
So have we all "closed our minds to anything but our own opinion"?
Have we all "forever lost........................"?

Maybe I'm wrong.
I hope I am.
And if so, please forgive me.
I'm trying my best with the english language.

Please enlighten me.

"dolph"

sorry dolph,
you should,,, like most people here realise that this post is aimed at a very small minority who post on AOS, i do not include you among those,these people know who they are.
A...

Marco
21-06-2009, 19:46
In short, Timmy boy!

Marco.

Marco
22-06-2009, 00:28
Hi Anthony,


reading through this thread and seeing where it has ended up yet again, i am at a loss,,, i have spent most of my life surounded by music, and electronics, but i have never, ever come close to thinking that i know everything there is to know about either,and even though i have my own views as to what makes a good system i hope i have been and always will be open minded enough to listen and learn by others experiences no matter what my initial thoughts are on the matter before hand...


This is testament to your qualities as a person and a professional in your field of expertise :)

Speaking from experience regarding what you've written, one thing I've noticed with older guys (Tim Farney here in his 60s, Ashley James of AVI in his late 60s, and some others I could mention of a similar 'vintage') is that they all appear to be stuck in their ways and seemingly unwilling to adapt or change. Dave (DSJR) refers to it rather quaintly as being "aspergic", even though I doubt he means it in the literal sense ;)

These guys appear to think that they know it all in terms of audio: the journey's over - there is nothing new to learn. Solid-state and digital are measurably more 'accurate' - end of, that's it - and anyone who thinks differently is a fool who believes in 'magic'; at least that's how they come across. This demonstrates in my opinion, at best, serious closed-mindedness, and at worst, quite staggering arrogance. I find this particularly true with people of a staunchly scientific bent: there is a belligerent and stubborn refusal to see validity in anyone's opinion other than their own, especially when the opposing viewpoint is contrary to their deeply-ingrained belief mechanism.

Why are some people so blinkered and inflexible?

You're certainly not like that and neither are most of the people on this forum. Me? I'm not either. I believe what I believe in with hi-fi at this current moment in time until such times as I'm presented with new evidence (via my ears) which shows that my current beliefs are flawed. If or when that happens, I will simply absorb the requisite new information and alter my opinions accordingly.

At the moment, valves & vinyl rule because that's what my ears tell me reproduces music most faithfully; ergo it is my current 'benchmark'. However, if someone were able to demonstrate to me a digital solid-state based system which significantly outperformed my current set-up then I would admit its superiority and embrace the necessary change accordingly. I am not wedded to vinyl & valves for eternity, so nothing for me is ever written in stone.

This is rational behaviour, surely, so why can't others be like that? :confused:

Tim touched on some stuff earlier which I think is important to address. He said:


I came home late last night, to find that a friend had sent me a file: Joni Mitchell singing "Summertime" on Herbie Hancock's album, "Gershwin's World." A file. Sent by email. I have no idea what the compression rate was, but it was obviously compressed. I played it back from my bog-standard Apple laptop through an untweaked Wolfson DAC and a pair of active speakers, bi-amped by big class A/B solid state amps. In other words, a system that is exactly the opposite of what is revered here, a system one would expect, according to the prevailing AOS rhetoric, to be not much better than an ipod and a pair of earbuds.


I don't doubt that what he heard was excellent, as is dictated by his current benchmark. Computer-based solid-state systems like Tim's can indeed be good - I've heard them, so no argument there - but experience tells me that a top-notch T/T playing mint condition audiophile quality vinyl (of music worth listening to) through the best valve amps (and I mean the punchy, dynamic variety, not the syrupy sleepy-sounding stuff), into huge, high-efficiency speakers like vintage Tannoys, makes the former, good though it is, sound like a very poor relation. I'm sure others here have similar experiences.

However, the question I would ask is this: when was the last time Tim heard a genuine top-notch vinyl & valves set-up - last week, last month, last year - or perhaps longer than that? He doesn't own a turntable or a valve amp, as far as I know.

The point I'm making is that you can't make valid comparisons of equipment solely from memory.

The advantage I have (and I'm sure I'm not alone here) is that I own four different sources: one digital (high-end CDP/DAC), and three analogue (T/T, cassette deck and tuner). That last one is interesting - I'd love to see Tim argue that DAB tuners sound better than high quality analogue ones! If he did then, I'm sorry, he is truly deaf!

Anyway, what I'm able to do therefore is make frequent and valid comparisons between all four sources in my own system, thereby getting a proper handle of what all are capable of. Now I'm not anti-digital - far from it - in fact, I love the sound of my modified Sony CDP & DAC, as it really does sound stunning...for digital.

It's only when I play the best vinyl recordings on my (heavily-modified) SL-1210 (or CR7) that the limitations of even the best digital sources and recordings are ruthlessly revealed. This is the point that Tim should remember - I'm not saying that digital sources and media aren't excellent; just that the best analogue ones are in my experience in an altogether different league.

Tim also said:


I am required to believe that the compromises of digital are glaring and unbearable and that inner groove distortion, tape hiss, surface noise, clipping valves, the RIAA curve and honking horns are the natural sound of music and that what I heard last night was crap. And i know this is not a popular point in these parts, but I am required to believe it in spite of the fact that the preponderance of measurement and data supports what I hear rather than what I am required to believe. To make matters worse, I am required to believe it by people who declare subjectivism as they dismiss my experience in the most absolute terms.


First of all he is not "required to believe" anything here; merely to respect other people's valid contrary opinions. That's hardly too much to ask, I wouldn't have thought.

Secondly, there is no audible "inner groove distortion" on a properly set-up turntable, arm and cartridge. There is also virtually no surface noise, providing records are kept in tip-top condition and spotlessly clean. It does take much more effort to get the best from vinyl, but the rewards are well worth it.

Thirdly, properly designed high quality valve amps, used within their optimal operating range, do not clip when partnered with suitable speakers. It is quite simply a non-issue. If it was an issue, I would not use valves. It's as simple as that.

Also, Tannoy horn-loaded drivers (I presume that's what Tim's referring to) do not "honk" (in any way I can detect) when used with high quality modern crossovers and fitted in suitably designed large cabinets. All speakers have some degree of coloration, but that exhibited by large high quality Tannoys is the most musically benign I've heard.

Lastly, and I do hope you're reading this Tim, no-one is dismissing your experience - I'm afraid that is only in your head.

What we are asking you to do is leave all your old, stereotypical, preconceptions about vinyl and valves behind and open your mind (and ears) to the possibility that things may be different now to what you think. We are all on a constant learning curve with our passion for audio and our love of music - and that includes you...

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-06-2009, 01:51
Indeed. I only discovered the virtues of valves in terms of linearity, tunefulness, texture, dynamics and 3D soundstaging early last year, around the time this forum was born as it happens, at the Manchester show.

Before then I was as dismissive of the glowing bottles as Tim.

My system is digital-only but I nevertheless acknowledge the superiority of analogue sources in many cases.

Most real scientists in hi-fi are open-minded empiricists looking for a logical explanation for observed phenomena. They hear something and seek out the mechanism behind it. Then you get the pseudo-scientists, the technical jobsworths, if you like, who often troll on hi-fi forums to pour scorn and ridicule on those who have discovered audible phenomena that do not fit into their compartmentalised world of pre-ordained criteria for easy measurement.

Scientific explanations (and by that I mean those within the realms of physics as well as how the ear/brain interprets sound waves) will always exist to explain such observed (i.e. heard) phenomena; there is no magic, fairy dust or foo. We sometimes just need to dig a little deeper for our scientific explanations than afforded by the hasty reductionism of the so-called objectivists.

Marco
22-06-2009, 07:17
Another gem from the repertoire of factoids from Mr Toy!

This bit is especially significant:


Scientific explanations (and by that I mean those within the realms of physics as well as how the ear/brain interprets sound waves) will always exist to explain such observed (i.e. heard) phenomena; there is no magic, fairy dust or foo. We sometimes just need to dig a little deeper for our scientific explanations than afforded by the hasty reductionism of the so-called objectivists.


Absolutely true. It is the pseudo-scientists and blinkered disciples of reductionism* that I have the problem with, not the genuine guys, who like you say, are "open-minded empiricists looking for a logical explanation for observed phenomena." I couldn't have put it any better myself :)

*Reductionism (from the Encarta English dictionary, for the benefit of anyone who may not know):


the oversimplifying of something complex, or the misguided belief that everything can be explained in simple terms


Oh how this approach is often so wrongly applied to audio by dogmatic pseudo-scientists...

Nothing we genuinely hear in audio, such as the subjective experiences often related on this forum, are scientifically unprovable - we just need to dig deeper with the right apparatus, and an open mind, to find the responsible mechanism(s).

However, it can unquestionably be unsettling to leave the comfort zone of our deeply-ingrained, long-held belief system, and embrace an alternative methodology with our approach to audio.

It is also no guarantee that longevity of experience correlates directly with genuine accumulated knowledge - one could have simply spent many years mostly learning the wrong things; or at least *some* wrong things... It happens. It's natural; it's human. Bad habits are so easily formed. But the question is, do we have the gumption or humility to admit our mistakes?

It is very easy with audio to fall into the trap of that which is scientifically provable being unquestionably correct, but as we know already, with hi-fi, it is rarely as simple as that. Indeed, if only it were, we could simply look at the specifications of equipment, buy on that basis, and be done and dusted. Life would be a whole lot simpler!

But in reality, how many genuinely superb sounding systems are successfully assembled solely on the basis of 'accurate' measurements? Do we simply settle for 'adequate' or go the extra mile and strive for excellence? In my experience, the latter is only possible by thinking outside of the box.

Undoubtedly, the prospect of perhaps rethinking, in Tim's case, around 40 years of accumulated bias is a bitter pill to swallow, but perhaps that's the price one has to pay to achieve true objectivity in this sometimes thorny hobby of ours...

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
22-06-2009, 07:49
Here's a little tale about the blindness & lack of logic in the scientific world.

Two engineering students were asked to measure the height of a tree as a class assignment. They went out to the woods and found the biggest tree in the forest.

They decided the best way to approach the task was for one to hold the tape while the other climbed the tree with the other end. Much to their disappointment, the student climbing the tree kept snapping branches & falling, never being able to reach the top.

A forestry worker on his way home after a long day in the woods has been observing the fun and games from a distance & asks them if they need some help. The engineers, thinking this must surely be a man who knows how to climb a tree, willingly accept his kind offer.

Much to their horror, he starts up his chainsaw & fells the tree. As it falls to the ground with an almighty crash and splintering of branches, the woodsman looks up only to see his two new friends crying. He explains that the felling of trees is a way of managing the forest because it was planted as a crop, much like a farm crop and that soon the whole area will be replanted with vigorously growing fresh young trees, so they shouldn’t feel bad about the loss of this one. He then goes on to point out that now it will be easy for them to measure the tree & they’ll get top marks for their homework.

One of the two engineers, enraged by this suggestion yells out "You stupid moronic bastard, you obviously don’t have a scientific molecule in your body, and that’s why you’ll never be a success in life. You’ll always carry out menial labour, risking your life every day for a minimum wage!”

The woodsman explains patiently that he is happy with his simple life, working outdoors in the beautiful woodland and feels privileged that he has a job without the worries and stresses that many people endure in the rat-race of life. He goes on to explain that life has been so much better for him since he gave up his old job as a lawyer because of the stress of that profession. He then asks them to explain the reason for the attack on his intelligence.

The two engineers both shout in unison: “We wanted to know how tall the tree was, not how long it is you idiot"

Marco
22-06-2009, 09:12
A rather nice (and effective) analogy there, Chris!

Marco.

DSJR
22-06-2009, 09:21
Marco, it's not always as cut and dried as your lengthy post above makes out. In fact, you seem to be more fixed in your beliefs than I am in the above content anyway..

I suspect that many "fanbois" have Aspergic tendancies, your lengthy post above Marco shows an incredible fixed attitude and rigid belief structure, with a defiance when your rigid opinions/belief structures are challenged. Why does discovering new things (such as a possible ss amp solution one day in the future?) need to be such a big deal. For example, rather than writing an old small Crown amp off as being total crap (I heard one once and it was crap so they're all crap), I've been genuinely surprised by how good it still is. Not once have I ever said it's a "top end" amp, but I'd much rather have it (the two bridged ones cost me nothing except a set of new supply caps) to a typical Arcam, budget Cambridge or Rotel or Nait of any age...

let me give one example that we've joked about - the M3D. I remember it as a punchy but dull (mis) tracker with a roughly finished nail crudely glued to a massive cantilever. You told me otherwise, so I set about finding one. Unwilling and unable (frankly) to buy one for £80 on eBay, I was given one by a kindly dealer sorting out his remaining "junk" and another friendly forum owner sent me a new pattern N21 stylus for it, which seemed a little more delicate than the Shure origina and with a much better finished diamond chip. I tried it and was very pleasantly surprised by what I've heard and have waxed lyrical about this ever since!

Regarding valve amps, my education as to their undoubted qualities started in 1975. I've blown hot and cold about their benefits and drawbacks ever since and was badly burned emotionally and financially by two models twenty years ago - one of these was made personally by Glenn too and gave me a great firework display one evening!!!!! Interestingly, the boring, grey and "horrid" AVI amps I replaced them with just disappeared, working with utter reliability and never once appearing to get in the way of my musical enjoyment. I was still single then, living on my own by this time and played the system every single day for hours on end.

I attended many HiFi shows back then as well and could always tell which room was playing records by the blowsy bass coming into the corridor outside (turntables have improved a bit since those days I'll grant you). The Audio Note rooms that many here seem to love, sounded truly awful to me and no-one seemed to notice the horrendous tracing distortion and surface noice emanating from the records being played. Bringing this up to date on another forum, one regular poster there has just spent a small fortune buying the expensive motor/supply combo for his beloved LP12 and went to the trouble of recording (at 24/96) his efforts before and after mod. I found the differences woefully small (could have been the ADC at fault) and all I could hear was mis-tracing of sibilance, which could have been record wear (another area the M3D/N21 gains for me).

I'm trying Marco, with no money to spend but with a motley collection of cartridges and a restored turntable to use, I've hardly touched a CD in weeks. It's frustrating and I have severe domestic limitations too, but I'm giving it a go and enjoying the experience as I would with a good vintage car - I make allowances for what my system can't do well yet enjoy the positive aspects, which are growing as I learn more about the stuff I'm using.

A clumsy post - apologies, but I've always tried to wear my heart on my sleeve and it still gets me up sh*t creek without a paddle. maybe when we meet over a pint or glass or two of fine wine we may be able to share more experiences, but at the moment, like Tim, I'm finding things a bit difficult on here.

College work calls (and some job applications too...).. TTFN

niklasthedolphin
22-06-2009, 09:30
Nothing we genuinely hear in audio, such as the subjective experiences often related on this forum, are scientifically unprovable - we just need to dig deeper with the right apparatus, and an open mind, to find the responsible mechanism(s).



I will question that.

An experience listening to music is percepted through our senses and adapted to the brain through the filter of whatever experiences we might already have had in life.
Memory, subcontiousness and whatever you have ever learned will influence on your acknowledgement of this listening experience.

How will any scientist analyze that?

If you really meant that we have to "Dig deeper with the right aparatus", I will have to supplement: We have to dig so deep into the human soul and mind that we are far beyond 2001: A Space Odyssey, so far beyond robotizing human beings that existing anymore is a non-attractive event.

Decades ago, in science, there was a trend of relating to the theory where everything would be possible to put into equations and formulars. This Superstring Theory was dumped many years ago and replaced first by Super Dynamic Hypothesis and others even later.
We realized that objectivism is unattainable and were only to aim for.
Therefor scientists started, with the Super Dynamic Hypothesis, to include their own influence on what ever was examined and measured.
Even when having an eye on the microscope, the microinvironment was behaving different than when the eye was not on the microscope.
In psychology this wisdom was implimented, as social workers realized that the behaviour of the people they were trying to help acted different and with other intentions when left alone (but observed with a camera).
Systematic Family Therapy.

Now back to our own level:
Many a home brewed technician, as mayority are, and even some of the engineers on all these hifi fora are still hanging stuck in the Superstring theory and this is making it very much into a religious fundamentalistic point of view, since everybody else, scientists, HR's and even us normal people, long time ago moved on into the world of realizing the necessity of subjectivistic points of views.

So I would guess not.
Digging deeper is not the answer.
The answer is:
Accept it. Live with it. Enjoy it. You're a part of the experience.

"dolph"

Mr. C
22-06-2009, 09:35
This is most entertaining and good to see

Marco
22-06-2009, 10:00
Wow, great post, Dolph. I am in complete agreement! :interesting:

:tribe:

I especially agree with this:


If you really meant that we have to "Dig deeper with the right aparatus", I will have to supplement: We have to dig so deep into the human soul and mind that we are far beyond 2001: A Space Odyssey, so far beyond robotizing human beings that existing anymore is a non-attractive event.


And this:


Digging deeper is not the answer.
The answer is:
Accept it. Live with it. Enjoy it. You're a part of the experience.


:exactly:

However, the question I would ask is this: can staunchly dogmatic pseudo-scientist types who simply don't have the required faith in their God-given senses (hearing acuity), and who thus always insist on the presence of empirical 'evidence' before believing in certain effects with audio, ever have the self-confidence to do as you have suggested (highlighted in bold)?

There comes a time in hi-fi, surely, when you must put measurements aside, trust your ears, and go with your gut instincts, or forever drown in a quagmire of uncertainty - and the psychological distress this must surely bring when presented with alternative viewpoints that deep-down you know have merit, but which your cynical mind won't allow to compute...

Unfortunately I have met quite a few people like this on forums!

Marco.

P.S This is what I like about AOS - we get to the 'nitty-gritty' of the matter. I do find discussions elsewhere sometimes somewhat lacking in substance!!

Marco
22-06-2009, 10:40
Dave,


Marco, it's not always as cut and dried as your lengthy post above makes out. In fact, you seem to be more fixed in your beliefs than I am in the above content anyway..


Before I get to anything else, could you explain how this (my standpoint on the matter - please read it again carefully):


I believe what I believe in with hi-fi at this current moment in time until such times as I'm presented with new evidence (via my ears) which shows that my current beliefs are flawed. If or when that happens, I will simply absorb the requisite new information and alter my opinions accordingly.

At the moment, valves & vinyl rule because that's what my ears tell me reproduces music most faithfully; ergo it is my current 'benchmark'. However, if someone were able to demonstrate to me a digital solid-state based system which significantly outperformed my current set-up then I would admit its superiority and embrace the necessary change accordingly. I am not wedded to vinyl & valves for eternity, so nothing for me is ever written in stone.


...represents "an incredible fixed attitude and rigid belief structure"? You are of course wrong about me, and I am at a total loss as to how the above could be interpreted the way you have done :confused:


A clumsy post - apologies, but I've always tried to wear my heart on my sleeve and it still gets me up sh*t creek without a paddle. maybe when we meet over a pint or glass or two of fine wine we may be able to share more experiences, but at the moment, like Tim, I'm finding things a bit difficult on here.


It's not a clumsy post, Dave - it's a most informative one, as you have given some 'of yourself'. Rarely do people do this on forums, and I respect it enormously. I'm sure that Neil, for example, would be with me on this. People are often too inward-thinking or scared to say what they really think. We try to provide people with a friendly platform on which to be themselves. So continue to wear your heart on your sleeve with pride!

As for you finding it "difficult" on here, then without appearing to be insensitive, that is precisely what AOS is about in terms of our more serious and searching hi-fi discussions: confronting your realities and questioning your prejudices/belief mechanism. We tackle the thorny issues head-on, and shy away from nothing... In essence, we go where other forums choose not, or dare not, go.

Uncomfortable reading can often make for valuable learning experiences... I know; I've been there. Stick with it! :)

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-06-2009, 10:43
A couple of points:

1) I would not consider DSJR to be an objectivist. He is one of us with a different take/experience and a very valid one at that.

2) (Dolph) I did touch on the issue of psycho-acoustics as well as physics. From this we can examine why we don't always reach a consensus of choice over what we hear. Perhaps it is because no hi-fi is perfect and we all have different priorities/chosen compromises.

Marco
22-06-2009, 10:50
Steve,


A couple of points:

1) I would not consider DSJR to be an objectivist. He is one of us with a different take/experience and a very valid one at that.


I agree wholeheartedly. I like Dave very much. He's one of the good guys.

However, he does have a habit of siding with people like Tim, and Ashley James, which I find ever so slightly worrying ;)

Marco.

anthonyTD
22-06-2009, 13:31
hi all,
some excellent reading and points of view in the last few posts, [dolph, marco, steve, wazoo, DSJR]
A...

niklasthedolphin
22-06-2009, 13:43
Digging deeper is not the answer.
The answer is:
Accept it. Live with it. Enjoy it. You're a part of the experience.


However, the question I would ask is this: can staunchly dogmatic pseudo-scientist types who simply don't have the required faith in their God-given senses (hearing acuity), and who thus always insist on the presence of empirical 'evidence' before believing in certain effects with audio, ever have the self-confidence to do as you have suggested (highlighted in bold)?



It's a question that might be as profound as the question of fate and coincident ; atomistic-mechanic or holistic.

From where should I have the prediction and knowledge about these peoples revelation?

The more you know, the more you acknowledge what you don't know.

"dolph"

DSJR
22-06-2009, 14:11
.

However, he [DSJR] does have a habit of siding with people like Tim, and Ashley James, which I find ever so slightly worrying ;)

Marco.

Thanks for positive vibes :)

I'm not "siding" with the above as such, it's just that *maybe* we have similar experiences in the broader audio/recording industry perhaps... I dare not say more at this juncture, as it will open floodgates not for this or any other forum ;) I think I know where these guys are coming from and have experienced some of it myself. In the past, Ash has put his demonstration abilities where his mouth is and shown a lot of what he's tried to say. His designer business partner has talked at length as to "why" he's designed some of the older stuff the way he did, so in my case anyway, both persons deserve my respect and friendship, whatever anyone else thinks. Doesn't mean I'd have a stand up fight with Anthony TD because he designs (expensive?) copper clad valve gear though.

It's great to hear and discover different ways of doing the same thing - like different fast cars when I was young and read "Car" magazine from cover to cover, or when I was at Junior School and read and absorbed HiFi Sound every month, when they often reviewed turntables that are now classics of all time..

Spectral Morn
22-06-2009, 14:15
Thanks for positive vibes :)

I'm not "siding" with the above as such, it's just that *maybe* we have similar experiences in the broader audio/recording industry perhaps... I dare not say more at this juncture, as it will open floodgates not for this or any other forum ;) I think I know where these guys are coming from and have experienced some of it myself. In the past, Ash has put his demonstration abilities where his mouth is and shown a lot of what he's tried to say. His designer business partner has talked at length as to "why" he's designed some of the older stuff the way he did, so in my case anyway, both persons deserve my respect and friendship, whatever anyone else thinks. Doesn't mean I'd have a stand up fight with Anthony TD because he designs (expensive?) copper clad valve gear though.

It's great to hear and discover different ways of doing the same thing - like different fast cars when I was young and read "Car" magazine from cover to cover, or when I was at Junior School and read and absorbed HiFi Sound every month, when they often reviewed turntables that are now classics of all time..

Hi Dave

I am glad you feel this way as do I. The thing about AOS is its one of the few places where that can happen. There is information and experience here in spades that is all useful info to take on our individual audio journeys.


Regards D S D L

Marco
22-06-2009, 14:21
Nice one, Dave. You are a valued member here, so please don't ever forget that :)


I'm not "siding" with the above as such, it's just that *maybe* we have similar experiences in the broader audio/recording industry perhaps...

Could it be, however, like Dolph says?


The more you know, the more you acknowledge what you don't know.


;)

Incidentally, I'm not saying that I'm immune from being in this category!

Marco.

Spectral Morn
22-06-2009, 14:28
Nice one, Dave. You are a valued member here, so please don't ever forget that :)



Could it be, however, like Dolph says:



;)

Incidentally, I'm not saying that I'm immune from being in this category!

Marco.

I second that Dave....don't ever leave or I will have to send the boys round

http://www.themindrobber.co.uk/dalek-models/day-of-the-daleks-finale.jpg:lol::lol::lol:

Regards D S D L

Lily Munster
22-06-2009, 15:46
These guys appear to think that they know it all in terms of audio: the journey's over - there is nothing new to learn. Solid-state and digital are measurably more 'accurate' - end of, that's it - and anyone who thinks differently is a fool who believes in 'magic'; at least that's how they come across. This demonstrates in my opinion, at best, serious closed-mindedness, and at worst, quite staggering arrogance.


One of the best things I've read here all year. Bravo :)

Lily.

Marco
22-06-2009, 16:15
Why thanks, Lily!

I do enjoy exposing this sort of stuff :cool:

Marco.

TONEPUB
22-06-2009, 18:35
I thought this was a discussion about cassettes!

:)

Reminds me I need to hook the old ZX-7 up and give it a go!

Marco
22-06-2009, 18:36
It's quality AOS thread drift, baby. Ya can't beat it! :lol:

Whatcha been up to recently?

Marco.

Beechwoods
22-06-2009, 18:42
Reminds me I need to hook the old ZX-7 up and give it a go!

You won't regret it :eyebrows:

Dave Cawley
22-06-2009, 21:54
I belive I have just added a Nakamichi CR7-E to my collection! :kiss:

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Marco
22-06-2009, 21:59
Ooooh... Pichoors, we want pichoors... :eyebrows:

Marco.

Beechwoods
23-06-2009, 04:45
I belive I have just added a Nakamichi CR7-E to my collection!

Oooh... with all the tape transfers I do, easy variable playback azimuth would be great. Dolph's Tandberg TCD-910 is a little too rare to come across these days but the CR-7E? Where did you get yours from?

Dave Cawley
23-06-2009, 07:42
Well, I think I bought the CR7 on eBay from Bulgaria, I have paid, I'm now just waiting.............. If you remember I bought a TCK81 new, and still have it, was used to record satellite telemetry. I was amazed to see David Price using a TCK81 in his main system this year! I also stole a Revox B215. And Also have the Technics RS-B965, RS-B765 & RS-B755 which might be the last three head direct drive machines Panasonic made? (or is it?)

Why ? curiosity! Adam Smith, David Price, Alex and I were having a post show drink at Bristol and the subject turned to cassettes, I was stunned to hear what they said. :kiss:

The next quest is to dig out one of my old FM Tuners and work out what/why/how the " Multipath " meter does.
See http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?p=50674#post50674

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Marco
23-06-2009, 07:48
Dave,


Why ? curiosity! Adam Smith, David Price, Alex and I were having a post show drink at Bristol and the subject turned to cassettes, I was stunned to hear what they said.


That's 'cos these guys know what they're talking about (well maybe not Adam when it comes to cartridges ;)), as do we, who've known for years that the humble wee cassette tape, on the right machine, is capable of greatness :eyebrows:

Enjoy your CR7E when it arrives - it's a fab machine!

Marco.

symon
23-06-2009, 08:29
a post show drink at Bristol
Dave

Oooh, what show?

Dave Cawley
23-06-2009, 08:41
Errrrr this one http://www.bristolshow.co.uk/next_show.lasso but this year of course! :kiss:

Also here http://uk.cinenow.com/tv?event_id=104-sound-vision-bristol-show-2008

Regards

:bag:

Dave

Adrian B
23-06-2009, 10:17
Coming late to this thread as a recent joiner. A couple of months ago I put a freebie cassette (Smokin' Jazz or somesuch) on my Nak 600. I was simply checking that it still worked ok having not played it for a year. What I got was sublime analogue sound which lead to a whole evening's rediscovery of the joys of TDK.

Adrian

DSJR
23-06-2009, 10:23
My favourite Naks were the ZX9 and Dragon - toys for the boys, as well as recording and playing back at near the limits of cassette technology (the Dragon was tweaked quite a bit during its very long life and late ones were rather better than the earliest ones, one of which I owned for a short while).

You know, I took the CR7e I had so much for granted (familiarity -contemp?) that it sat unloved on the bottom shelf of a Sound Org TT stand. The Mentor with stone-like solid base sat above it. I'm not even sure I have a pic of it. Down at floor level I could hardly see the CR7 at all. Only when financial hardship (story of my lives at different times) caused me to sell it to a mate for his collection of DSJR cast-offs, together with a mint Revox B77 Hi-Speed mk2 and over a few drinks one Saturday evening, did I look properly at it when my mate was cleaning it prior to boxing it back up (he was a cleaning freak and all his stuff was covered in plastic dust sheets when not in use - I don't alf pick-em...:)).

For the first time I *really* looked at the CR7 and how good it was.

I feel no sadness at not having a CR7 I must admit and the auto azimuth of the Dragon was easily beaten by iffy pre-recorded cassettes. The machines I did like was the Revox one, which gave loads of trouble to my mate with hardly any use and the later TEAC three head machines, which were heavily built and the last 8000 series models sounded pretty good as well IIRC.

DSJR
23-06-2009, 10:27
I belive I have just added a Nakamichi CR7-E to my collection! :kiss:

Regards

:bag:

Dave

You're selling too many SP10's......:lol:

niklasthedolphin
23-06-2009, 10:45
The machines I did like was the Revox one, which gave loads of trouble to my mate with hardly any use and the later TEAC three head machines, which were heavily built and the last 8000 series models sounded pretty good as well IIRC.

The Teac Cassette decks worth going for are the Z- series of which the Z-6000 would be the most attractive to me.
Many would probably say Z-7000.
However, I find manual tape allignments better that auto ditto.
If you have the time, the ears and the skills, you can make better recordings manually alligning up the deck for the tape.

"dolph"

niklasthedolphin
23-06-2009, 11:27
Now that we're at it.

Allignment of a deck for a tape when best contains:

Bias for each channel and if more than one speed (R2R and a few cassette decks) also for each speed.
EQ for each speed, for each channel and seperate for rec and PB.
Rec level for each speed, for each channel and for Rec and PB.

Do these allignments over a distance of tape to make shure the tape is stable.
If not: Throw out the tape.
Do these allignments for every recording.

I don't want to debate the decks internal adjustment options.
Let's assume they are set. If not, get it done or throw out the machine.

Azimuth for the rec head everytime you make a recording and every time you flip the tape. Best point on the tape to adjust Azimuth is 2/3 through the tape.

Azimuth for PB head is not really advisable to touch.
Some people do adjust PB azimuth to tweak out the best from tapes recorded on other machines or pre-recorded tapes.
Play these tapes on what ever machine they were recorded if you really want them to sound that great.
Pre-recorded tapes will almost never give you any kick of great listening experience.

Azimuth is a non-R2R gimmick for the user. (It is better left for the tech guy doing the machine)

On great recordings using Cr or Me tapes try to get the best result without using Double ended NR systems like Dolby B, C, S, High Com, DBX I or II and similar.

HX-pro is really great.
Dolby HX is also ok just not as great as the original HX-Pro.
dbx 929 (and was it dbx 222 - a quite rare thing) is also doing a good job if not overloaded.

Some people would refer to these as head Room Expanders.
However, HX-Pro was first launched by B&O, who invented it and owns the patent, as a single ended NR system.
Later on Dolby bought the rights to launch a cheaper and not that sofisticated circuity called Dolby HX and threw it into some consumer tape decks.

HX-Pro is to be found on some of the absolutely best Pro Open Reel Tape Decks.
HX-Pro is sort of Dynamic Bias function.

DNL is another great single ended Noise Reduction system.
Unfortunately it was only found on mediocre decks.

Instead of seeking the highest possible saturation on a recording, my advice is to go for what would read out as 0dB to +2dB on a analog peak reading meter after eq on Cr.
A little less on Fe and a little higher on Me.

If you machine only does VU metering: BAD LUCK
;-)
Somehow it will be hard to translate to VU read out but count on the reading being less than on peak reading.

If needed on some Fe tapes, Dolby B can be activated.
Don't go for Dolby C - unless the recording is non-important.

First of all, there will be a lot of compatibility trouble between machines when using double ended NR systems like Dolby B, C and S.
Second, double ended NR systems are creating "punpimg" due to compression.
Third, Doubel ended NR systems are compromising microdynamics, stereo perspective and other important parameters in a similar way as digital encoding does.

Some machines have incooperated Dynamic Equalization, Actilinear recording technique and other great features and they are really improving sound quality of the recordings.

These allows no switching off.
HX-Pro allows no switching off neither.
They are all ON all the time.

There has been a lot of confusion over HX-Pro and Dolby HX.
Not only in debates online in HiFi communities/foras but also from manufacturer side in what was written on the decks as patent etc.
If it is to be found on your machine and it is possible to switch off, it will be the cheaper Dolby HX no matter what they write on the machine.
Anyway, leave it on all the time.
It does not harm your recording (nor Playback), it only works when recording and it only improves quality.

This post is only covering these subjects "on the surface".
I can go a bit deeper into explaining if needed AND when/if I have the time to do it.

"dolph"

Alex Nikitin
23-06-2009, 13:48
Hi Dolph,

You are not quite correct in your information on HX-Pro. I've looked through many circuit diagrams of cassette decks with HX-Pro, including switchable versions, I know exactly how it works, I did design and implement my own headroom extension circuit in 1982 and it was different from HX-Pro as it worked on the sum of currents (bias and HF part of the signal) and HX-Pro works from the sum of voltages on the recording head. HX-Pro (or Dolby HX-Pro) is one thing, "plain" HX is another. The rest is due to differences in implementation and adjustment (HX-Pro circuits in some decks just do not work as they suppose to). "Switchable" HX-Pro should work exactly as a non-switchable so there should be no difference if that feature is there or not.


HX-Pro was first launched by B&O, who invented it and owns the patent, as a single ended NR system.

It is not a NR system. Its purpose is to extend the maximum recorded level at high frequencies by dynamically adjusting the bias. It is more required on decks with poor quality recording heads as these need more HF EQ. For a good recording head (like on a 3-head Nakamichi or on amorphous head for Aiwa 9000/009) it is almost not required. I have better sonic results on my Aiwa 7000 when I switch the HX-Pro off for most recordings without excessive HF content, as the dynamic biasing does modulate the bias a bit even at lower levels and that eats in to the low-level dynamics of the recording.

Cheers

Alex

niklasthedolphin
23-06-2009, 14:36
Hi Dolph,

You are not quite correct in your information on HX-Pro. I've looked through many circuit diagrams of cassette decks with HX-Pro, including switchable versions, I know exactly how it works, I did design and implement my own headroom extension circuit in 1982 and it was different from HX-Pro as it worked on the sum of currents (bias and HF part of the signal) and HX-Pro works from the sum of voltages on the recording head. HX-Pro (or Dolby HX-Pro) is one thing, "plain" HX is another. The rest is due to differences in implementation and adjustment (HX-Pro circuits in some decks just do not work as they suppose to). "Switchable" HX-Pro should work exactly as a non-switchable so there should be no difference if that feature is there or not.



It is not a NR system. Its purpose is to extend the maximum recorded level at high frequencies by dynamically adjusting the bias. It is more required on decks with poor quality recording heads as these need more HF EQ. For a good recording head (like on a 3-head Nakamichi or on amorphous head for Aiwa 9000/009) it is almost not required. I have better sonic results on my Aiwa 7000 when I switch the HX-Pro off for most recordings without excessive HF content, as the dynamic biasing does modulate the bias a bit even at lower levels and that eats in to the low-level dynamics of the recording.

Cheers

Alex

I knew someone would disagree here.
;-)

However, my information is directly from the inventors at B&O and included views of the patent and historical explenation.

I believe, with proper research, you will be able to find this patent on the web to clear off your misinformation.

You might be right about the switchable stuff as I did not go through all machines on the market.

The description about the way it works are informative and valid, but the side effect of the way it works is that it also reduces noise.
At the time of the launch, this noise reduction seemed most commercial to the consumers (whom might not have got any idea about what headroom extension was) and that was the reason for the launch as a (single ended) NR system (as if it was).

Another thing was that using MPX filters (for filtering away pilot tones on FM broadcastings) caused many a Dolby B, C and S circuit to go crazy.
This issue was non-existing with HX-Pro.

Your problems with HX-Pro is, and was, not at all present on the Studer and Lyrec professional Open Reel decks with HX-Pro implimented, that I have been using.
You must be able to make adjustments for the system working as meant to, considering your technical skills.

It is not as much for the quality of the heads as it for the quality of the tape formulation.

Slainte Mhath!

"dolph"

Alex Nikitin
23-06-2009, 15:04
I knew someone would disagree here.
;-)

However, my information is directly from the inventors at B&O and included views of the patent and historical explenation.

I believe, with proper research, you will be able to find this patent on the web to clear off your misinformation.

You might be right about the switchable stuff as I did not go through all machines on the market.

The description about the way it works are informative and valid, but the side effect of the way it works is that it also reduces noise.
At the time of the launch, this noise reduction seemed most commercial to the consumers (whom might not have got any idea about what headroom extension was) and that was the reason for the launch as a (single ended) NR system (as if it was).

Another thing was that using MPX filters (for filtering away pilot tones on FM broadcastings) caused many a Dolby B, C and S circuit to go crazy.
This issue was non-existing with HX-Pro.

Your problems with HX-Pro is, and was, not at all present on the Studer and Lyrec professional Open Reel decks with HX-Pro implimented, that I have been using.
You must be able to make adjustments for the system working as meant to, considering your technical skills.

It is not as much for the quality of the heads as it for the quality of the tape formulation.

Slainte Mhath!

"dolph"


Hi Dolph,

Here is a link to an article about HX-Pro (http://www.analogaudio.narod.ru/mag/hx-pro_01-07.djvu), what it is, how it works and what is the difference between HX-Pro and "Dolby HX" (not "Dolby HX-Pro" (!) ) - written by the authors of that system.

You'll need DJVU viewer (http://djvu-viewer-plug-in.en.softonic.com/) on your browser to open it.

I think it will clarify most points for you.

Cheers

Alex

P.S. HX-Pro on a R2R would be engaging at much higher levels and frequencies so it should have considerably less noticeable effect on the low level dynamics than on a cassette deck (and even there it is only very slightly noticeable). And again - the implementation is very important.

P.P.S. - the site by Alexander Vostokov (http://www.analogaudio.narod.ru/mag/tech.htm) about magnetic recording is highly recommended - lots of information, old advertising and reviews there - mostly in English, some in Russian.

DSJR
23-06-2009, 16:48
If you've got to do all that to make a good cassette recording, I'd rather have a Revox or similar, thanks very much, as batches of r-r tapes stayed far more consistent I found at the time.

niklasthedolphin
23-06-2009, 18:28
Hi Dolph,

Here is a link to an article about HX-Pro (http://www.analogaudio.narod.ru/mag/hx-pro_01-07.djvu), what it is, how it works and what is the difference between HX-Pro and "Dolby HX" (not "Dolby HX-Pro" (!) ) - written by the authors of that system.

You'll need DJVU viewer (http://djvu-viewer-plug-in.en.softonic.com/) on your browser to open it.

I think it will clarify most points for you.

Cheers

Alex

P.S. HX-Pro on a R2R would be engaging at much higher levels and frequencies so it should have considerably less noticeable effect on the low level dynamics than on a cassette deck (and even there it is only very slightly noticeable). And again - the implementation is very important.

P.P.S. - the site by Alexander Vostokov (http://www.analogaudio.narod.ru/mag/tech.htm) about magnetic recording is highly recommended - lots of information, old advertising and reviews there - mostly in English, some in Russian.

Thank you for the link to this article.
It explains in simple terms how the technology works.

I must agree that the article clearly states that HX-pro was not befor HX or even Dolby HX.

I can though supplement with the fact that B&O signed up for the patent of HX-Pro.

That must, according to the article, have been later than the patent of HX.

Dolby HX, as the licenced edition of HX-Pro have likely carried on being called, was a simplyfied and less effctive or less quality edition of the HX-Pro according to other trustworthy articles there is to be found on the net (with reference to sources like this article has in the end) as well as according to this article.

Problem is that this article also states that HX-Pro got it's name from Dolby HX.
This makes history of this technology a bit complicated.

There are machines on the market dating to the time after HX-Pro was implemented on many machines, that also have the writing of Dolby HX on them - and there are machines having the B&O patented HX-Pro writeen on them.

Another point; as it clearly states in the article you are linking to:
"This lowers over all distortion......................"
".............permitting higher recording levels and better S/N ratio without audible distortion at unexpected peaks in the audio signal"

This is the side effect I was writing about and the reason B&O at some point launched HX-Pro as a (single ended) Noise Reduction System.

From this (http://www.beoworld.org/prod_details.asp?pid=607) article at some official B&O site, you can read:
"I said above that HX Pro is the only system that keeps dynamic bias constant However, the original Dolby (http://www.beoworld.org/article_view.asp?id=52) HX circuit had many of the same properties. But the facts are that while Dolby HX restores some of the dynamic range available on cassette tape that is otherwise lost by the automatic compression mechanism referred to above, it does so in a convoluted fashion with for example a control signal derived from a Dolby B circuit, and is simply not as effective. In addition, the Dolby circuit is mono, where the B&O circuit, which works quite independently of any noise reduction circuit in the system, is a true stereo device, operating quite independently on each channel."

and furthermore:
"The HX Pro circuit is permanently connected, which is sensible enough given its function. "

This verify that HX-Pro is a better working solution than Dolby HX.
And this is also what I was told by the technical department of Bang & Olufsen at a visit.
(B&O and I are both Danish)

From another site on the web about noise reduction (http://audiotools.com/noise.html):
"Dolby HX Pro
Like Dolby HX not a noise reduction system per se, it's a headroom expansion system that also helps the deck to record high frequency sound without distortion when used in combination with a NR system by controlling how high frequencies are recorded onto the tape, thus enabling the noise reduction system to perform much more effectively since there is less danger of tracking errors, slightly less tape saturation effects audible as well when it's used. It can be very effective and is single ended, i.e. it needs only to be used while recording, especially effective when used with cheap ferric tapes that display an uneven HF response and in particular when recording from the radio were MPX (http://audiotools.com/ordabok_d.html#mpx) tones interfere with the NR tracking. Not developed by Dolby Laboratories (http://audiotools.com/d.html#dolby) at all but by the Danish company Bang & Olufsen (http://audiotools.com/b.html#bogo) and it archived all that the original HX system set out to do, but it's simpler circuitry and the fact that it worked much better with cassette tape recorders than Dolby's system meant that the company gave up on it's own system and licensed the Danish system. Only available as a part of a dolby NR license and built into a recorder, it's not possible to build it into a codec."

What do you think about history of this system after being "forcing me" to spend time on reading the article you linked to, my comments and the link I gave you?

My judgement: Dolby HX and HX-Pro is not the same, although alike and although developped at about the same time.
HX-Pro is more efficient and higher quality.

HX-Pro nor Dolby HX are actually meant as a noise reduction systems even though it has noise reduction as a side effect, however, for marketing issues, HX-Pro was launched as such.

Let's get other opinions on the subject.

"dolph"

niklasthedolphin
23-06-2009, 18:31
If you've got to do all that to make a good cassette recording, I'd rather have a Revox or similar, thanks very much, as batches of r-r tapes stayed far more consistent I found at the time.

Funny you mention it.

My Lyrec Professional Open Reel Deck has HX-Pro, patented by B&O, build in.

And by the way, Revox exist under same conditions of the media as all the other tape decks.
It's a matter of obtainable quality on the recordings you make, how many allignment options a certain deck blesses you with.

"dolph"

DSJR
23-06-2009, 20:12
:) ;)

Beechwoods
23-06-2009, 20:27
Dolph, if ever you get tired of this audio lark, PM me and I'll take your kit off your hands. I'll even collect it all in person!

niklasthedolphin
24-06-2009, 09:57
I hope this thread about cassette decks didn't die now.

For newcommers to the cassette niche of musical enjoyment, I can recommend a very cheap solution of TOTL sound quality in the Tandberg TCD 440A.

If found in good condition, these machines run for +20 years without service, remaining their very high buck for the money high sound quality.

These machines usualy comes extremely cheap on ePay abd anywhere else.

"dolph"

REM
25-06-2009, 17:38
Cassette based DJ

http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/14/diy-dj-cassette-decks

cool or what:smoking:

jandl100
25-07-2009, 07:54
Well, well. What a sensible forum this is! :)

I hadn't even noticed this thread until Beechwoods gave a link to it in his new Nak thread.

I've a problem (well, many problems, but this one is to do with music/audio!).
I live in a lovely area right out in the backwoods in Deepest Gloucestershire, on the side of a hill. The wrong side of a hill. FM radio reception is totally crap. :( So I listen to BBC Radio 3 (I'm a classical fan) on DAB. It doesn't sound too bad, quite 'listenable' actually. But I also like to record from the radio - I've a cabinet full of minidiscs recorded from mostly live concerts broadcast on BBC Radio 3. About 600 probably. Luvvly stuff - and some real gems there, too.

It used to be that I could record from DAB onto minidisc and it sounded damn fine, especially the smaller scale stuff. But then the good ol' Beeb reduced the bitrate on their Radio3 DAB broadcasts. Bad news! Compressed lo-bitrate DAB recorded onto compressed minidisc --->> urk - treble screech! Awful. Quite unlistenable.
What to do? I needed a (hopefully fairly inexpensive) convenient & non-compressed recording medium .... after mooching around a bit, kind of baffled, it came to me CASSETTE! :doh: Worth a try anyway.

So the other week I picked up a nearly new Akai GX-65 3 head cassette deck for £50 from a Wigwammer. Fed by my DAB radio it sounds bloody good! I have now recorded several live concerts off the radio, including some Proms, onto TDK SA tapes. Switching between 'source' and 'tape' as can be done with a 3-head machine, listening on my Stax headphones, there's is barely any difference at all, much to my surprise. What a fine machine that Akai is! :smoking:

Here displayed - the Akai and the DAB tuner, doing the biz!

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii114/jandl100/AkaiGX65DAB.jpg

All I need now is the remote control handset for it - there's one on eBay.de for, err, just on £50 delivered. As much as the damn deck cost me! :mental: I'm steeling myself, but I haven't yet pressed the Buy It Now button .... ;)

twelvebears
29-07-2009, 16:33
Well following the excellent purchase of a excellent condition DR-2 for £89, my following acquisition of a Sony TCK71 (3 heads Sendust and Ferrite, closed loop drive) for £26 also seems to be a good one.

Heads and rollers need a clean but other wise it's in lovely 'one careful owner from new' condition.

Now where am I going to put it?........

Spectral Morn
29-07-2009, 17:49
Well following the excellent purchase of a excellent condition DR-2 for £89, my following acquisition of a Sony TCK71 (3 heads Sendust and Ferrite, closed loop drive) for £26 also seems to be a good one.

Heads and rollers need a clean but other wise it's in lovely 'one careful owner from new' condition.

Now where am I going to put it?........

I think we need to set up an E-Bayholics anonymous..... I'll start "My names Neil and I have a problem"...........:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Its as well you haven't started the R to R lark, once you get a machine then there are all the other bits you need................. Errr. NAB adapters, empty reels-metal reels-cine plastic reels, head demag, remote and it goes on and on and thats before you have bought a blank tape.


Regards D S D L

twelvebears
29-07-2009, 18:07
Yeah I may have to make a deliberate effort to avoid going down that road....


I think we need to set up an E-Bayholics anonymous..... I'll start "My names Neil and I have a problem"...........:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Its as well you haven't started the R to R lark, once you get a machine then there are all the other bits you need................. Errr. NAB adapters, empty reels-metal reels-cine plastic reels, head demag, remote and it goes on and on and thats before you have bought a blank tape.


Regards D S D L