+ Reply to Thread
Page 36 of 47 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 463

Thread: The vinyl illusion ?

  1. #351
    Join Date: Jan 2008

    Location: Wrexham, North Wales, UK

    Posts: 110,012
    I'm AudioAl'sArbiterForPISHANTO.

    Default

    I think it's all good and well folks shooting down the use of "technobabble"; undoubtedly some stuff qualifies as that, but you have to make allowances for when audio topics centre around the [extremely valid] ear/brain relationship: how we as humans listen to music and process that information, and subsequently the difficulty in discussing this where, due to the complexity of the subject, it's easy to explain yourself incorrectly and stray into "technobabble".

    When it comes to hi-fi, the electronics and technical side may indeed be pretty well understood, but the latter (above) certainly isn't - and that I believe is the area where many of the answers lie in what is claimed as being genuinely heard, and what is currently technically provable.

    And folks should be allowed to discuss that, as best as they can within the limits of their understanding, in order to provoke debate and perhaps learn something new, without their views being completely rubbished as "hogwash", by those who think they know it ALL.

    They might intimately know about how boxes of electronics function, but the most important thing of all, and huge grey area, in terms of ascertaining WHY we hear what we hear, when processing music signals, and which is defined by the human ear/brain relationship, they know next to nothing - and so in that respect are as much amateurs here as the rest of us!

    We learn by exploring ALL credible possibilities, and perhaps making some mistakes along the way, not by arrogantly dismissing that which doesn't neatly fit into our belief system, and that approach is the one we will always practice (and champion) here on AoS.

    Marco.
    Main System

    Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.

    Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.

    Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.

    CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.

    Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.

    Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.

    Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.

    Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.

    Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.


    Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!

    Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!


  2. #352
    Join Date: Jan 2013

    Location: Birmingham

    Posts: 6,772
    I'm James.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by struth View Post
    An interesting take on Digital here i bookmarked a while ago

    http://productionadvice.co.uk/no-sta...digital-audio/
    Interesting article Grant but at every stage it just suggests that we cannot hear the difference in digital audio because of certain technical features applied such as dither. But no matter how you quantify or try to technically absolve digitalisation of audio it still does not mean the brain can't hear the difference.

    Remember in the early days of digital audio when it sounded absolutely atrocious we were told it was due to jitter then when this was 'resolved' with better clocking it was then brick wall anti aliasing filters,quantisation and dither etc which were not implemented correctly.

    So we are where we are now with digital audio and it is all perfect....except each time a Sabre or ESS DAC chip is released it moves digital audio closer to a perfect digital audio experience until the next chip is released and so on and so on.

    Now digital audio has cottoned onto timing and transient timing in particular. This is where MQA has found its niche, correcting time domain issues.

    There is always another issue with digital audio which needs to be fixed because it never was perfect and still isn't in my book. But that's not to say if other folk think it's fine great use it, after all as we know not all our hearing ability is the same.
    Main system : VPI Scout 1.1 / JMW 9T / 2M Black / Croft 25R+ / Croft 7 / Heco Celan GT 702

    Second System : Goldring Lenco GL75 / AT95EX / Pioneer SX590 / Spendor SP2

  3. #353
    Join Date: Feb 2013

    Location: W Lothian

    Posts: 99,005
    I'm Grant.

    Default

    Just another take on it.. its about 4 years old so stuff might have moved on.
    Regards,
    Grant .... ؠ ......Don't be such a big girl's blouse

    I've said it before and I'll say it again: democracy simply-doesn't-work
    .... ..... ...... ...... ................... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
    FIIO K7 BT, M11 PLUS, BTR7, KA5 - OPPO BDP-103D - PANASONIC UB450 - PANASONIC 4K ULTRA HD TV - PIXEL 6 - AVANTREE LR BLUETOOTH - 2* X600 SOUNDCORE - HEADPHONES INCLUDE, FIIO, NURAPHONES', FOCAL, OPPO, BOSE, CAMBRIDGE, BOWER & WILKINS, DEVIALET, MARSHALL, SONY, MITCHELL & JOHNSTON - 2*ZBOOK'S- MERCURY BD ROM, ROON, QOBUZ, TIDAL, PLEX, CYBERLINK, JRIVER - MULTI HDD'S -

    Oh my god! There's nothing wrong with the bidet is there?

    “Nothing discloses real character like the use of power. It is easy for the weak to be gentle. Most people can bear adversity. But if you wish to know what a man really is, give him power. This is the supreme test. It is the glory of Lincoln that, having almost absolute power, he never abused it, except on the side of mercy".

    “You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police ... yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts: words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home -- all the more powerful because forbidden -- terrify them. A little mouse of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic.”

    "You don't have free will. You have the appearance of free will.”

    “There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!”


    ***SMILE, BE HAPPY***

  4. #354
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,779
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post

    Remember in the early days of digital audio when it sounded absolutely atrocious we were told it was due to jitter then when this was 'resolved' with better clocking it was then brick wall anti aliasing filters,quantisation and dither etc which were not implemented correctly.

    So we are where we are now with digital audio and it is all perfect....except each time a Sabre or ESS DAC chip is released it moves digital audio closer to a perfect digital audio experience until the next chip is released and so on and so on.

    Now digital audio has cottoned onto timing and transient timing in particular. This is where MQA has found its niche, correcting time domain issues.

    All just marketing, trying to sell you the same washing powder over and over again. Digital never sounded awful, the massive take up in CD sales and the rapid decline of tape and vinyl in the late 1980s is surely evidence of that? Classical listeners in particular moved to CD wholesale.

    A few isolated incidents of cd players sounding rubbish with extreme flat earth systems got talked up by magazine journalists, and vinyl die-hards (like me, I fully admit it) propagated the myth. That's all that happened there. I mean CD has no audible distortion, so how can it possibly be the cause of a system sounding harsh?

    I did my own comparison back in 1990 with 2 systems and vinyl was the clear winner so I rejected digital. In retrospect I was daft to base my decision on just those 2 experiences. On the plus side it did mean I was buying vinyl well into the 'nineties so inadvertently bought what are now some desirable rarities
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  5. #355
    Join Date: Jan 2013

    Location: Carlisle - UK

    Posts: 1,956
    I'm Ken.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Hi Ken how are you?

    One Theory put forward by one of the worlds top mastering engineers was that analogue tape actually slows down the transient speed of high end frequencies in particular and the perceived speed of the recording as it hits our ears. Whereas digital recordings due to the sampling procedure actually speed up the sound of a recording especially where a digital system actually moves between the sampled bits. It is only a small effect but is picked up by our brains. This may explain why analogue tape sounds so good?
    Fast moving thread this, I mist your earlier nod James.
    I have trouble with the theory about different digital/analogue wave forms, as it all passes through very analogue speakers and the brain is very adept at filling in blanks, with all the senses. The argument that we like 2nd/3rd harmonic distortion in our musical diet is one levied on why we like analogue tape, I don't know that there is any definitive explanation though. I used to think analogue was superior, I'm moving away from that position lately. It certainly sounds pleasing, but listening to live acoustic sets I'm now finding good digital (there is good and bad in both) is more believable, in terms of real voices and instruments and not a coloured facsimile. It's making my decision, of whether to go completely digital or stay analogue with my active crossovers a tough one. I've swapped back and forth many times now, but keep coming back to the digital crossover/source, my Turntable doesn't sound good through it, so I need to work on that. The digital/analogue argument is so much about personal preference, it's like comparing how you like your Steak, at the end of the day, its all meat to be enjoyed.
    Last edited by Qwin; 26-09-2017 at 18:10.

  6. #356
    Join Date: Dec 2008

    Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days

    Posts: 4,779
    I'm Shaun.

    Default

    I love the word facsimile as that is exactly what digital is, a facsimile of analogue. An analogue waveform is sampled into digital which is then merely a facsimile of the original. The same with photography.

  7. #357
    Join Date: Apr 2016

    Location: Gravesend and France

    Posts: 1,498
    I'm paul.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marco View Post
    You seem in a rather strange mood today, Paul. Is everything ok?

    Marco.
    Yes Marco I was and still am today
    Bakoon 13r Denon DP80 Stax UA-70 Shure Ultra 500 in a Martin Bastin body with jico stylus, project ds2 digital Rullit aero 8 field coils in tqwt speakers

    Office system, DIY CSS fullrange speakers with aurum cantus G2 ribbons yulong dac Sony STR6055 receiver Jvc QL-A51 direct drive turntable, Leema sub. JVC Z4S cart is in the house

    Garage system another Sony receiver, cassette deck


    System components are subject to change without warning and at the discretion of the owner.

  8. #358
    Join Date: Aug 2010

    Location: East Midlands

    Posts: 426
    I'm Hugh.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Because the brain is extremely sensitive to digital sampling even information lost in milliseconds can be detected by the ear and brain. Even if you sampled at 100 times the current rate for CD your brain could still detect the difference. Analogue waveforms are infinite and exactly what the brain uses to compute information which is where digital sampling falls down. The theorists can argue technically that digital audio is good enough but the brain can detect the difference. It likes the infinitely smooth waveform of analogue.

    If I was to dismiss this as nonsense I would probably risk the wrath of Marco. So I won't.


    Let's just say it's your opinion. My opinion differs.

  9. #359
    Join Date: Jan 2013

    Location: Birmingham

    Posts: 6,772
    I'm James.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    All just marketing, trying to sell you the same washing powder over and over again. Digital never sounded awful, the massive take up in CD sales and the rapid decline of tape and vinyl in the late 1980s is surely evidence of that? Classical listeners in particular moved to CD wholesale.

    A few isolated incidents of cd players sounding rubbish with extreme flat earth systems got talked up by magazine journalists, and vinyl die-hards (like me, I fully admit it) propagated the myth. That's all that happened there. I mean CD has no audible distortion, so how can it possibly be the cause of a system sounding harsh?

    I did my own comparison back in 1990 with 2 systems and vinyl was the clear winner so I rejected digital. In retrospect I was daft to base my decision on just those 2 experiences. On the plus side it did mean I was buying vinyl well into the 'nineties so inadvertently bought what are now some desirable rarities
    One thing I can definitely agree is the sound of CD in itself was OK as I have heard recently digital audio products that have proven this to be the case. Not really sure a lot if the hardware over the last 30 years was really that good hence the proliferation of DACs which come thick and fast every month. As for CDP they are almost extinct?

    I think the massive uptake of CD was more due to non audiophiles wanting a more convenient music source that they could take anywhere ie ICE? Walkman? And many bought the 'perfect sound for ever' marketing BS.
    Main system : VPI Scout 1.1 / JMW 9T / 2M Black / Croft 25R+ / Croft 7 / Heco Celan GT 702

    Second System : Goldring Lenco GL75 / AT95EX / Pioneer SX590 / Spendor SP2

  10. #360
    Join Date: May 2010

    Location: Vancouver, Canada

    Posts: 2,166
    I'm Alex.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Interesting article Grant but at every stage it just suggests that we cannot hear the difference in digital audio because of certain technical features applied such as dither. But no matter how you quantify or try to technically absolve digitalisation of audio it still does not mean the brain can't hear the difference.

    Remember in the early days of digital audio when it sounded absolutely atrocious we were told it was due to jitter then when this was 'resolved' with better clocking it was then brick wall anti aliasing filters,quantisation and dither etc which were not implemented correctly.

    So we are where we are now with digital audio and it is all perfect....except each time a Sabre or ESS DAC chip is released it moves digital audio closer to a perfect digital audio experience until the next chip is released and so on and so on.

    Now digital audio has cottoned onto timing and transient timing in particular. This is where MQA has found its niche, correcting time domain issues.

    There is always another issue with digital audio which needs to be fixed because it never was perfect and still isn't in my book. But that's not to say if other folk think it's fine great use it, after all as we know not all our hearing ability is the same.
    My initial attempt to go back into vinyl was a ho-hum experience. I bought the analogue front-end, got me some LPs and then sat down to compare the vinyl playback to the digital playback. Ended up being singularly unimpressed with vinyl, judging it as being 'quaint' and 'a piece of nostalgia'. It just sounded wimpy compared to digital format.

    Then, following a suggestion from a vinyl aficionado friend, I sprang some cash for RCM. Holly-molly! Talk about the night-and-day difference...

    So I now think that many people who, after listening side by side to vinyl and then digital, conclude that digital is superior, simply listened to LPs that haven't been washed, vacuumed, rinsed, etc. Proper cleaning of vinyl is essential if one wants to give it a fighting chance when comparing it to digital.
    Last edited by magiccarpetride; 26-09-2017 at 20:39.
    Don't you just hate it when you cannot detect where the post ends and a signature line begins?

    Alex.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 36 of 47 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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