+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 56 of 56

Thread: CD Revival?

  1. #51
    Join Date: Feb 2008

    Location: http://www.homehifi.co.uk

    Posts: 6,090

    Default

    I still own my first discs from 1983. They came in a packet of five whenever you bought a CDP from Lasky's.

  2. #52
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 20,256
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alphaGT View Post
    I! I read somewhere back then, that many labels were in such a rush to get music on CDís that they took masters for vinyl, which are tipped up on both ends of the frequency spectrum to accommodate the Frequency losses during the cutting process. But CDís donít have these problems and it made them very bright in the top, and boomy in the bottom. It took them a while before they figured out they needed to be equalized first. Of course, they had to know, but just didnít care! They were trying to get some CDís on the shelves, ready or not. For a while, I had no faith in the medium. Those first bad discs really gave it a black eye as far as I was concerned.
    I suspect that is an audiophile myth. I actively try to buy the first releases rather than the later issues and re-masters as they often have a much higher dynamic range, and I'm not the only one who has discovered this. That's why the original releases sell for a lot more second-hand.

    I think the explanation for the 'very bright' sound was the systems some people were using back then. The people who complained about it were a vocal minority, the rest of the world adopted the cd pretty happily.
    Martin



    Current Lash Up:

    Technics SL1200P CD Player * NVA P90SA passive pre / Krell KSA50S Power amp * JM Lab Electra 926 loudspeakers *



    'The best I advice I ever received was to always remember that no-one else has any idea what they are doing either.'

  3. #53
    Join Date: Feb 2008

    Location: http://www.homehifi.co.uk

    Posts: 6,090

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alphaGT View Post
    A few of those first CDís, when they were on a small rack by the cash register, were pretty bad. I bought Heart, Little Queen, and it was nearly unlistenable! The female vocals were so shrill it would curl your toenails! I read somewhere back then, that many labels were in such a rush to get music on CDís that they took masters for vinyl, which are tipped up on both ends of the frequency spectrum to accommodate the Frequency losses during the cutting process. But CDís donít have these problems and it made them very bright in the top, and boomy in the bottom. It took them a while before they figured out they needed to be equalized first. Of course, they had to know, but just didnít care! They were trying to get some CDís on the shelves, ready or not. For a while, I had no faith in the medium. Those first bad discs really gave it a black eye as far as I was concerned.
    A lot of stories were made up over the years and turned into urban myths. But the reality is quite different.
    I was one of the 1st group of 10 repair engineers to be trained up by the likes of Sony, Philips etc to service the CD players that they were going to release. And from the outset we were told that the discs were 16 bit, whilst some players were as low as 12 bits due to lack of technical knowledge at that stage to make 16 bit players cheaper. Those lower bit players produced a very bright sound due to their limited D to A capabilities.

    There was also a problem with regards to the de-emphasis requirements. HIFI users were accustomed to the RIAA curve from vinyl. The de-emphasis used on CD was alien to the new adaptors of CD, and it had to be eventually changed. Some disc players and even DACs (my TC-7510 for instance) have an extra bit of circuitry to recognize the older discs and their emphasis, and convert it to the later decoding curve.
    It's not that they didn't know and didn't care. How would they have known? It was all new and CD engineers were as much in the dark as the sound engineers about how to get the best fro the new medium.

    By the way I still have most of my discs that I bought in the eighties, and they sound terrific.

  4. #54
    Join Date: Oct 2014

    Location: London N19

    Posts: 20
    I'm Huw.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sq225917 View Post
    No one ever skinned up on a CD case and enjoyed it.
    So right, where me Rizlas?

  5. #55
    Join Date: Apr 2009

    Location: Hertford, Hertfordshire, UK

    Posts: 234
    I'm Adam.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StanleyB View Post
    A lot of stories were made up over the years and turned into urban myths. But the reality is quite different.
    I was one of the 1st group of 10 repair engineers to be trained up by the likes of Sony, Philips etc to service the CD players that they were going to release. And from the outset we were told that the discs were 16 bit, whilst some players were as low as 12 bits due to lack of technical knowledge at that stage to make 16 bit players cheaper. Those lower bit players produced a very bright sound due to their limited D to A capabilities.

    There was also a problem with regards to the de-emphasis requirements. HIFI users were accustomed to the RIAA curve from vinyl. The de-emphasis used on CD was alien to the new adaptors of CD, and it had to be eventually changed. Some disc players and even DACs (my TC-7510 for instance) have an extra bit of circuitry to recognize the older discs and their emphasis, and convert it to the later decoding curve.
    It's not that they didn't know and didn't care. How would they have known? It was all new and CD engineers were as much in the dark as the sound engineers about how to get the best fro the new medium.

    By the way I still have most of my discs that I bought in the eighties, and they sound terrific.
    My first CD Player - a Philips - was only 14 Bit. Actually sounded better to me than some of the 16 Bit Japanese jobs though.

    I bought the first press UK Factory CD of New Order's "Low-Life" in 1986. The disc was pressed in Japan and had Pre-Emphasis.

    In the 1990s I had an early Cambridge Dacmagic which had a light to show if Pre-Emphasis was detected. This was was most useful.

    Today after I rip a CD with Pre-Emphasis in Exact Audio Copy I then process the FLACs with the free Sox program. I can then play them as FLACs through my Raspberry Pi Squeezebox clones with the Pre-Emphasis taken care of.

    BTW Stanley - I always thought Pre-Emphasis was part of the Redbook CD standard. If I am understanding you correctly not all CD player do Pre-Emphasis ? I have a fairly recent Creek 50CD player. Cost me close on £1000. I wonder if that handles Pre-Emphasis ? I perhaps wrongly assumed that if you play an actual disc on a standard CD Player (as opposed to FLACs through a DAC) that Pre-Emphasis would be dealt with ?
    Adam.

  6. #56
    Join Date: Apr 2012

    Location: Southall, West London

    Posts: 34,602
    I'm Geoff.

    Default

    My first CD player was a Toshiba XR-J9 mini top loader, bought around 1983 if I recall. I thought it sounded pretty good. I gave it to a friend, who as far as I know still uses it.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456



 

Posting Permissions

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