View Full Version : Computer based audio discussion
Ashley James
01-02-2008, 18:45
Hullo everyone, I'm here at Marco's invitation and I'm not sure I'm a fan of Forums!
As some of you may be aware we've introduced a pair of loudspeakers called ADM9s that completely replace a conventional hi fi system and can be used with a PS3, a Macbook, a music streaming device or even an iPod. They've been unbelievably successful for us, but have caused immense controversy amongst traditionalists.
Their worry is our (truthful) claim that they replace separates costing around £6K and do a far better job.
I'm here as may be Martin to try to answer all your questions and also to persuade other experts (IT etc) to join in and do the same.
There was a Pitch Battle on Hi Fi Wigwam an month or two ago, which has resolved now as participants have bought them and are now telling everyone about them, but as it's resolved so another is under way on Pink Fish. I really pray that doesn't happen here and I welcome an opportunity to discuss them with anyone who might be interested. :band:
Hi Fi enthusiasts seem concerned that computer can't play music, which is nonsense although to PC owners, it may not seem so. Apple Computers are different and in widespread use in the music industry to record and produce the CDs that you buy and iTunes has a vastly better user interface than a CD Player.
However the biggest worries seem to centre around compression (which is optional) or that Hard Disc aren't as good as CD mechs. The opposite is true, they are better because, in their present form, they are more sophisticated. Instead of reading in real time and guessing or muting if they aren't able to retrieve something, they keep reading and feeding information to the RAM where a Checksum is done. The computer adds up the noughts and ones and when it has them all, it plays you a tune. And it's exactly the same tune every time without guesswork. Macs even sound quite good through a headphone output, but as they have an optical digital one, they can act as a source for ADM9s or a full hi fi system.
Hi fi types have been slower than mainstream customers to cotton on to this and the mags have been slow to explain, however customers haven't and that's why ADM9s are selling so well.
Filterlab
01-02-2008, 19:00
...but have caused immense controversy amongst traditionalists...
Hi Ashley.
Yes, that seems to happen a lot when new technology threatens to change the face of hi-fi. As an ardent 'computer based music will never replace my main source' type of chap, imagine how surprised I was when I visited a recent show which caused me to ditch my CD player and use my Mac as a source.
Frankly, and in the words one of exhibitor, this is the future whether audiophiles like it or not. I couldn't agree more, I'm now switched and I'm off to buy myself a proper DAC this weekend as the in-built DAC is competent (and better than my £1k Musical Fidelity player) but not high end.
I think this'll be a huge subject over the next few years and you're right at the start with a highly acclaimed product.
By the way, they'll be no pitched battles here as we are a more respectful and intelligent clientele. ;)
Ashley James
01-02-2008, 21:20
The fact that Philips, the main supplier of CD mechs to specialist manufacturers, have stopped making VAM 1202 www.daisy-laser.com but have stock is an indicator of the demand for CD players.
They continue to supply kits of parts with their Juke Box model which high enders and Naim use www.daisy-laser.nl and which DIY types can buy one off's of if they are interested in insurance against the future.
Hi Ashley,
I see you've broken your duck, and contributed with an excellent first post :)
This to me is the crux of the matter:
Hi Fi enthusiasts seem concerned that computer can't play music, which is nonsense although to PC owners, it may not seem so. Apple Computers are different and in widespread use in the music industry to record and produce the CDs that you buy and iTunes has a vastly better user interface than a CD Player.
There is indeed an deep-rooted perception amongst audiophiles that computers 'can't play music', at least to anything like the same standard as their 'hi-end' CD players. Like Rob, I too was of this mindset until very recently when I heard my friend's Helios media player streaming lossless FLAC files completely outperform his £6k Naim CDS2, and then recently the Robson Acoustics computer set-up at the Manchester show that Rob has referred to elsewhere.
Both these systems succeeded to 'play music' to a much higher standard than I've heard from almost any CD player, and I'm convinced that a significant part of this improvement is due to the removal of various mechanical interfaces that succeed to degrade the musical signal. Streaming music via a computer removes a whole load of 'gubbins' from the chain that is necessary when a CD player is used, and I've always been of the opinion that the less the signal is interfered with then the better the sound.
It certainly seems that companies such as AVI have wholeheartedly embraced the new technology, and at an early stage, to the degree that their products reflect the unique understanding they have of how to maximise performance and musical satisfaction with computer audio. As such, I'm looking forward to hearing your set-up at the forthcoming Bristol show at the end of the month. Perhaps some details of the system you intend to demonstrate would be useful to our members?
As an aside, I had no idea that Apple computers are different to PCs in terms of their ability to play music to a higher audiophile standard. This is intriguing! Could you please provide some more information regarding this?
Marco.
P.S Rob, I think we should move this thread to a more appropriate part of the forum. I sense the Digital Impression area is looming... ;)
Filterlab
02-02-2008, 10:50
It is releatively common knowledge that Apples are the preferred computer for many industries, mainly music and design, due to their programmability (for third party software houses), stability, ease of use and outright quality. In fact Apples are now becoming that tool of choice for film directors as well, the recent film '300' was edited entirely on a Mac Pro using 'Final Cut Pro'. We're not talking some super mega powered custom Apple here, we're talking an off the shelf Mac Pro that anyone can buy from an Apple centre.
Anyway, as far as user interfaces go Apple hold the crown - anyone who has used one will attest to that. The same applies to flexibility of use within applications. For music production I was sorely tempted to go for Logic (which my mate uses) but to be frank the standard and free Garageband is ample enough to easily create a 32 track mix using live and processed instrument. Ok so it has some limitations, only allowing a maximum of 8 'open source' tracks per song but that's more than enough for most. And to be honest the same applies for all of Apple's applications, iTunes being a prime example as it is simplicity itself combined with flexibility and comprehensive features.
As for sound quality there's a lot of debate as to which file type sounds best. Leaving the lossy compression formats aside there is quite a selection of lossless formats available. On Windows the best is generally said to be FLAC, its equivalent on Apple is AIFF - basically completely uncoded and uncompressed. There is also Apple Lossless encoding which has been receiving praise from transformed audiophiles across the globe, however since it is an encoding I personally wonder if there is some form of compression going on there. An AIFF file is large - generally around 50-60meg per track, the same track in Apple Lossless is 25-30meg which would suggest some compression. The format is however still lossless so in essence the music should not be affected.
The best result I've obtained as far as playback quality goes has been using AIFF, whether that will change once I get my new DAC I couldn't say, maybe I'll have to re-import my CDs using Apple Lossless. What I do know is that even the standard output DAC on my iMac sounds far more competent that the Musical Fidelity player ever did - much less artificial and more musical whilst retaining detail. How good it'll sound once I pop the new DAC on is something I'm really looking forward to.
Sound quality AND flexibility. Now that's the way forward. :)
Ashley James
02-02-2008, 12:51
Blimey! There's a lot of information here that I should respond to.
PC's and Music.
These will play music via a good quality DAC as well as an Apple Computer if the drivers are correctly loaded. The problem with PC's is their crappy operating system and the fact that the Hardware is sold on price with third party software. And where Apple supply everything you need to stream music and video on Wi fi network, with PC's you have to select from different sources - mixing and matching often gives problems. It's likely that Vista will be replaced later this year and that things may change but right now, I'd buy Mac
Lossless is Lossless, the reason the files are smaller is that the Data is better packed, a bit like a Zip file. Apple Lossless means DRM added.
There is a state verging on Paranoia amongst audiophiles regarding perceptual encoding. There needn't be because if you have the CD's you can experiment.
A number of properly conducted tests, properly supervised using Industry Pros, members of the Public and selected Audiophiles have shown 192K might be the point at which you can't hear the difference and you almost certainly can't at 320K.
However the Hi Fi business is a disaster area where science is dismissed and all sorts of completely stupid ideas are touted including £500 mains leads with special properties and manufacturers are actually shaking Phono leads in paint mixers because they think it will help the sound.
Most professionals agree that MP3's at say 128K sound pleasant and musical but not as good as CD and a little dull. As a result they will often "lift" the treble slightly.
Many Audiophiles are complaining about thin shrill top ends and excessive treble. This has to be their systems and herein lies the problem. The equipment they own is raved about by the press and everyone agrees it's good stuff. They are wrong, there are a number of reason why, the most obvious of which is insufficient power; Sub 100 watts amps are clipping a lot of the time (you can't hear it but if you try a bigger amp, provided it's at least as good, it will sound clearer rather than louder), some don't recover well from clip (this is called "musicality"), others are susceptible to radiation from the DACs and some companies are using forty or fifty year old designs that just don't work alongside modern technology. Even loudspeakers have upper mid band issues from crossovers that can affect them.
What this means is that if you can get a good sound from MP3's by buying a better system, you have access to enormous amounts of music you're not going to hear any other way including huge numbers of Radio stations from all over the World, many of which sound better than our own Terrestrial offerings because they are MP3 instead of MP2. You can download music you like, but not enough to pay for and you can sample more different types of music than you've ever dreamt of from sites like Amazon.com
You can also exchange music amongst friends via email.
MP3s are international currency and can be very useful so don't avoid, instead try to get good results from them
Filterlab
02-02-2008, 13:01
is Lossless, the reason the files are smaller is that the Data is better packed, a bit like a Zip file. Apple Lossless means DRM added.
Ahhh, now that I didn't know. :)
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 04:22
.
Lowrider
03-02-2008, 08:27
However the Hi Fi business is a disaster area where science is dismissed and all sorts of completely stupid ideas are touted including £500 mains leads with special properties and manufacturers are actually shaking Phono leads in paint mixers because they think it will help the sound.
I thought this was an audiophile forum... :eek:
Ashley James
03-02-2008, 09:41
It is an audiophile forum and if we all want good sound, we should concentrate on things that make a difference and try to avoid snake oil.
Think of it another way. If you fit a turbocharger to your car it will go faster as it might if you remove the hub caps (because it's lighter). Which is the better modification?
Lowrider
03-02-2008, 09:58
Removing the hub caps...
Because you will have less moving mass and better wheel balance...
Ashley James
03-02-2008, 11:54
I have to say of Audiophiles that there is a tendency to snobbishness that is depriving them of improved sound quality.
On Pink Fish a Newbie with a complete Naim system was asking what he could do to it to improve the sound so that it compared with his iPod. Most of the suggestions put forward revolved around spending more money "upgrading" and changing cables, but ignored the fact plenty of others are posting the same sort of thing on other message boards. Digital sound has progressed to the point where the DACs in a iPod Shuffle may well be as good as the ones in a certain £15K CD player, they certainly will be in this M-Audio device http://www.soundslive.co.uk/product~name~M-Audio-FireWire-Solo~ID~3772.asp The plain (and disturbing) fact is that iPods and other better MP3 players compare favourably with the best CD players and sound better than many hi fi systems if used with high quality headphones.
Because the Pro Audio business is so much larger than the "Audiophile Market" customers have a wider choice for a fraction of the cost and usually of equipment with a better performance. Something similar has happened to Hi Fi with products like Cambridge Audio easily outperforming many Specialist favourites. The fight around ADM9s is simply because something very much cheaper is better and that the technology we've pioneered will soon replaces "separates" in the real world.
The worst of this snobbishness is over MP3's. I admit that I loathe and always have loathed turntables, they were good enough for Pop and rock but misery with Classical Music. I remember endless mistracking on Tenors and Sopranos, increasing congestion on complex passages and struggling to hear the quiet passages over the surface noise. I was absolutely delighted to throw my turntable away nearly twenty years ago, but not Audiophiles, they are still playing with them, some even arguing that they are better than CD!
They are not, they have 100 times as much distortion!
And now we have 128K MP3's either as Internet radio or downloads from P2P File sharing sites like Limewire, rocketmp3 and Ares, the record companies are paranoid about the them but seem unable to prevent them, so presumably they are legal. Purchased MP3's are 256K and difficult if not impossible to distinguish from a full size file on a good modern system, but not on certain hi fi companies systems.
My argument is not that everyone to switch to MP3 but use them, via the Internet, to discover new and different types of Music, material that you'd never have known about otherwise. If you like it enough, you can always buy a CD. This suggestion has turned a Cyberspace Lynch Mob on me, some so angry that they may end up with blood pressure problems! Is it me are are these people potty? Because I much prefer the sound of an MP3 to an LP, I find them, in the words of an Audiophile "more musically involving". It's a bloody stupid term that's been used to excuse inferior kit for years, but disallowed where MP3's are concerned.
Lowrider
03-02-2008, 12:00
This suggestion has turned a Cyberspace Lynch Mob on me, some so angry that they may end up with blood pressure problems! Is it me are are these people potty? Because I much prefer the sound of an MP3 to an LP, I find them, in the words of an Audiophile "more musically involving". It's a bloody stupid term that's been used to excuse inferior kit for years, but disallowed where MP3's are concerned.
It is definitely you, coming to an audiophile forum, and calling stupid to audiophiles... :eek:
Steve Toy
03-02-2008, 13:14
Controversy is a good thing as it encourages the sharing of knowledge and provides balance as the basis for analysis both to those contributing and those just reading.
Unfortunately when the red mist does drop, intelligent discussion goes west...
Lets keep it intelligent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My wife has an iPod Nano that I bought her for Christmas. A friend also brought one of the original iPods round a couple of years ago and I hooked it up to my system. I then did a direct comparison between it and the Naim CDX I had at the time.
The CDX blew it away in terms of midband coherence, timing and dynamics in particular. The Krell iPod docking station I heard at the show last weekend was also pretty unconvincing.
Lets not even begin to pretend that compressed, lossy formats can possibly compete with CD. Lossless FLAC files implemented properly probably will see off most CD players but compressed formats designed for convenience first and foremost never will.
As for turntables, it's a case of some are better than others.
Vinyl Grinder
03-02-2008, 15:45
Agree ashley that a hell of a lot of high end gear does sound appauling & yes there is a lot of snobbery (The turntable comment tho is cobblers) but to claim MP-3 are something to takes serious compared is utter rubbish.It a lossy format that destroys the original recording from off set, there's no getting away from that...MP-3 also has connection problems.
ie: take a live recording on CD for example, it's a continuing performance with no break's, as the CD moves to track two (on the CDP display) there is no pause in the performance (continues flawlessly into the next song), if you were to transfer this CD to MP-3 you will encounter a small pause between the tracks that the CD is telling you there is (But isn't).You can buy software to try illiminate the 2 second gap MP-3 has created but to exceptional ears you can still detect it unless you've already damaged your hearing in the first place with MP-3 listerning.Seve is encountering dynamics & soundstaging problems mainly due to the lossy compression.If the same were FLAC lossless it would most probably beat the Naim 'CDX' providing it's been properly implimented..
I have to say of Audiophiles that there is a tendency to snobbishness that is depriving them of improved sound quality.
On Pink Fish a Newbie with a complete Naim system was asking what he could do to it to improve the sound so that it compared with his iPod. Most of the suggestions put forward revolved around spending more money "upgrading" and changing cables, but ignored the fact plenty of others are posting the same sort of thing on other message boards. Digital sound has progressed to the point where the DACs in a iPod Shuffle may well be as good as the ones in a certain £15K CD player, they certainly will be in this M-Audio device http://www.soundslive.co.uk/product~name~M-Audio-FireWire-Solo~ID~3772.asp The plain (and disturbing) fact is that iPods and other better MP3 players compare favourably with the best CD players and sound better than many hi fi systems if used with high quality headphones.
Because the Pro Audio business is so much larger than the "Audiophile Market" customers have a wider choice for a fraction of the cost and usually of equipment with a better performance. Something similar has happened to Hi Fi with products like Cambridge Audio easily outperforming many Specialist favourites. The fight around ADM9s is simply because something very much cheaper is better and that the technology we've pioneered will soon replaces "separates" in the real world.
The worst of this snobbishness is over MP3's. I admit that I loathe and always have loathed turntables, they were good enough for Pop and rock but misery with Classical Music. I remember endless mistracking on Tenors and Sopranos, increasing congestion on complex passages and struggling to hear the quiet passages over the surface noise. I was absolutely delighted to throw my turntable away nearly twenty years ago, but not Audiophiles, they are still playing with them, some even arguing that they are better than CD!
They are not, they have 100 times as much distortion!
And now we have 128K MP3's either as Internet radio or downloads from P2P File sharing sites like Limewire, rocketmp3 and Ares, the record companies are paranoid about the them but seem unable to prevent them, so presumably they are legal. Purchased MP3's are 256K and difficult if not impossible to distinguish from a full size file on a good modern system, but not on certain hi fi companies systems.
My argument is not that everyone to switch to MP3 but use them, via the Internet, to discover new and different types of Music, material that you'd never have known about otherwise. If you like it enough, you can always buy a CD. This suggestion has turned a Cyberspace Lynch Mob on me, some so angry that they may end up with blood pressure problems! Is it me are are these people potty? Because I much prefer the sound of an MP3 to an LP, I find them, in the words of an Audiophile "more musically involving". It's a bloody stupid term that's been used to excuse inferior kit for years, but disallowed where MP3's are concerned.
This is far too simplistic. Just the process of digitising and undigitising a signal has a sonic impact even if while in the digital realm nothing changes (which I am far from convinced of). The digital world is no panacea, apart from for manufacturers in making the production process more consistent and predictable. Analogue is a highly unpredictable medium which is why subjective assessment in design is so essential. If you want to get back to real basics then go back to the 1920s and mains powered magnets, voice coils wound to the output voltage of single ended tubes, extreme horn loading, all pretty dangerous with the voltages flying around and would not be allowed now. BUT in some ways nothing today could compete in musical terms to what this would reproduce, it wasn't very good at the time due to the quality of source, but now!!! Even more basic as I talked about before go for extremes in speaker efficiency and then you can just use a pair of transformers for voltage gain as long as the source has a modicum of current capability. Simplicity in design will always be sonic king.
In musical terms the modern age seem to have less and less to offer.
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 16:22
.
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 16:33
.
Vinyl Grinder
03-02-2008, 16:45
Take Gong, Flying Teapot.
I have the original LP, the Audiophile Re-issue LP and a Japanese Mini LP CD, the Original pressing still sounds better and more musical than the other two, and my Record player is nowhere near as expensive as my CD replay.
.................................................. .......
I still dont have a decent CD of Dark Side of The Moon, apparently the CD side of the SACD is the one to have. Any opinion?
I have the 1st issue's of the Gong Trilogy of LP's..You mention Audiophile pressing! Do you meant the Italian issues on Get Back records?
I have the SACD 'Dark Side Of The Moon' CD.Doesn't sound as good as the 30th anniversary Vinyl issue to me.
Damn, I still dont have a decent CD of Dark Side of The Moon, apparently the CD side of the SACD is the one to have. Any opinion?
Hi Steve
I have a few different copies of DSOTM on seedee.
My personal favourite is the Toshiba black triangle release.
The SACD layer and the CD layer of the most recent release,is,IMHO not very good compared to the Toshiba release.
YMMV.
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 17:04
Hi Guys,
I don't think I have heard of the Toshiba black triangle CD issue? I remember reading HiFi World? and their CD recommendations.
Apparently all issues of DSOTM were from second generation copies and not masters so I heard?
I have the 30th aniversary LP and a couple? of other LP's. But only the one CD.
There was meant to be a downloadable DVD-A? version on the net, in surround sound which apparently came from the master? And I had heard that the CD layer of the SACD was meant to be one of the better copies?
Regarding Gong, I am not sure what my original 70's pressing is, or my 180g re-issue is?, as my 105.4 are right in front of the shelf they are stored in and I cannot get access to them :)
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 17:16
I have the 1st issue's of the Gong Trilogy of LP's..You mention Audiophile pressing! Do you meant the Italian issues on Get Back records?
I have the SACD 'Dark Side Of The Moon' CD.Doesn't sound as good as the 30th anniversary Vinyl issue to me.
Yes its the 1999 Get Back copy in 180g vinyl. I take it there may be better re-issues?
My original is the 1973 Virgin release, which though no heavy, it seems more natural and involving, the Get Back re-issue though good seems to be more EQ'ed with more treble emphasis?
Vinyl Grinder
03-02-2008, 18:57
I know of no more recent re-issues of the gong LP's..I've just bought the latest Emerson Lake & Palmer 180 grm re-issues on Get back.I'm very impressed with both the sound & packaging, shame the record labels wern't so plain.
Vinyl Grinder
03-02-2008, 19:20
Regarding Gong, I am not sure what my original 70's pressing is, or my 180g re-issue is?, as my 105.4 are right in front of the shelf they are stored in and I cannot get access to them :)
If 1st issue it should be the black & white virgin label with the two virgins & dragon (Black & white not the coloured one)..I much prefer the other design cover art for this album you found on the Byg, Charley issues..
sastusbulbas
03-02-2008, 19:41
If 1st issue it should be the black & white virgin label with the two virgins & dragon (Black & white not the coloured one)..I much prefer the other design cover art for this album you found on the Byg, Charley issues..
It just says virgin 1973 I think, plain green lable with virgin written on it for the LP, the cover is a gatefold with the two girls in white in the lower left rear corner.
The Re-issue album art is a pretty good copy of this.
Vinyl Grinder
03-02-2008, 21:52
It just says virgin 1973 I think, plain green lable with virgin written on it for the LP, the cover is a gatefold with the two girls in white in the lower left rear corner.
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Gong1.jpg
Here's the 1st issue (Black & white virgins)
http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/TD.jpg
Heres the pale green label you have shown here on TD's 'Rubycon' fuzzy.
These early re-issues were equally as good as the originals, it was the '80's re-issues that were bad.
sastusbulbas
05-02-2008, 03:13
.
Vinyl Grinder
05-02-2008, 03:20
Though I hope not to see any of the MAC versus PC snobbery, cause PC's can outperform MACs :p
Like i hinted at early on, Apple users are like Linn/Naim users :p
sastusbulbas
05-02-2008, 03:56
I am currently getting peeved at the time a couple of album downloads are taking.
Utorrent with a lossless 24bit Flac file/album still got an hour+ to go and a couple of ambient albums on zip file at MP3 rate look like they are taking just as long.
Broadband pah...
Not that computers should be used for music, but they are legitimit free downloads... (though at this rate I could probably order the CD online and get it in the morning post before these finish doon loadin)
And this was meant to be my last day on sick leave...
Computers for audio pah.. what next.
Filterlab
05-02-2008, 08:58
Like i hinted at early on, Apple users are like Linn/Naim users :p
Ahhh, that popular misconception from an MS user.
Though I hope not to see any of the MAC versus PC snobbery, cause PC's can outperform MACs :p
No no no no!
:D
If you lot can put your swords away for a few minutes, I am reasonably computer savvy, as in I can build them, keep them up and running and normally dross free. I use computer stored and replayed music files in my (home) office. The main file type is flac, with a few hi bit rate ogg's kicking around. I dont much mind if I use windows or linux, (ubuntu or Suse) but what would you say is the best way of getting the files into the amp. digital link of some type, usb dac, or just a decent USB soundcard of some description. I like the fact that you can ''chuck'' a play list at media monkey or similar and have your choice of background music running for the next few hours while you beaver away at whatever needs doing.
Filterlab
05-02-2008, 11:49
It's something I'm really enjoying with my Mac based system - flexibility. If I want to change artists I just type their name and up come their albums. Plus having a wireless keyboard I can pop it next to my sofa. :)
sastusbulbas
06-02-2008, 03:12
.
Filterlab
06-02-2008, 09:03
Why anyone would use a PC for gaming is beyond me though. I've never seen a PC that runs as smoothly as a dedicated console, especially now the 7th gen consoles are out. Still, takes all sorts I guess.
Personally I use my Mac for internet, graphics design, photography (editing), writing music, mastering and mixing and editing music, remastering CDs, compiling wedding photo albums, making wedding DVDs and then all the normal stuff. Never had a moments trouble and neve had any software incompatability.
MS? Not for me ta. :)
sastusbulbas
06-02-2008, 12:54
.
Filterlab
06-02-2008, 13:10
...it only outputs 720p...and I dont think any games console or MAC can touch any high end PC running any of the higher quality 8800 series graphic cards when it comes to gaming...
Actually the current crop of games only output to 720P, but the PS3 is capable of full 1080P.
I agree with you on the gaming thing, Macs are not really any good for that type of work but whether people would buy them with that intention is questionable. :)
I guess then I've never seen a dedicated gaming PC set up properly, my mate has a gaming PC which is apparently 'more powerful than any console' but the games to me looked staggered and slow by comparison. I'm not really that much of a gamer, but the PS3 does amaze me. It's no CD player though. :(
sastusbulbas
06-02-2008, 13:35
.
Filterlab
06-02-2008, 13:53
I had heard it could be possible to use this with 24 bit 175hz recordings made on DVD disc with the ADM9 (PFM debate), but of course many digital discs are bottle neck 16 bit 44.1 anyway.
Indeed, 176.4khz I believe, but the whole unit is too corrupting with it's video processing, surround processing (something like 7 modes), cooling fans and a slot loading mechanism it's never going to play very well - certainly not to an audiophile standard.
It is one trick unit if taken for what it is though, and the Blu-ray / DVD quality is very good as is the cinema sound.
Are you a gamer then?
sastusbulbas
06-02-2008, 15:42
.
Filterlab
06-02-2008, 15:47
Hmmm, not really, not anymore, hence my off putting of fabulous PC builds.
I still read up and stuff, still interested in building and that.
Well apart from Command and Conquer, Age of Empires and Dawn of War for PC, the wife kids and I usualy still use consoles :D
They're more than good enough for great fun. My faves on the PS3 are Oblivion and Resistance: Fall of Man, but I also like Dirt. I'm going to grab the new Burnout game this evening as I love open world driving games, my last fave was Driver: Parallel Lines - hilarious fun. :)
Filterlab
06-02-2008, 22:38
Macs are where its at. PCs are total shit. U would have to be an idiot to use one.
Thank you and VERY well said! :D
sastusbulbas
09-02-2008, 01:05
.
Hi Steve,
I would completely ignore the shit "Chance66" wrote. He/it was an out-and-out troll and thus his/its views deserve to be held in utter contempt. He/it, the real idiot, has since been permanently banned. So worry not :)
Marco.
Macs are where its at. PCs are total shit. U would have to be an idiot to use one.
Aren't Macs PCs now anyway?:p
And whoever says that Macs don't crash is lying! I've been fighting with one today.
sastusbulbas
09-02-2008, 16:03
.
Ashley James
09-02-2008, 18:22
We've a mixture of Dells and Macs and I have to say that Macs are superior in every respect, faster more stable, more friendly, easier to configure, easier to install and remove programs, better graphics, more reliable wireless networking, far better looking and quieter, so better suited for use in the home, which is why their business is growing so fast.
Pixar and Disney are Steve Jobbs and more an more blockbuster movies are made on Macs using Mac software. Most of the music you buy will have been processed via Mac software. Many modern Musicians use a MacBook Pro as a recording studio.
And Mac sell both the soft and the hardware so you get a better package. PC's are always cheap, noisy and ugly and they get slower and slow, Macs carry on regardless and don't suffer the depreciation of PC's, you can always sell a second hand Mac.
And it is surprising how good they sound, though there's no need to use their analogue output because they all come with a digital one.
I've been using iTunes in a MacBook Pro instead of a CD player for over year now, I did it because an increasing number of customers were, and I love it, I'd never go back now. And it's such a fast computer you can have loads of programs running simultaneously like photo manipulation and streaming music or watching a movie on it in one room and streaming music to another. I could go on all night, but if you haven't tried a new Mac, you'd never realise.
Lowrider
09-02-2008, 18:27
Why people cannot see the obvious... :confused:
sastusbulbas
09-02-2008, 19:48
.
Ashley James
09-02-2008, 21:02
Sastas, I haven't bashed CD players, I've pointed out that they are less reliable than hard discs and that practically no mechs are made now.
I haven't bashed cables, I've stated that it's impossible to tell the difference between them in properly controlled conditions and that anyone who believes mains cables might make a difference needs help.
I can't be bothered to argue about Macs but the sales figures are awe inspiring, currently Apple are half the size of Microsoft but if growth continues at it's present rate, they will overtake them in 3 years!
A recent survey showed a 15% customer satisfaction rate with Vista and 81% with Leopard and rumour has it Vista will be replaced later this year. Apparently Yahoo are about to introduce web based software and this is why Microsoft are trying to buy them.
I could go on all night but I don't need to, you need to search the net and see for yourself.
Apple computers and all their other designer products are finding their way into the homes of discerning up-market professionals, typically Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, Architects, Music and Film people, University types and so on. It's these people who are buying ADM9s. You'd be amazed at the expensive cars that visit with iPods playing Classical Music in them.
We rarely see PC people in a hi fi connection and of those that we do, there are often software issues and usually no digital output - hence Squeeze Box Chat.
I haven't bashed cables, I've stated that it's impossible to tell the difference between them in properly controlled conditions and that anyone who believes mains cables might make a difference needs help.
LOL.
:door:
Marco.
Lowrider
10-02-2008, 09:59
properly controlled conditions
A very large umbrella to cover poor listening capacities... and Apple computer based music systems... :trust:
sastusbulbas
10-02-2008, 16:30
.
sastusbulbas
10-02-2008, 16:30
.
Ashley James
10-02-2008, 17:39
Sastus, have read read the technical analysis of the ADM9s in Sound On Sound? Because then you'd understand how ADM9's compare with other Active Pro Audio Monitors. Or have you read the Hi Fi Choice review on our website and has it dawned on you that you have a pair of 20 odd year old Kefs that failed to beat B&W into the Classical Record Company Recording Studios, that comprise of little more than than Passive LS3/5A's sitting one huge resonant cavities driven through a 20 year old equaliser. You've done nothing but slag off something you don't understand on every message board that will allow it and yet you own precisely the type of system they so successfully replace!
The typical cost of system ADM9s are replacing is something over £3K often over £6.5K (see what hi fi forum) and one chap sold a £17.5K system.
The fact is that the ADM9s with the Sub will almost certainly be quite significantly better than all that kit you own, especially with a pro audio 10" in a sealed enclosed as opposed to a resonant chamber.
You can find out for yourself what Apple are up to, I'm fed up with Pantomime Dame act of Yes it will No it won't Yes it will No it won't, that you so love.
Of course you could always have contacted us direct and asked whatever you wanted, but no, you had to go slagging amongst your peer group of playground bullies!!
Lowrider
10-02-2008, 17:44
So easy to slash what you dont know...
Home hifi didnt start today, on the contrary, today, guys like you, are ruining it...
Of course you could always have contacted us direct and asked whatever you wanted, but no, you had to go slagging amongst your peer group of playground bullies!!
Ash,
What exactly do you mean by that? IMO, Steve has done nothing of the sort. Let's stick to the hi-fi argument and keep things from getting personal please. Both of you have made good and valid points.
Regards,
Marco.
Ashley James
10-02-2008, 21:19
Marco he and a few others have been slagging ADM9's off on other forums for several months now and It makes no sense to me, all he had to do was phone and query anything he didn't like.
I apologise for mentioning it this one but he's been trying to compare ADM9 's with cheap active pro monitors, which is good to the extent that hi fi types ought to do that, they are often better than much more expensive hi fi, but they aren't ADM9s and the extensive technical analysis in SOS explains that.
The comparison with Kef 107's is worth making because ADM9s will be better, that's progress and the kefs are probably 20 years old.
Most of the advances in transducer design and there there have been significant ones, in the last five years, have been to 5 and 6.5" drive units. Bandwidths are increasing and so is power handling, which means better crossovers are possible and improved mid band performance.
We used a very expensive Vifa 6.5" in our Pro-Nine-Plus five years or so ago, it was the first of these new, more powerful (cleaner mid tighter bass but needs better amplifiers) drive units, it had a 25mm voice coil and sounded very good. However it needed a low crossover frequency than is ideal and had an upper mid band hump that was always a problem. Peerless (same group) then announced another of basically the same design but with a bigger voice coil (33mm) and better mid and we used it in our Duos, which were noticeably better than PNPs.
Then Tymphany acquired the group and a Scanspeak engineer left and joined the company who supply us now. He and his UK agent (they supply Bentley Motors) have been terrific and provided us with another of the same type of drive unit that has a bigger voice coil still (36mm) , a much wider bandwidth and more bass in a smaller cabinet.
The result of this ongoing progress is that three way speakers of yesteryear are under threat from modern two way passive ones, never mind a proper active design with some new ideas in it.
Marco he and a few others have been slagging ADM9's off on other forums for several months now and It makes no sense to me, all he had to do was phone and query anything he didn't like.
I apologise for mentioning it this one...
No problem.
I'd appreciate it when you post here that no arguments are brought over from other forums. I have no idea what discussions you and Steve have had about the ADM9s elsewhere but whatever they were they aren't relevant here. Treat the discussions you have here on the subject as if you were starting from scratch, and keep to the hi-fi (or computer) side of the argument please - no personal stuff or 'points scoring', please. That applies to you both :)
It's an interesting discussion so keep it up!
Cheers.
Marco.
Steve Toy
10-02-2008, 21:55
but no, you had to go slagging amongst your peer group of playground bullies!!
Does this refer to us?
guys like you, are ruining it...
And this?
No, Steve, he was referring to Sastus. It's dealt with :)
Marco.
sastusbulbas
10-02-2008, 22:08
Sastus, have read read the technical analysis of the ADM9s in Sound On Sound? Because then you'd understand how ADM9's compare with other Active Pro Audio Monitors. Or have you read the Hi Fi Choice review on our website and has it dawned on you that you have a pair of 20 odd year old Kefs that failed to beat B&W into the Classical Record Company Recording Studios, that comprise of little more than than Passive LS3/5A's sitting one huge resonant cavities driven through a 20 year old equaliser. You've done nothing but slag off something you don't understand on every message board that will allow it and yet you own precisely the type of system they so successfully replace!
The typical cost of system ADM9s are replacing is something over £3K often over £6.5K (see what hi fi forum) and one chap sold a £17.5K system.
The fact is that the ADM9s with the Sub will almost certainly be quite significantly better than all that kit you own, especially with a pro audio 10" in a sealed enclosed as opposed to a resonant chamber.
You can find out for yourself what Apple are up to, I'm fed up with Pantomime Dame act of Yes it will No it won't Yes it will No it won't, that you so love.
Of course you could always have contacted us direct and asked whatever you wanted, but no, you had to go slagging amongst your peer group of playground bullies!!
Hello Ashley,
Yes I have read the Sound on Sound article, Sound on Sound is at times a regular read, as is my continuing subscriptions to other magazines, Hi Fi orientated such as Hi Fi News, Choice and the rest, and a few computer magazines such as Custom PC.
The review is no more favorable than many a review I have read as far back as SoS reviews of Absolute Spirit monitors and such. They also quote competing models as the ATC SCM10A2, PMC TB2As, Digidesign's RM1 or RM2, and Klein and Hummel O110D. Hardly top in the sound quality stakes.
When I read the SoS review of your product, I saw a reasonable and attractive active package which SoS seemed to say underperformed without the SUB, which when reading spec looked to still underperform in LF extension for serious monitoring. Impressive performance at a good price. Not earth shattering.
I am not too aware of the Classical Record Company and its choice of speakers, though it does sound quite interesting, any links. I was aware of the early B&W 801 monitors being chosen over Kef R107 in some installs? I didn't take that to mean the the LS3/5a was better, but that the B&W was more appropriate.
I guess now the Kef R107 is a rubbish speaker?
I personally have not read any poor reviews of the Kef R107, and I have every magazine from the first review when they were introduced, up to all Stereophile's reviews throughout MK1 through to Raymond Cooke Signature series. Not that that makes them perfect, I know they have flaws. But yes, any links showing how poor people have found them would be interesting Ashley.
Thank you for telling me I have precisely the sort of low resolution old crap that a pair of ADM9's replace.
To quote an earlier comment from you from elsewhere, if I may,
Sastus, I'm sorry that you were made to feel that you should sell your equipment, I understand that it means a great to you. Not for a moment are we claiming that ADM9s replace large three way speakers and hugely expensive separates, it's a different market and three way speakers do have some advantages.
I honestly thought you were telling me there, that kit such as my own was reasonable. (If bulky)
I also honestly thought Kef put some reasonable design into the Kef R107, by putting two 10" drivers within separate sealed enclosures together in a single coupled cavity, within a 70ltr enclosure capable of 20hz at -2db. (To quote Kef spec and magazine reviews)
I am not so sure I want to agree with your FACT of the ADM9's and their matching SUB being so superior to all my kit.
I would like to have some faith in companies like Krell, Theta, Classe, Kef, Teac, Rogers and such.
As for my disagreeable attitude on other forums, well maybe you are right. Though I cannot help but feel there is a little bit of hype and falseness to much that is being said. Attitude is apparent on both sides of many of those other arguments, many do seem to get wound up.
I am unaware of saying the ADM9's are shite like my system? And I do not think I discussed anything about a single 10" driver with a 35ltr enclosure and a 220 watt amplifier, with a quoted LF limit of -6db under 30hz as mentioned in SoS magazine.
I did get a little defensive and peeved at the apparent snobbery surrounding MAC's and their performance, I felt I was trying to defend PC's more than slag of MAC's. Thing is, it is easy to build a PC, and teh only real limiting factor to performance is money, there is a hell of a lot of hardware for the avid PC builder to choose from, more choice than you get from a MAC or Dell.
I do not think I love any sort of pantomime act, I have stated I use and like PC and MAC for different applications.
So can you elaborate in what area's I would find significantly better performance with the AVI ADM9 and Sub £1750 active combination.
So far the only speakers I have though of as suitable upgrades are large ATC, PMC and B&W. Though I also like large Spendor and Harbeth models, and the Tannoy System 15 maybe. I also like the look of some of the TAD designs and old JBL's. (though some of this is just due to liking big ugly speakers)
I also liked the look of your larger Brio and Trio floorstanders, though never got given the opinion that your pre power and CD player would be far better than my current set up by anyone.
So to sum it up, 20 year old speakers are rubbish, because B&W were chosen by some Studio's for installation. Regardless of many buyers choosing the Kef R107 as they preferred that unit for their application. And by your own admittance above, that studio install had uncritical or poor speaker placement and old equipment, so clearly there may have been personal opinion at hand as much as any technical issue?
I can only apologise for the behaviour I am guilty of causing offence with I guess. I myself didn't notice myself being part of a peer group who was slagging your product or yourself.
I myself did question and doubt your claims, I did also question others opinion and statement, and pointed out various alternative items for those with or without money who may be interested in other options, or who thought this technology was all new and such. I have my own opinion based on my own experience of MAC's and building PC's, which is at the end of the day, is only my own opinion, hard to change with around 13 years experience with both.
At the end of the day though, you are telling me that my TEAC cd system is rubbish, my Classe amplification is rubbish, my Rogers speakers are rubbish.
That my Theta CD system is rubbish, my Krell amplification is rubbish, and my Kef speakers are rubbish.
That my record player are no better than low bit rate MP3.
And all this is being beaten in performance with your 40 or so year old speaker cabinet design, designed to manufacturer recommendation of your off the shelf speaker drivers, and that for pounds you can design a pre amp and DAC which is built to DAC chip manufacturer recommendations that will outperform most equipment and are amongst the best in the world regardless of price. With a couple of small power amp modules and all electronics within a small speaker. All for £1000 which still gives you some profit. Coupled with a £500 mac or an Ipod.
Are you sure you didn't just copy some of the cheap pro model digital active speakers, by throwing of the shelf components together in a cheap package and lie and hype the shit out of them to line your pockets with fools money? And that you are being paid to advertise Apple products with either free or discounted product, or some sort of commission? :)
(NOTE none of this above is fact or actual personal opinion, therefore can be dismissed as rubbish being spouted by a grumpy loser, who is unhappy at finding out I own so much shite.)
And that the above should not be expected to be disagreed with, nor expect factual technical merit, or questioned in any unreasonable manner which contradicts or disagrees with your opinion or any fans opinion of the ADM9 monitors and matching Sub.
Still disappointed that my system is regarded in such low esteem.
Sorry to have upset you and doubted your views Ashley, though I do now find it difficult to come to any conclusion of your personality and such.
You will find many of my posts and opinions have been deleted, if there is anything else you find offensive please do not hesitate in letting me know.
No offence intended.
Steve
So will the ADM9's be at the Bristol show?
Lowrider
11-02-2008, 06:12
It always ends the same way, ignorant bullies who think they discovered the holly graal, slashing everybody that disagrees, and experienced people that really enjoys this hobby, to listen to music the best way possible, deleting posts and retreating... :mad:
Antonio,
Steve and Ashley obviously have different opinions on the subject, but they're managing to keep it civil (just!)
I wouldn't let what anyone else says bother you. As long as you're happy with your system, and your method of doing things, that's all that matters :)
Marco.
Steve Toy
11-02-2008, 10:16
No, Steve, he was referring to Sastus. It's dealt with
I knew Ashley was refering to Sastus Steve not me in post #59, so my questions still stand unanswered.
LOL. That's not what I meant. It doesn't matter. Like I said, it's dealt with :)
Marco.
Ashley James
11-02-2008, 10:53
Steve, I'm certain no offence was intended from you, just as it's clear how easy it is for all of us to be drawn into a slugging match on a Forum. And you aren't the target group for ADM9s because you don't want to be rid of your present system.
You've covered a huge amount of ground and I've got a long day's work ahead of me so I apologise for a short reply.
Kef and B & W were World leaders because they and the BBC (they became Rogers Spendor and Harbeth) developed direct radiating loudspeakers to the point where it was obvious they were much better than the Horns they replaced. The Classical Record labels replaced Tannoy Lockwoods with 801's, the American Market bought huge quantities of both and the BBC made its own until about 15-20 years ago.
The success of theses companies was impressive and at one time their average monthly sales to the States equalled their annual UK sales. But it wasn't long before other companies caught up and Kef got into money trouble.
I knew Raymond Cooke and also Laurie Fincham and they were extremely clever and very likeable people making a superb product, however no one knew where to go next and there was pressure from financial backers to develop "new technology" and USP's.
The middle and treble were considered largely resolved and bass was considered the place to go. A resonant cavity was chosen as a means of getting the most in the smallest possible cabinet. In the event it proved a mistake, the direct radiating B & W won the day, Polk got fed up with them and they were hoovered up by the Goldpeak Battery Company.
There are no absolutes in anything and products are not either rubbish or perfect, but there are big differences between them.
The ADM9s drive units are not off the shelf, they have been developed for us by our supplier's engineer and Martin so they are suitable for a specific job.
The amplifiers are better than big, stand alone ones because they are high voltage low distortions low current types. 10 Amps and 50 volts gives 500 watts peak 250 RMS into a 5 Ohm drive unit with a mid band distortion figure limited by the output devices to minus 96dB mid band. Big stand alone amps have to produce huge amounts of current if they are to avoid clipping and this pushes their distortion up above ours.
The advantages the ADM9s have over the Kefs is that the mid/bass driver has much greater bandwidth and dynamic range. Dynamic range improves clarity and the greater bandwidth means a a higher and less intrusive crossover point in a passive design and inaudible one in an Active one because the filters are steeper and more accurate.
The Kefs crossover at 2K I believe and Marco's Spendor's 5K, as an example.
Passive three way loudspeakers can be much clearer than two way ones but the extra crossover is in a bad place and tends to interact with tweeter one. It's upsets phase, which is why some people don't get on with them.
What all this means is that the ADM9's will be smoother, louder, cleaner sounding with a far better stereo image, and will not appear to have as much bass as your Kefs. I think they'd be a culture shock, but you'd grow to love them.
If you read the SOS review I think it's possible to tell there are big differences between ADM9s and other monitors - ours are described and not being "hyped" at the top and bottom end and being well suited to Classical and Folk where accuracy is important.
The problem with hi fi generally is the bad advice given by magazines and the refusal to accept that low powered amps cannot reproduce sound accurately because they a clipping much of the time. Surely you've seen people dismiss ADM9s as being to Sterile, too clinical and boring, the listener can't get involved in the music. One chap who posted something like this had a 25 wpc Exposure and 30 year old Mordant Shorts and all he was described, was the considerably greater accuracy in ADM9s that he was having trouble adapting to.
I hope that you can now see that there may be quite a big difference and that it will cause lots of people problems getting used to it.
Ashley James
11-02-2008, 10:58
Steve post 59 - No I'm not referring to this one, but ADM9s have caused WWIII on other Forums.
Rest assured that won't be allowed to happen here!
Marco.
Steve Toy
11-02-2008, 11:57
Marco,
Seconded.
Ashley,
Thanks for clearing that up for me. :)
sastusbulbas
11-02-2008, 18:10
Thankyou for the reply Ashley.
My own opinion of the early B&W 801 is that it was not particularly better than the Kef R107, but had different strengths and weaknesses. I had the opportunity of both (plus Apogee and Martin Logan), I preferred the early B&W 802 to the 801 in some ways, but ultimately found the Kef R107 more suitable, maybe due to using Kef R105.4 at the time of purchase? I never thought of the Kef R107 as second best to the B&W 801, just slightly different presentation with more bandwidth in an easier to integrate package, they were both in the same price bracket and performance band for anyone looking for that sort of speaker.
I myself have not read much saying anything untoward about the Kef R107 bass implementation? It is a very well braced enclosure with two sealed cabinets firing drivers into a third vented chamber, the chambers are well damped, and the dual 10" drivers are decoupled and joined by a force cancelling rod.
These are not as resonant as some designs I have heard, and have superb pitch definition and depth. I am sure pitch definition would suffer if resonance was a problem? There are still not many designs which give clean LF extension like the 107, to be honest I have heard more complaints about them being too neutral and flat in the bass, due to not having any mid bass excess or emphasis, but also know they can produce undesirable results with poor amplifier and room size/LF cut off choices.
I do not think the 5" 1057 mid of the 107 is that bad?, sure it's no modern miracle, but it was a respectable mid used by many companies in its day. The midrange performance of the Kef R107 was likened to that of the LS3/5a and Spendor BC1 by some when it was in production, not unlike the opinion of the ADM9 midrange performance approaching the clarity of the LS3/5a mid as mentioned in the Hi Fi Choice review by Alan Sircom?
(I also have a pair of matched Harbeth replacement 1057 drivers which I got for the 107 while awaiting my four new bass drivers to be built and dispatched a couple or so years back, plus various other 107 spares, so will be able to keep these 107 running for some time, maybe I could get new passive or active crossovers constructed with better treble units?)
I have heard a lot of two way speakers, and never thought of 6.5" bass/mid competing with a dedicated 5" mid and large bass driver in the way you are describing?
I do not see comparing an almost full range signal through a 6.5" driver to limited power and mid frequencies through a 5" dedicated midrange driver as proof of superior dynamic range and power handling? The 1057 of the Kef is designed only for mid frequencies and sits in a sealed 8'5 litre enclosure, and its performance envelope works well with the overall power handling and frequency extension parameters required in its application of the Kef R107.
A more interesting comparison of power handling and dynamic range would be with other competing two way speaker drivers such as those from ATC, Dynaudio or PMC would it not?
I myself have been reasonably happy with the resolution of my system, and feel it is clean and controlled, with superb bass performance and synergy, my Kef are 4ohm speakers with a sensitivity of 90db and not huge by power handling standards, my Krell power amp has more power than I need, with tests showing it to give over 300w into 8ohm and over 600w into 4ohm with plenty of current and control. I can turn the Krell pre up full (only done for a short period) and it still does not sound like I am getting all that power, no doubt due to thermal compression and the speakers limits being reached, though they are quoted as being capable of 112db output. This I think shows I am getting quite clean undistorted output, and though I would like more power output, I do not think I need it.
There are reasonable reviews of the Kef R107, such as this from Stereophile.
http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/550/index5.html
Maybe having replaced the drivers and Kube over recent years has helped keep them in good working order, but I do still think some DIY could improve them. I do think properly maintained old speakers are still capable of reasonable performance, more so with many of today's ancillaries.
Personally I do think things have moved on significantly with speaker driver design, improvements yes, but still slight improvements based on old technology with some twists and turns. For me coherence is important, I do not really like superb mid with poor bass and treble or such, I would rather have something that is competent in all areas over a wide frequency response than excel in some areas in a curtailed frequency response. A speaker should also perform well with a variety of music and sources.
Of course much of the above is through my own conclusion and my own personal opinion of what I have experienced throughout the years, therefore is limited and slightly biased toward my own preferences and what I enjoy.
Your ADM9's fail by a few quirky accounts, they have limited inputs, and limited extension, they require an add on sub, so in some ways take up more space. They are also not child proof, I have had tweeters and mid's poked, and stand mounts and lightweight floor standers pushed over. (not much a 2yr old and 4yr old and their party friends can do to a 99lb speaker with metal grills covering the drivers)
I believe if I put the ADM9 side by side for comparison with my Kef R107, there would be pro's and con's with both, but maybe no more than would be apparent with a pair of ATC or any other monitor or high quality stand mount with newer or different modern drivers?
My own opinion of the active PMC/Bryston BB5/XBD package was quite high, no demo has left me more impressed, and that includes the Tannoy Westminster Royal HE. These PMC's put a lot of areas of performance into sharp relief, though still left me thinking the Kef were capable of reasonable performance in a smaller domestic environment considering their age and chosen ancillaries.
Regarding past posts you found offensive, many if not all of these have been removed from here and other forums, I did not like having that label, or the assumption that I intended to insult. Anything else by me you find offensive and want removed let me know.
Regards,
Steve
Ashley James
11-02-2008, 19:50
Steve, I'm quite moved by your gesture in removing all those posts, I fancy we'd probably get on well away from Cyberspace! I apologise too for being heavy handed.
Your Kef and typical three way speakers of that era were capable of just over 100 dB continuously with a peak capability that may be 10dB louder. I quote the exact and measured dynamic range of ADM9s: The typical operating SPL (based on 100 Hour continuous operation using RS426A Program Noise) is rated at 108dB at one metre per pair of speaker which leaves a further 8dB in hand to accommodate instantaneous peaks.
The advantage of greater headroom is not being louder but being much clearer.
I'd be more than happy to have these compared with the speakers you mention and ATC50A's because our have better mid range and a far better stereo image. I've either owned or had most of the ATC models in my house over the years so know them well.
This is what's pissing everyone off; they can't understand why so they give us hell. The silly thing is that we've explained on our website and Paul has to, in the SOS review.
You may not realise it but the reason many studio monitors have a digital input is that they use a DSP chip to do all sorts of equalisation, act as a crossover and drive Class D Amps. Class D amps have more distortion (nearly 20dB) than the best analogue ones and so sound smoother and warmer, a crossover is an analogue function so doesn't need to be a DSP chip. Ours are different, the left hand speaker has a proper 24 bit high end DAC and a preamp in it with vanishingly low disortion, so low it's not much more than the thermal noise in copper wire! And all the bits are so small you need a magnifying glass to see them!
Russell Dawkins
13-02-2008, 08:24
Great thread!
Disaster averted and information gained.
The ADM9 is new to me, but sounds very worthy and well thought-out. Timely, too.
Too bad I have committed to open baffle as my next fundamental change, in the interest of reducing my room's influence on playback, but that's a different thread!
Lowrider
13-02-2008, 16:05
Open baffle, that can sound realy good for not so much money... :cool:
Ashley James
13-02-2008, 18:29
Russell, it's kind of you to comment, I enjoyed explaining the technology that goes into these things. It's very hard to get people interested in the proper engineering side of hi fi these days, instead too much energy is expended blathering on about ancillaries like mains cables that cannot possibly make a difference.
Believe me when I tell you there is so much wrong with most hi fi that we understand well and can measure, that we've absolutely no need to look further than basic engineering principles.
The amplifiers are better than big, stand alone ones because they are high voltage low distortions low current types. 10 Amps and 50 volts gives 500 watts peak 250 RMS into a 5 Ohm drive unit with a mid band distortion figure limited by the output devices to minus 96dB mid band. Big stand alone amps have to produce huge amounts of current if they are to avoid clipping and this pushes their distortion up above ours.
.
What amp topology is used?
Ashley James
16-02-2008, 10:49
Conventional Linear bi-polar ones. If you email the company address, I'll forward a copy of the Technical analysis and review that's in this month's Sound On Sound. It's too big to be a private message on the Forum.
Thanks, I'll do that, should be interesting reading.
Ashley James
16-03-2008, 14:13
James Guthrie who produced the Wall and Dave Gilmour have both bought quite a bit of AVI in their time.
I reckon that MP3's are worth discussing, not just because they are so useful and give access to so much material, but because I think that although they don't sound as good as the original 16 bit recording (they do improve some of the overbright ones though!), they do sound really good, I suspect better than many realise because I believe that some hi fi systems still don't cope well with digital and compressed digital seems to cause more problems. Every time we've improved something in the chain MP3s have been the biggest benefactor.
On the subject of now assumed failed SACD's (nobody was prepared to pay for the licence and customers are reluctant to buy anything copy protected), I'm pretty sure that the SACD offerings were deliberately manipulated to sound better than straight 16 bit. For example, all Pink Floyd recordings were produced via Studer A820 tape recorders which are equivalent to 10 or 11 bit digital as was Jamie Cullum. How could these improve by being mastered to SACD?
I'm afraid that I hate the sound of vinyl other than at modest levels as background music. I do quite enjoy some remastered 78's though. I never liked vinyl except for Pop and Rock when there wasn't an alternative and I can't understand why audiophiles are so keen on it now, it's totally beyond my comprehension. And I had and used much more expensive record players than most.
Ashley James
19-03-2008, 20:57
This is where the discussions should be, Computers make Hi Fi more interesting than it's ever been and it gives access to more music than ever before!
Isn't anyone using one for music?
Well I do, I converted my CD listening to a Squeezebox over two years ago, maybe three, can't recall. I held on to my CD player until recently, it was like a security blanket. It wasn't until we decided to redecorate living and dining room that the decision was made to de-clutter the CD's and put them in the garage! I feel much better for it, I still have vinyl (sorry Ash) as I have a large LP collection and it still gives me great sound quality but I use both technologies side by side. Both have strengths and weaknesses but I'm happy to live with that for now.
Ashley James
19-03-2008, 22:13
I bought an Airport Express a year or two ago, then controlled it with a PDA before buying a Macbook Pro and putting everything on it. I only use a big separates system for DEMs now. I'm using Apple TV for movies, Photos and Music now and it's is a fantastic device. I found a video of the Bristol Brabazon test flight on Youtube and other little gems too, it's a good £200 worth.
We bought an SB3 a month or two ago after we'd used a Noxon 2 in the factory, but we don't like them as much as a Laptop and customers seem to agree, although I think the next few months are likely to be all PS3's until the Mac Mini appears with a Blu Ray player in it. But at least we now know how they work.
The SB can be controlled from a laptop if needed but it dosent suit me, I prefer the use of remote and green display (still harbouring feelings for my old CD :lolsign: )
I like the look of the new Duet though. I reviewed the Sonos kit a while back and was really taken with it, great idea and neat interface but the price put me off...I was very close to buying though...not checked out the the Apple stuff its on my 'to try list'.
Ashley James
19-03-2008, 22:43
Sonos is more popular than people realise and it's the best wireless system, the easiest to use and the most reliable when streaming FLAC. One chap reckoned his 80 year mum was on to it straight away!
Apple's score because it's the most Integrated system of all and if you're more Computer than TV orientated a 24" Mac with Elgato eye TV is stunning with a screen to die for.
interesting stuff i am now using a PS3 to good effect streaming from my laptop etc.
always thought of myself as a bit of a luddite but have been surprised with how esay it was to set up and the quality is beyond what i thought would be possible.
like the look of the adm9's by the way
Ashley James
20-03-2008, 08:38
It's the future but I expect there will be those on this Forum who will be sticking pins into your effigy!
Are you streaming DIVX movies yet?
It's the future but I expect there will be those on this Forum who will be sticking pins into your effigy!
Not at all.
The fact is in hi-fi there is no universal 'true path'.
The mistake you are making is promoting the myth, somewhat over-zealously, that the newest and latest technology in hi-fi is automatically best, which is definitely not the case.
Do tell us about your laptop music streaming, though, jester. It sounds interesting :)
Marco.
movies are my next task.
wifi connection from laptop to ps3 no need for other boxes etc. so very simple the sound quality is very good all the music files i have on windows media player are available job done
pictures from picasa look very good on the tv and again the ease of use is excellent
i am i will admit very taken with the ps3 excellent bit of kit
Ian Walker
20-03-2008, 19:33
This is what i use guys pretty good for £300.
http://www.helios-labs.com/us/products/X5000/x5000_tech_specs.shtml
Hey that looks interesting!
Now if only it played bluray too, all for three hundred quid......
:)
Ian Walker
20-03-2008, 21:35
mmmm good idea ive just mailed Helios support to see if there's a version planned.
Will post their reply.
I've managed to get some music on my computer that sounds better than the CD version played through the same system... alas these are the raw Protools files straight from the studio.
Bit late joining in but I have been messing around with in PC based audio ever since Creative Labs brought out the Sound Blaster card. Besides, posts by Ashley James make this thread particularily interesting.
Have seen many good reports about ADM 9s too. Active speakers are the norm in the Pro Audio market and those experts should know.
But I am confused! I have heard that one of the reasons for isolating components is because electronic parts are affected by vibrations; such as from speakers. If this is correct, surely the worst place to put an amp is inside a speaker enclosure?! :scratch:
Filterlab
25-03-2008, 22:52
But I am confused! I have heard that one of the reasons for isolating components is because electronic parts are affected by vibrations; such as from speakers. If this is correct, surely the worst place to put an amp is inside a speaker enclosure?! :scratch:
Well you'd think, and by traditional reckoning it shouldn't help by any means, but do amps really suffer that much at the hands of vibration? I can understand a turntable or CD player, but surely the lack of moving parts should negate any serious consequences of vibration. Ok so there's microphonics to think about, but how much does it really affect the sound? More in a turntable surely?
I had a while back a pair of Alesis M1 mk2 (you probably remember me chatting about them on HFC) and they were sodding staggering, for their absurdly low price they destroyed anything in their price range - hi-fi or studio wise, this was surely aided by the built in amp.
Also a decent speaker enclosure should be inert anyway.
Filterlab
25-03-2008, 22:52
Welcome btw Blue Max. :)
Yeah, howdy, BlueMax.
Good to see you here :)
Marco.
Hi Rob and Marco
Thanks for the welcome. :)
Joined this forum soon after it started but some how forgot about it.
Some quality posters and posts here with useful info rather than too many jibberish posts. So it is good to be here.
Steve Toy
28-03-2008, 03:43
Hi Bluemax. I've been reading your posts elsewhere. :)
Ian Walker
28-03-2008, 08:43
And here's the reply from Helios:
Hi Ian,
We will not be able to launch Blu-ray version any time soon, due to super expensive license cost and the hardware cost ( yes Sony did want to make a lot money for their investment on Blu-ray ).
Feel free to let me know if you have any further question. You can always reply this email to re-open this ticket.
Regards,
Ryan
Filterlab
28-03-2008, 09:18
And here's the reply from Helios.
Hi Ian,
We will not be able to launch Blu-ray version any time soon, due to super expensive license cost and the hardware cost ( yes Sony did want to make a lot money for their investment on Blu-ray ).
Feel free to let me know if you have any further question. You can always reply this email to re-open this ticket.
Regards,
Ryan
That's a shame, but Sony have said they don't want Blu-ray to go the same way as DVD (i.e. players becoming £9.99 items).
Excuse my ignorance on these new-fangled thingies, but what exactly is Blu-ray?
I've seen it mentioned a few times but never really paid much attention to what it's about.
Marco.
Ian Walker
30-03-2008, 12:08
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluray
This should cover it.
Cheers big ears! ;)
Marco.
Filterlab
30-03-2008, 16:55
It's amazing, that's what Blu-ray is! Blows standard definition into the weeds. :)
Phil Bishop
26-05-2008, 21:35
Blimey,
That was an interesting thread (more like a huge tangled ball of string) that went off on all sorts of tangents. Noted that a couple of folk have "banned" by their names - I had better watch out!
But I want to bring this back to the original topic - computer based audio of "audiophile" quality. As Rob knows, I am very interested in this. I come from a modest traditional hi fi background - vinyl on my old Trio turntable when I was young - now Linn LP12 and Arcam CD set ups. But I am sure I am typical of many......I don't really sit down and listen to music these days...too busy...I "skank" (love that word!) around the house when I can (kids and wife are out) doing things (jobs, etc) listening to the music, occasionally popping into the sitting room where the music is playing to appreciate the sound more fully, particularly when favourite tracks or sections are playing.
LPs are great - I love them - but not practical for me at the moment (would never sell my LP collection though - yes, 30th Anni vinyl reissue of DSOTM is the best I have heard!). My LP12 is in the loft! Might sell it. I am also tiring a bit of the "harshness" of some CD reproduction.
If Rob is right and an iMac with DAC can do what he says, that sounds just what I am looking for. But I am not a computer buff. I have searched on the internet and all computer based audio chat takes a lot for granted in existing knowledge (I am not even sure what a soundcard is for example).
Please - what is needed is a basic guide for us starters. You need this gear (IMac/PC and DAC?), this software, run in this format (lossless or whatever) to achieve audiophile quality and explanations of what the terms mean. Does such a beginners guide exist anywhere? Anyone fancy writing one? By the way, Rob's posts on his set up are brilliant and go a long way to explaining things - it could just do with a broad brush overview.
Help....please!
Phil
BajaGringo
26-05-2008, 23:00
I was a big vinyl fan for many years, long before and after the digital revolution that started back in the 80's. At some point in time, probably about 7 or 8 years ago I came to the conclusion that vinyl will inevitably have a limited/finite life. I then made a deal on swapping my several thousand disc vinyl collection and turntables for cash and invested the money into duplicating my prior vinyl collection in a digital format. The process is still ongoing and today I have over 100,000 songs including 30K+ in my Living Room server which includes my favorites/most listened to. I run the library through a rack mounted PC with a high end audio card into a Yamaha DSP and the pre-outs into integrated amps. You can get a better explanation and see all the photos here:
Digital Music Library into Analog Audio Setup (http://www.bajagringo.com/BajaGringoManCave.htm)
Cheers!
Filterlab
27-05-2008, 10:28
...Does such a beginners guide exist anywhere? Anyone fancy writing one? By the way, Rob's posts on his set up are brilliant and go a long way to explaining things - it could just do with a broad brush overview.
Phil
I must apologise Phil if my email advice has been a bit technically OTT, I will write a basics guide and post it as a sticky in this section. You'll have to give me a couple of days though, it's fairly straightforward but there's a lot of technical stuff which most would take as read in terms of consumer knowledge. :)
Phil Bishop
27-05-2008, 13:40
Absolutely no apology needed Rob - I have grasped most of what I have read and your advice, both in posts on this Forum and via e-mails to me have been excellent - clear and informative. This issue I was getting at was for a starter like me (and I am sure there are plenty of others out there) a basic starters guide would be brilliant. If you can write one, I am sure it would be oft consulted! Phil.
Going to computer need not be difficult first u need a decent dac with at least usb port to feed pc or mac There are many systems you cam use to store the music and play itunes being the most famous but also consider widows media player and foobar. basically dowmload on the hihest nit rate u can losseless works well and there are a few specialist that allow u to listen at a higher quality bit rate. The more bits the more data. Make sure u have plenty of memory any new modern computer should work well. Lots of different dacs around so thonk about the cost before u buy Then plug in usn lead to computer and dac download or burn cds onto libary (good to think about having a back up system) connect to pre amp or intergrated and you are then up and rumming although you may need to see if driver has been loaded and change speaker output on computer. Thats as basic as I can make it hope it helps
Phil Bishop
27-05-2008, 16:30
Thanks John, that is basically how I understood it worked. Are the only digital outputs on Macs/PCs USB - does this give "Audiophile" quality output? The aspect I am interested in is the potential to download/read CDs to computer at higher resolution/accuracy potentially than even high end CD players would play them. Hook up a good DAC and then one should have excellent reproduction and convenience. Downloading itunes, etc, does not appeal so much because of compressed nature, but I am reading more stuff is being made available uncompressed - so one may have the opportunity to download music that would be used to burn CDs - i.e., there may be the potential to cut out the CD manufacture/replay issues alltogether? Phil.
purite audio
27-05-2008, 16:43
Phil Hi, I have researching the very same thing, I don't care about convenience i want the highest sound quality possible, the two options I have been thinknig about are, a.
E-Mu 1616m sound card and junction box for my existing PC, then into a realy good dac, option B, it to have a computer made ( Simon has been really helpful with this ) with just the audio functions, have pipe cooling etc, and use a Lynx 16aes card ,then into a realy good dac, I believe the Lynx may offer a slight improvement, have a look at the 'reference recordings' technical page therethey specify the computer they use for their new Hrx discs , the E-M is £250 the Lynx card £800 , regards Keith.
BajaGringo
27-05-2008, 18:11
Going to computer need not be difficult first u need a decent dac with at least usb port to feed pc or mac There are many systems you cam use to store the music and play itunes being the most famous but also consider widows media player and foobar. basically dowmload on the hihest nit rate u can losseless works well and there are a few specialist that allow u to listen at a higher quality bit rate. The more bits the more data. Make sure u have plenty of memory any new modern computer should work well. Lots of different dacs around so thonk about the cost before u buy Then plug in usn lead to computer and dac download or burn cds onto libary (good to think about having a back up system) connect to pre amp or intergrated and you are then up and rumming although you may need to see if driver has been loaded and change speaker output on computer. Thats as basic as I can make it hope it helps
I run four - 250 GB drives for my music library. Two for music and two for backup. The thought of losing all those years of work would frive me to drink. What a minute... I DO drink!
Filterlab
27-05-2008, 18:25
...The thought of losing all those years of work would frive me to drink. What a minute... I DO drink!
:)
Well, you'd just have to drink more!
Phil Bishop
27-05-2008, 21:12
Thanks for advice. Its Rob's set up that interests me at the moment as it seems relatively "off the shelf" and if it can beat reasonably "high end" CDPs then that's for me!
Dummy question here - what exactly is a sound card? I thought maybe it was the inbuilt DAC in a computer, but I think there is more to it than that. Phil.
Filterlab
27-05-2008, 21:19
A soundcard is basically the audio output stage of a computer. It may comprise of several output connectors in both analogue and digital.
Yep, mine is relatively off the shelf, and it smashes several high end players I've compared it to. :)
Beechwoods
27-05-2008, 21:20
I run four - 250 GB drives for my music library. Two for music and two for backup. The thought of losing all those years of work would frive me to drink. What a minute... I DO drink!
I lost a 500Gb drive that was about 90% full of live audio that I'd gathered over a few years or so. I even sent the drive off to one of these forensic recovery places and they couldn't get it back (the drive was a RAID 0 speed-striped array and one half of the array was messed up so badly they couldn't get anything off it.
Ever since then I have 3 rules. 1: Multiple smaller drives. 2: 100% drive redundancy, ie. every drive has a mirror. 3: I have a scheduled, regular, automatic backup run to make sure everything is in sync.
It may seem like false economy to have 2 drives for every one drive you think you need, but hard drives are flaky and will fail sooner or later.
It took me a year to get back 75% of the stuff I lost, and that was hard work. I collect lossless live music and some of that stuff only turns up once in a blue moon.
And if you've taken the time to rip all your discs you'll know just how much work that is (I have!)
It's better to be safe than sorry :doh:
BajaGringo
27-05-2008, 21:23
Thanks for advice. Its Rob's set up that interests me at the moment as it seems relatively "off the shelf" and if it can beat reasonably "high end" CDPs then that's for me!
Dummy question here - what exactly is a sound card? I thought maybe it was the inbuilt DAC in a computer, but I think there is more to it than that. Phil.
Here is the one that I am using right now and I really like it. This is a link to one from eBay where I bought mine...
Onkyo Sound Card (http://cgi.ebay.com/Onkyo-Wavio-SE-200-PCI-Sound-Card-Free-Postage_W0QQitemZ160244040920QQihZ006QQcategoryZ37 01QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
Filterlab
27-05-2008, 21:44
I have a back up at the moment - the original CDs. :) Shortly however I will get a pair of 1 Terabyte firewire drives and move my current files across - one as a back up (which will be disconnected from the computer when not backing up) and the other will be the player.
Phil Bishop
07-07-2008, 11:45
Well, sometimes life takes you on unexpected journeys. A few months ago, I was intrigued by a passive pre-amp for sale on ebay. I eventually made an offer and bought it off Rob (Filterlab). When I collected it I asked where his CD player was. "CD player, what CD player" came his answer - "I use my Mac". A Mac for music - you are having a laugh, are you not?
Anyway, here I am a few months on and last Friday my Mac arrived as did some ADM9s. The system is a revelation - I can't remember enjoying music so much since I got my first hi fi in my teens - the spark has been rekindled. The living room has also been liberated of numerous black boxes (well actually, it hasn't as they are all packed up in cartons at one end of the room, but you know what I mean). Anyone interested in some original Audiolab monoblocks, Tag pre-amp, Epos speakers, Audioquest interconnects, RDC cones, Merlin power cables...the list goes on...
Phil
Filterlab
07-07-2008, 12:32
:)
I'm so glad computer based audio is doing it for you mate. Pop up your review and I'll do as we discussed to keep the muppets away. :)
thrunobulaxx
07-07-2008, 17:23
Hard drive failure happened to me recently, i had got a maxtor 500gb drive cheap from argos and put around 500 CD`s on it in WAV lossless, while transfering some files i had a power cut and that was it, "I/O error and after looking for answers on the net found out it was a common problem.
A friend who has retrieval software tried to get my tunes back but failed, he thought he had got most of it back but a few days later it shut down on me again.
I lost a lot of music :steam:, but argos gave me a credit and i paid a bit more and replaced it with a phillips 500gb and fortunatly got back most of it as he had much of the same stuff backed up albeit only at 320kbps mp3.
I find playback from H/D as good and maybe better in some cases than the original CD and if i ever have to back up everything will do multiple back ups, i`ve learnt the hard way.
Ever since i have had a beresford dac i have played off the media player but had noise from the soundcard when connected from the pc`s mini jack output so looked into getting a better one with digital outs but saw this at maplin for £17 and gave it a go, its a suberb little interface for the money and using a usb from the PC to it and its optical out to dac there is none of the noise i had with the wire connection.
I dont use my pioneer as a transport any more:)
Suggestion: buy a second hard-drive and a Linksys NSLU2. Connect both drives to the NSLU2 and one will back up to the other every twenty-four hours. Total outlay £105 from Dabs.com.
The only problem is that you will have to borrow a third hard drive to set it all up since the NSLU2 reformats the drives connected to it.
There may be other ways to achieve the same end, but this works brilliantly for me!
Tony Moore
08-07-2008, 08:28
Hi All,
I also use the NSLU2 and a big hard disk for daily backup of all our photos, music and documents.
It's a great little device. I originally bought it with the idea of using it as a SlimServer but after much faffing around I found it just wasn't fast enough for hosting the SS software, now that it is all burdened down with mySQL.
So now I just use the "Slug" for what it was designed for. It can be set up to periodically log into PCs over the network and backup (full or incremental) to the USB drive(s) that you connect to it. It's great to know that you've always got two copies of your files! On more than one occasion I've had problems with a music track on the main SlimServer and simply copy the one back from the Slug and fixed it.
Cheers,
Tony
There was meant to be a downloadable DVD-A? version on the net, in surround sound which apparently came from the master?
I have the DVD-A version. It was a pain to rip it but finally got it at 24/96 resolution with DVD-A Explorer. Not worth the effort, the CD version I have sounds much better.
:confused:
Blimey! There's a lot of information here that I should respond to.
PC's and Music.
These will play music via a good quality DAC as well as an Apple Computer if the drivers are correctly loaded. The problem with PC's is their crappy operating system and the fact that the Hardware is sold on price with third party software. And where Apple supply everything you need to stream music and video on Wi fi network, with PC's you have to select from different sources - mixing and matching often gives problems. It's likely that Vista will be replaced later this year and that things may change but right now, I'd buy Mac
Lossless is Lossless, the reason the files are smaller is that the Data is better packed, a bit like a Zip file. Apple Lossless means DRM added.
There is a state verging on Paranoia amongst audiophiles regarding perceptual encoding. There needn't be because if you have the CD's you can experiment.
A number of properly conducted tests, properly supervised using Industry Pros, members of the Public and selected Audiophiles have shown 192K might be the point at which you can't hear the difference and you almost certainly can't at 320K.
However the Hi Fi business is a disaster area where science is dismissed and all sorts of completely stupid ideas are touted including £500 mains leads with special properties and manufacturers are actually shaking Phono leads in paint mixers because they think it will help the sound.
Most professionals agree that MP3's at say 128K sound pleasant and musical but not as good as CD and a little dull. As a result they will often "lift" the treble slightly.
Many Audiophiles are complaining about thin shrill top ends and excessive treble. This has to be their systems and herein lies the problem. The equipment they own is raved about by the press and everyone agrees it's good stuff. They are wrong, there are a number of reason why, the most obvious of which is insufficient power; Sub 100 watts amps are clipping a lot of the time (you can't hear it but if you try a bigger amp, provided it's at least as good, it will sound clearer rather than louder), some don't recover well from clip (this is called "musicality"), others are susceptible to radiation from the DACs and some companies are using forty or fifty year old designs that just don't work alongside modern technology. Even loudspeakers have upper mid band issues from crossovers that can affect them.
What this means is that if you can get a good sound from MP3's by buying a better system, you have access to enormous amounts of music you're not going to hear any other way including huge numbers of Radio stations from all over the World, many of which sound better than our own Terrestrial offerings because they are MP3 instead of MP2. You can download music you like, but not enough to pay for and you can sample more different types of music than you've ever dreamt of from sites like Amazon.com
You can also exchange music amongst friends via email.
MP3s are international currency and can be very useful so don't avoid, instead try to get good results from them
I' sorry but I totally disagree with you here. A 320 MP3 still sounds poor in comparison to a good lossless file like Flac. MP3 sounds what it is compressed. Yes subjectively it might sound ok but if an objective measured comparison is done its found to be very poor in comparison. I'm not a computer ludite as i've worked in the industry for over 40 years and IMHO MP3 just cannot compare to FLAC. An excellent objective comparison was carried out by Stereophile http://stereophile.com/features/308mp3cd/
I listen regularly to FLAC files on my PC and am regularly impressed by their quality. However the limiting factor of most PC's is they are just not designed for playing music. Poor quality sound cards, cheap dacs and noise on the output stages. In addition USB limits the quality that can be achieved, IMHO its technically not up scratch. We need interfaces like I2S. This is where the Mac scores as it supports Firewire which is much better suited to media.
In addition where do we get the material from! From our CD's!!
Yes there are lots of downloads but 192 or slightly better MP3's.
So if we accept that lossless Flac, Wav etc are what audiophiles need who out there is supplying them? There are a few small record companies that offer lossless downloads but its fairly niche comparred to the morass of here today gone tomorrow latest top 10 flash in the pans. Where are the recordings for the Jazz, Classical, anf Folk fans to name but a few?
My concern is its all going the same way as FM Radio. This was supposed to be a great leap forward to high quality digital from the PCM Analogue FM. So what do we get, a poor quality digital replica of the analogue service. IMHO thats what MP3 is forcing us to accept.
I have to say of Audiophiles that there is a tendency to snobbishness that is depriving them of improved sound quality.
On Pink Fish a Newbie with a complete Naim system was asking what he could do to it to improve the sound so that it compared with his iPod. Most of the suggestions put forward revolved around spending more money "upgrading" and changing cables, but ignored the fact plenty of others are posting the same sort of thing on other message boards. Digital sound has progressed to the point where the DACs in a iPod Shuffle may well be as good as the ones in a certain £15K CD player, they certainly will be in this M-Audio device http://www.soundslive.co.uk/product~name~M-Audio-FireWire-Solo~ID~3772.asp The plain (and disturbing) fact is that iPods and other better MP3 players compare favourably with the best CD players and sound better than many hi fi systems if used with high quality headphones.
Because the Pro Audio business is so much larger than the "Audiophile Market" customers have a wider choice for a fraction of the cost and usually of equipment with a better performance. Something similar has happened to Hi Fi with products like Cambridge Audio easily outperforming many Specialist favourites. The fight around ADM9s is simply because something very much cheaper is better and that the technology we've pioneered will soon replaces "separates" in the real world.
The worst of this snobbishness is over MP3's. I admit that I loathe and always have loathed turntables, they were good enough for Pop and rock but misery with Classical Music. I remember endless mistracking on Tenors and Sopranos, increasing congestion on complex passages and struggling to hear the quiet passages over the surface noise. I was absolutely delighted to throw my turntable away nearly twenty years ago, but not Audiophiles, they are still playing with them, some even arguing that they are better than CD!
They are not, they have 100 times as much distortion!
And now we have 128K MP3's either as Internet radio or downloads from P2P File sharing sites like Limewire, rocketmp3 and Ares, the record companies are paranoid about the them but seem unable to prevent them, so presumably they are legal. Purchased MP3's are 256K and difficult if not impossible to distinguish from a full size file on a good modern system, but not on certain hi fi companies systems.
My argument is not that everyone to switch to MP3 but use them, via the Internet, to discover new and different types of Music, material that you'd never have known about otherwise. If you like it enough, you can always buy a CD. This suggestion has turned a Cyberspace Lynch Mob on me, some so angry that they may end up with blood pressure problems! Is it me are are these people potty? Because I much prefer the sound of an MP3 to an LP, I find them, in the words of an Audiophile "more musically involving". It's a bloody stupid term that's been used to excuse inferior kit for years, but disallowed where MP3's are concerned.
So is this why the music industry have started to produce those round black things at the old EMI factory in London.
BTW we are not snobs but music lovers and many of us have been listening to music for decades. I think we are well placed in making value judgements regarding quality. I agree there is a lot of C**P and snake oil around in the audiophile industry, but I dont think its any different in the digital music industry either! Its all about spreading FUD so that manufacturers and retailers can sell boxes a typical example is all the PraT that was and still is bandied about.
We all know and strive for perfect sound but in our heart of hearts we know its unachievable. We also know that a great limiting factor is the media we input into our music systems. Red book CD was a compromise from the start, and although good, itcould have been so much better. I think Tim P summed it up when he said.........
When CD arrived in the 1980s, Tim de Paravicini was among the first to explain the shortcomings of the new format's sound quality by pointing out that existing analog media were superior when analyzed in terms of sampling rate. He argued then that a digital medium would need a much higher sample rate than 44.1kHz (and a higher bit rate than 16) to match the resolution of analog tape or vinyl. I asked him to explain this again.
"Well, the quick nutshell of it all is this. An analog microphone we all understand, and a valve or transistor amplifier is linear in its working range. On a vinyl record, when you are cutting an acetate, there is no modulation or chopping it up—you are down to the molecular level of the acetate to store that information. It's a totally random but very minute-resolution storage system.
"When it comes to digital, it's how to operate it, how many bits we devote to it, and the sampling frequency, as to how we store that information. The original digital system of CD, with 16 bits and 44.1kHz sampling, was what the mathematicians deemed to be the minimum acceptable to human hearing for so-called hi-fi. They never looked at all the artifacts and all the problems. And they never did enough analysis of the human hearing mechanism to realize that we don't stop hearing at 20kHz—people can discern and detect sound up to 45kHz. We have, as I say to people, an equivalent risetime of 11 microseconds in the hearing mechanism. And the ability to resolve detail in those digital systems wasn't quite good enough.
"In analog, you can change the thing and keep on aspiring to perfection without a compatibility issue. With digital, once you change any parameter, you've got a compatibility issue. Now, you can record on ProTools at 24-bit/192kHz, but it's not compatible with CD. I did my own summation—and this is from 20 years ago—that if we did 384kHz at 24-bit, we'll have a system that will resolve on a par with the best analog. That's the holy grail. And the problem, for the computer people, is having the balls to go that whole hog.
"At the moment, they are going the opposite way. Digital radio came along with a promise of perfect sound forever on the radio, and the BBC made all sorts of spurious claims using what I'd call not-true comparisons; for example, showing that they could drive a car around and digital would sound better under certain circumstances.
"FM, when it was designed in the late 1940s, had a dynamic range of 80dB potentially, and FM has the linearity of an analog system, because the equivalent sampling frequency is around 108MHz, which is huge, and gives an extraordinary resolution. And then they come along with a digital system that is only 13 or 14 bits, and 32kHz sampling.
"And now, with digital radio, even Radio 3 [the BBC's classical-music and arts radio station] has been cut down to 160 kilobits per second. They've now abused us, putting on more and more channels of poorer quality on digital radio. What is the purpose? It's not high quality! They don't care any more about quality, that's the saddest part. Whereas, with stereo and FM, the original aspiration was towards quality. With the BBC, back in the 1950s and 1960s, there was a relaxed quality in listening to Radio 3, for example, or Radio 4. But as time has gone on it's been mutilated. And now Radio 3 is processed until it's not very palatable
"People will eventually believe McDonald's tastes good, if you force them. But there are people who like good food, and go out of their way to look for good food. The same with good music. And music is human emotion, it is every bit as important to us as food, because music conveys everything from laughter to crying to smiling to tears of joy.
"We've got to get people to realize—hold your horses, before it all disappears. In the pop field now, young bands are realizing that if they put the vinyl out, they know that the kids can't copy it. And the kids can now say to their peer group, 'I've got the Rotten Tomatoes record (or whatever the name of the band is), you haven't got it yet.' There's pride of ownership. But if you've got an iPod with 1000 tunes on it, you haven't got anything tangible to show what you own. It's a bit bucket, basically. And that's why, I think, vinyl has survived and has been growing. Because you've got a package, the record and the sleeve, that has some meaning."
.
Agree ashley that a hell of a lot of high end gear does sound appauling & yes there is a lot of snobbery (The turntable comment tho is cobblers) but to claim MP-3 are something to takes serious compared is utter rubbish.It a lossy format that destroys the original recording from off set, there's no getting away from that...MP-3 also has connection problems.
ie: take a live recording on CD for example, it's a continuing performance with no break's, as the CD moves to track two (on the CDP display) there is no pause in the performance (continues flawlessly into the next song), if you were to transfer this CD to MP-3 you will encounter a small pause between the tracks that the CD is telling you there is (But isn't).You can buy software to try illiminate the 2 second gap MP-3 has created but to exceptional ears you can still detect it unless you've already damaged your hearing in the first place with MP-3 listerning.Seve is encountering dynamics & soundstaging problems mainly due to the lossy compression.If the same were FLAC lossless it would most probably beat the Naim 'CDX' providing it's been properly implimented..
WELL SAID I TOTALLY AGREE :)
Btw i can put you in touch with a good dentist:lol:
Mate, do you have a 'thing' for quoting banned members? Both Ashley and VG are gonners, and some time ago, too...
Hey, I guess that's one way to make sure you win the argument! :lol:
;)
Marco.
Sastas, I haven't bashed CD players, I've pointed out that they are less reliable than hard discs and that practically no mechs are made now.
I haven't bashed cables, I've stated that it's impossible to tell the difference between them in properly controlled conditions and that anyone who believes mains cables might make a difference needs help.
I can't be bothered to argue about Macs but the sales figures are awe inspiring, currently Apple are half the size of Microsoft but if growth continues at it's present rate, they will overtake them in 3 years!
A recent survey showed a 15% customer satisfaction rate with Vista and 81% with Leopard and rumour has it Vista will be replaced later this year. Apparently Yahoo are about to introduce web based software and this is why Microsoft are trying to buy them.
I could go on all night but I don't need to, you need to search the net and see for yourself.
Apple computers and all their other designer products are finding their way into the homes of discerning up-market professionals, typically Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, Architects, Music and Film people, University types and so on. It's these people who are buying ADM9s. You'd be amazed at the expensive cars that visit with iPods playing Classical Music in them.
We rarely see PC people in a hi fi connection and of those that we do, there are often software issues and usually no digital output - hence Squeeze Box Chat.
Yes but its not sales of computers, but iPhones, services such as iTunes and the like. I hate Microsoft software with a vengence but it has a stranglehold on the business community now so in terms of numbers its well documented that Macs make up about 3% of all personal computers in the world
Marco he and a few others have been slagging ADM9's off on other forums for several months now and It makes no sense to me, all he had to do was phone and query anything he didn't like.
I apologise for mentioning it this one but he's been trying to compare ADM9 's with cheap active pro monitors, which is good to the extent that hi fi types ought to do that, they are often better than much more expensive hi fi, but they aren't ADM9s and the extensive technical analysis in SOS explains that.
The comparison with Kef 107's is worth making because ADM9s will be better, that's progress and the kefs are probably 20 years old.
Most of the advances in transducer design and there there have been significant ones, in the last five years, have been to 5 and 6.5" drive units. Bandwidths are increasing and so is power handling, which means better crossovers are possible and improved mid band performance.
We used a very expensive Vifa 6.5" in our Pro-Nine-Plus five years or so ago, it was the first of these new, more powerful (cleaner mid tighter bass but needs better amplifiers) drive units, it had a 25mm voice coil and sounded very good. However it needed a low crossover frequency than is ideal and had an upper mid band hump that was always a problem. Peerless (same group) then announced another of basically the same design but with a bigger voice coil (33mm) and better mid and we used it in our Duos, which were noticeably better than PNPs.
Then Tymphany acquired the group and a Scanspeak engineer left and joined the company who supply us now. He and his UK agent (they supply Bentley Motors) have been terrific and provided us with another of the same type of drive unit that has a bigger voice coil still (36mm) , a much wider bandwidth and more bass in a smaller cabinet.
The result of this ongoing progress is that three way speakers of yesteryear are under threat from modern two way passive ones, never mind a proper active design with some new ideas in it.
Yes but you cant get away from the laws of physics. To get good peformance, particularly in the lower and mid bass you have to move lots of air. So in speakers a good big un will always beat a little un!
I know that manufacturers have used techniques to improve this (i.e. Bose) but all comes down to moving more air such as a folded horn, reflex etc...
Oi, are you drunk?? Enough!
:mental:
Marco.
sastusbulbas
19-07-2008, 20:42
:lolsign:
Here is the one that I am using right now and I really like it. This is a link to one from eBay where I bought mine...
Onkyo Sound Card (http://cgi.ebay.com/Onkyo-Wavio-SE-200-PCI-Sound-Card-Free-Postage_W0QQitemZ160244040920QQihZ006QQcategoryZ37 01QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
Yes but this has the wolfson dac chip already active on it?
http://www.audiocubes.com/product/Onkyo_SE-200PCI_HD_PCI_Digital_Audio_Board.html
So wont this cause problems when connected to an external dac unless its disabled from the analogue output? Can this be adjusted from the driver software
Also not sure if Onkyo make this any longer
Phil Bishop
10-12-2008, 17:06
A quick update to this thread. After living very happily with my ADM9's for a few months, I could not resist upgrading to 9.1's given the very positive reviews they have received on various forums, Computer Audiophile, for example.
I still use a Mac as a source, now upgraded with a 500 GB Hard Drive. This means my 1000 - 2000 CD collection is totally on the computer, pretty well all in lossless format.
I thought the ADM9's were good, but the 9.1's are at a whole new level. Amazing detail and clarity. Used in conjunction with the Mac (a stable source that pretty well never puts a foot wrong) this comprises a stunning system in my view. I do also have a Sub, but you don't really need it. To think that the 9.1's cost a little over a grand and all you have to do to start is throw in a digital source with an optical digital output such as a cheapish DVD player - quite extraordinary.
Early this year I spent almost the price of my ADM9.1's on cables and other tweaks trying to get my previous system right - if only I had found them earlier.
I know a few AoS members heard the original 9's at the Bristol Show (?) and were not bowled over? If you get a chance to listen to the 9.1's take it - you may be pleasantly surprised.
Finally, thanks to Rob (Filterlab) for initially getting me interested in computer audio. There is now no going back!
Filterlab
10-12-2008, 18:35
Finally, thanks to Rob (Filterlab) for initially getting me interested in computer audio. There is now no going back!
My pleasure mate. I'm more than over the moon with my Mac as a source, I've certainly not heard anything in the CD player market that betters the inky-black background and honestly consistence of a computer based source. Glad you're enjoying it mate.
Phil Bishop
10-12-2008, 21:40
Rob,
Agreed - I think CDPs are now basically redundant. Mind you, I have a Cambridge Audio £150 DVD player into my other digital input of ADM9.1s and this sounds superb too. But, of course, it is nowhere near so flexible. Having one's entire library available at the click of a button (or mouse) is pretty impressive. Stick the Mac on shuffle and find music you never realised you had!
So what do others think - can anyone see a future for CDPs?
Phil
No; unless you own one that was properly built in the first place ;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
11-12-2008, 11:41
can anyone see a future for CDPs?
Phil
Nope !
Chris:)
Filterlab
11-12-2008, 11:54
So what do others think - can anyone see a future for CDPs?
Not really, although the drives are obviously essential. Standalone players though? Nope.
sastusbulbas
16-12-2008, 00:55
I know CD players are not going anywhere. FACT :) we will always see new players because some manufacturers can still make decent CD players worth having. And FACT, they are more convenient and suited to the music collector.
Face it, this time last year we saw similar discussion from a computer speaker manufacturer, and since then, god I've lost count of the amount of new CD players that have been released! Every month there is a few more in the Hi-Fi comics.
Sadly it's all hype and scaremongering.
Computers on the other hand WILL continue to change and develop, and will continue to have an equal share of new and old, quite simply because they do not do what they say on the tin, they are going somewhere, and manufacturers are NOT interested in audio but the general consumer and bundling as much shite which earns coin into their machines with more hype than a cable manufacturer. Sadly we will see a mix of computers that perform well and others that perform poorly, though with them being the new emperors clothes it will take some time to sift through the bull...
Quite simply we will never see a computer motherboard designed purely for audio, nor a never connected PSU for a computer audio, nor an operating system with only audio in mind, nor any technical analysis and development into circuits and shielding and any other detrimental area of performance there may be. We will however continue to see free ware develop better audio interfaces as it is one area some consumers can improve on, and more hyped pro audio and gamers sound cards instead of development into the quality of the digital output devices and interfaces of the computers themselves.
Unless you buy an overpriced audio server. And even then it's limited to what the manufacturer deems necessary, and may still suffer teething problems. Naim's HDX had an apparent problem with it's PSU causing audible problems with some ancillaries, something I mentioned as a problem wth PSU's which got dismissed as Foo ;) but at least Naim are reported to be working on that.
Not that any of it matters, as we will not see very much high definition releases of popular 24/192 music, and may well see plenty of 16/44 re-sampled to 24/192 muck.
:lolsign:
Stratmangler
16-12-2008, 03:00
And even then it's limited to what the manufacturer deems necessary, and may still suffer teething problems.
Hot hint - leave Squeezecenter 7.3 alone - it is absolute sh*te.
All IMHO, of course !
Chris:doh:
Steve Toy
16-12-2008, 03:15
and were not bowled over?
I was bowled over by how incredibly insipid and flat they sounded. Do the Point Ones polish turds or something?
Was this an internal upgrade or did you have to junk the lot?
Phil Bishop
16-12-2008, 15:22
Steve,
If you did not like the 9's you will probably not like the 9.1's either. It is not an internal upgrade to my existing 9's - it is a new product (so I sold my old and bought new). I have never been to a hi-fi show, but always wonder how easy it is to judge something on the basis of an audition at a dealer or show. It has only been when I have got equipment home that I have known whether it is right or not.
For me, these 9.1's are the most "right" product I have owned. I have a Moving Hearts album called "The Storm", fantastic music and always held up as a great recording. I used to play the vinyl on some £1 - £2 K's worth of turntable/phono pre-amp. Today, I ripped a £5 CD from ebay to the Mac and played through the 9.1's - it was better than the vinyl.
As for computers and CD players, I agree CD players will continue for a while until the ipod generation grows up and then most CDPs will probably become commercially unviable. I'm with Rob though that Macs seem to comprise a brilliant, flexible digital source and presumably throw out exactly the same 0's and 1's as a CDP. One word of caution though - my Mac has been in for new parts twice in a few months - reliability may be an issue (but then it may also be with some CDPs).
Phil
Has anyone an idea of the actual CD players sales are these days. I must admit I often get suprised how many manufacturers still are releasing new players.
Filterlab
16-12-2008, 19:33
One word of caution though - my Mac has been in for new parts twice in a few months - reliability may be an issue (but then it may also be with some CDPs).
That's unbelievable! I've had my Mac for almost two years and in that whole time I've never had a moments trouble. In fact I've only used force quit once, I've never had a crash or a fail of any type. My best mate has had Apple laptops for years, since OS9 in fact, and he's never had a problem with any of them except his G4 when his mate's dog knocked a bottle of wine on to it. What's yours been in for?
Phil Bishop
16-12-2008, 20:14
Rob,
Yes, I think I've just been unlucky. It developed a rattle with the fan and also a problem rejecting CDs. I have had a new fan and new superdrive fitted (all under guarantee). I have the 3 year Applecare so in theory I have 3 years' worry free support and parts so that's OK (even though it cost £150!). Most folk talk about Macs as being very reliable.
Phil
sastusbulbas
16-12-2008, 20:33
Has anyone an idea of the actual CD players sales are these days. I must admit I often get suprised how many manufacturers still are releasing new players.
What a silly thing to say? Why would you be surprised?
Manufacturers release CD players because there is a demand for them, because people find them more convenient than many other formats, because people still buy CD's. Because people still enjoy playing them, because people have large collections, because some manufacturers believe you can get better results from a dedicated CD player, because CD's are not going anywhere in a hurry.
I am more surprised at the amount of hype regarding downloaded music.
Filterlab
16-12-2008, 21:13
Rob,
Yes, I think I've just been unlucky. It developed a rattle with the fan and also a problem rejecting CDs. I have had a new fan and new superdrive fitted (all under guarantee). I have the 3 year Applecare so in theory I have 3 years' worry free support and parts so that's OK (even though it cost £150!). Most folk talk about Macs as being very reliable.
That's a shame, I've never known any Apple laptops to be problematic. Still, with the Applecare you'll be fine, the customer service is very good. Hopefully you'll have no more problems. :)
Beechwoods
16-12-2008, 21:30
I am more surprised at the amount of hype regarding downloaded music.
I don't understand why someone would want to buy music in the form of a download.
Apart from the problem of DRM and the risks associated with some corporation being able to switch off your ability to play the music you've bought, I am particularly keen on the ritual of ownership in music; being able to physically inspect the item, to see the artwork properly, to lend it to your mates, to have it lined up in whatever order you like to line your stuff up in. This is all part of collecting and enjoying music in my opinion. I have all my CD's ripped into iTunes for convenience, and that's how I listen to most of them, but I would never part with the originals, and would always seek out the originals if I enjoyed something I had come across online.
I guess that I have always thought that music has a rarity value, but that value doesn't exist when it comes to downloaded music, at least not as far as officially released stuff is concerned. Not that I would ever sell my collection...
What a silly thing to say? Why would you be surprised?
Manufacturers release CD players because there is a demand for them, because people find them more convenient than many other formats, because people still buy CD's. Because people still enjoy playing them, because people have large collections, because some manufacturers believe you can get better results from a dedicated CD player, because CD's are not going anywhere in a hurry.
I am more surprised at the amount of hype regarding downloaded music.
I am asking a geniune question I understand manufactures do not release equipment unless there is a demand but demand for CD players; but demand can no longer be high. I think we can argue all night and all week about what gets you better results for instance Coherent systems use computer based audio in there referece system. So think both mediums are capable of good results
I do not really care which is the better format I enjoy all mediums but most of all I enjoy the music
Phil Bishop
16-12-2008, 22:08
I tend to agree about downloads - most are compressed and I don't bother with them (although some compressed music can sound fine). For me, it is the lossless ripping that is the key factor - I don't then really care much about the media - it goes in the loft (may need it as back up some day!).
The ritual of ownership? I totally understand this, but more relate it to vinyl and gatefold sleeves, etc. I have never got excited about a CD cover or booklet. I actually get pleasure from ripping them, letting the Mac work it's magic and then dispensing with the media. The Mac is so much more flexible too for finding stuff, discovering stuff you never realised you had, compiling playlists, etc, etc.
Phil Bishop
16-12-2008, 22:11
John,
Totally agree with you!
Phil
Beechwoods
16-12-2008, 22:30
I tend to agree about downloads - most are compressed and I don't bother with them (although some compressed music can sound fine). For me, it is the lossless ripping that is the key factor - I don't then really care much about the media - it goes in the loft (may need it as back up some day!).
Lossy-compressed stuff of course is anathema for anyone who cares about their music. Some download stores do lossless in the form of FLAC downloads, which sidesteps that issue nicely, and that of DRM, since the FLAC format doesn't support DRM, but regardless, not really owning the music in a physical sense just isn't on! Aside from my fetishising of the object, there is of course the important backup factor, as you say. I've had 3 or 4 hard drives die on me, so they are hardly reliable... you do backup everything to a separate drive don't you?
sastusbulbas
16-12-2008, 22:31
I am asking a genuine question I understand manufactures do not release equipment unless there is a demand but demand for CD players; but demand can no longer be high. I think we can argue all night and all week about what gets you better results for instance Coherent systems use computer based audio in there reference system. So think both mediums are capable of good results
I do not really care which is the better format I enjoy all mediums but most of all I enjoy the music
Why can demand not be high?
People are not all sufficiently well off, not everyone owns a computer or is computer literate, not everyone ownes an MP3 player only.
Indeed most of my friends own computers CD players and MP3 devices. The majority prefer their CD players. When it goes kapput most will get another CD player. Such "common" people only will download MP3 and load favourite CD's into computers for MP3 player lists and background play lists.
There are also more CD's out there than downloads and such, and not everyone buys new.
Don't people get it, for CD players to be dead there would have to be no CD's. There IS still demand as there IS still a market, honest, it's in that place called "real" world.
I think it silly to believe market hype also, after all they claim the average wage in the UK is £25k, why believe CD sales are down just because they look at a specific market area?
I predict it will still be a few years before it is noticeable that CD players and CD's are out of favour, but there Will still be a lot of people after nothing else.
sastusbulbas
16-12-2008, 22:34
Lossy-compressed stuff of course is anathema for anyone who cares about their music. Some download stores do lossless in the form of FLAC downloads, which sidesteps that issue nicely, and that of DRM, since the FLAC format doesn't support DRM, but regardless, not really owning the music in a physical sense just isn't on! Aside from my fetishising of the object, there is of course the important backup factor, as you say. I've had 3 or 4 hard drives die on me, so they are hardly reliable... you do backup everything to a separate drive don't you?
Exactly, computers are HYPE and FACT less convenient for anyone with a CD collection.
In the future kids will carry OS's on flash and Palms or mobiles, with compressed music files stored in offline email accounts.
Beechwoods
16-12-2008, 22:39
Like I say I find it convenient to have all my stuff on my computer, but it takes work to get them there, takes work to make sure they're not at risk of hardware failure, and there's nowt will replace the original disc be it black or silver in the touchy-feely and downright strokeable sense :lol:
As i said I am quite happy with both formats and agree that its a pain in the neck to change everything over to digital
The reasons for my question around CD player sales is that I remember reading that the main sales these days are AV products I know one dealer who specilalises in audio sales who no longer sales CD Players but still sales turntables amps speakers etc. Also manufactures are making a lot more crossover computer based audio they are doing this for a reason and there are some interesting products like the memory player my own biggest complaint about downloads is there is only a small amount of material availble for download but think that will change in the years to come.
I am not sure what the future is for CD players I suspect it will go the down a similar road as vinyl I am talking about 3 to 5 years here but I may be wrong
I remember speaking to a producer a few years ago (Neil Kernon) and getting really scared when he said to me sell you CD player and go down computer audio It was not till I compaired it myself in my system that I decided to change my system
As for the sound of Computer audio I have no issues with it myself its about the equal of my old CD Player (nu-vista slightly better)and cost a lot less money I had a Nu-Vista Audiocom mod CD player with £2000 worth of mods done to it.
I perfer vinyl myself but each to there own
Why can demand not be high?
Don't people get it, for CD players to be dead there would have to be no CD's. There IS still demand as there IS still a market, honest, it's in that place called "real" world.
I predict it will still be a few years before it is noticeable that CD players and CD's are out of favour, but there Will still be a lot of people after nothing else.
I was thinking about this yesterday when I went into HMV. CD section was almost impossible to find..consisting of 3 rows amongst many more DVD's and games. Seen the same in Borders...Looking for Nitin Sahwneys latest. Not a cat in hells chance...
My kids don't buy CD's/non of their friends/most business people I talk to about it have or are going down the sonos/wireless route in the past 6 months.
Now we have started to see some new releases available in download only.
Fading demand...and thin edge of the wedge?
Nicked this from 'The Word' web-site..
Five years ago, Chris Rea's wife told him to clear out a drawer in their bedroom. "Everyone's got one of those drawers where there's, you know, one cufflink - the broken one," he says. "And you don't even know where the cufflink came from, because you've never bought a pair of cufflinks in your life." He came across two long-lost blues LPs by Sister Rosetta Tharpe and Blind Willy Johnson that he'd bought at the age of 22. He was unable to listen to the records because he no longer had a record player, and he sat down on the bed and started to cry.
Rea was recovering from a life-threatening disease called pancreatitis. It put him in hospital with a one-in-four chance of survival and when he came out, weighing just eight stone, he faced a six-month recuperation period and an uncertain future. The drawer-clearing exercise was his wife's attempt to keep his mind occupied - "she didn't like to think of me getting depressed" - but it turned into a personal epiphany. At the bottom of the drawer, Rea came face to face with a lost musical persona, his "deeply serious, Charlie Patton blues side", which he'd been obliged to ignore in favour of "terrible LA bossa-nova production" during the 1970s and '80s for the sake of chart success.
The smell and feel of the old records reignited an emotional connection with the album as an object, bringing back memories of a time when "you would order a record and take it home, and you'd have a night in, facing the speakers. You'd light up your magic cigarette and have a whole night just listening to it."
Rea decided to make an album that would restore a physical relationship with music. It had to be visual as well as audio - to counteract the rise of "invisible" downloads, outwit the random "cherry-picking, sweetshop selection procedure" of the iPod - and transport the listener back to an older consumer climate. He had time on his hands, and his post-op mind was working in mysterious ways: he dreamed up a band that had never existed - a pastiche instrumental group from the late '50s called The Delmonts, and their later incarnation in the equally fictitious Hofner Bluenotes.
None of the tracks will be available to buy separately on iTunes. "You've got to buy the book or you don't get nothing," he says gruffly. He's done it on his own label, absorbing all the production costs: "It's not expensive. I'm going to let it all go out for about 30 quid. You'll get a piece of something - something to touch, and 88 pages to look at while you're listening to the music."
Cupboards and bedroom drawers. Rea is running a DIY record industry at a time when the big labels are claiming that downloads make things more "artist friendly" and "consumer focused". He has another five album-books in the pipeline, one of which is "the whole world and life of dance. It's a suite that goes one step further, where you get a book and a DVD too - so you're looking at something rhythmical on the screen while you're listening to the music." He speaks as a fanatical hobbyist, or a man who's come back from the brink of death and no longer cares what the industry thinks of him.
"The music executives are drifting away from the music, and I think that given the opportunity to buy books like this, many people will take it." There's evidence that it works, he maintains. Other bands have already tried out different ways of presenting their music - putting albums out as downloads and then releasing the same material in luxury boxed sets - "like, er, what do they call them fellas?" Radiohead.
sastusbulbas
17-12-2008, 12:21
I was thinking about this yesterday when I went into HMV. CD section was almost impossible to find..consisting of 3 rows amongst many more DVD's and games. Seen the same in Borders...Looking for Nitin Sahwneys latest. Not a cat in hells chance...
My kids don't buy CD's/non of their friends/most business people I talk to about it have or are going down the sonos/wireless route in the past 6 months.
Now we have started to see some new releases available in download only.
Fading demand...and thin edge of the wedge?
Interesting, whenever I visit HMV it can take me a morning to browse CD's only, Fopp an hour plus, some of my second hand haunts an hour plus, eBay I usually only look for specific things now, as you cannot browse all of them.
Online download stores, and online CD stores take minutes to look through.
Small HMV stores like in St James, Fort Kinnaird and the Gyle have a lot less CD's in them, but I thought that was due to the type of customer they expect.
Personally though, I at times have to take a day off for either shopping in second hand shops, or shopping in retail stores, I could happily spend £50 a week and still find stuff I want to listen too.
Why can demand not be high?
People are not all sufficiently well off, not everyone owns a computer or is computer literate, not everyone ownes an MP3 player only.
Indeed most of my friends own computers CD players and MP3 devices. The majority prefer their CD players. When it goes kapput most will get another CD player. Such "common" people only will download MP3 and load favourite CD's into computers for MP3 player lists and background play lists.
There are also more CD's out there than downloads and such, and not everyone buys new.
Don't people get it, for CD players to be dead there would have to be no CD's. There IS still demand as there IS still a market, honest, it's in that place called "real" world.
I think it silly to believe market hype also, after all they claim the average wage in the UK is £25k, why believe CD sales are down just because they look at a specific market area?
I predict it will still be a few years before it is noticeable that CD players and CD's are out of favour, but there Will still be a lot of people after nothing else.
The prime age group for music sales (13-17yr olds) will download MP3 and this is set to continue, they don't buy CD's and most likely never will. They don't need a computer to download their music. Also many of my friends in the 40 something age group have also ceased purchasing CD's...download now transcend age groups.
Audio CD players are dead. Stand alone players now use Computer based mechanisms, the age of new dedicated red book audio CD mechs from the likes of Philips has gone. In fact computer based CD mechanisms have also gone, everything is now DVD with backward read capability.
Yes there is still a demand for CD but its dwindling:
http://www.dailyadvance.com/business/digital-sales-surpass-cds-at-atlantic-261762.html
If you think CD sales are as strong as they where, even this time last year, then you would be mistaken.
sastusbulbas
17-12-2008, 17:56
Yeah I may be wrong, seems to still be some CD's available up here, and still a strong market second hand. And like I said earlier I do not trust market research.
As CD players are still being manufactured, new models being released practically every month, and that some of these CD players do not use DVD/CD roms is evidence that CD is not as dead as people make out. (Unless that is what was in all those boxes in the warehouse featured in the latest Indiana Jones movie?)
The same opinion HAS been going round for a few years, we keep hearing CD is dead, we keep seeing players. We keep seeing the same market hype.
Like records, there is a huge amount of physical media out there. I hasten to add that owners of large CD collections, and owners of CD players are still a large majority. And from what I have seen, portable media players are no more an accessory than a mobile phone, everyone I know changes them regularly.
Quote,
This performance is sharply at odds with the trends in the music industry over all, where data show that sales of compact discs still account for more than two-thirds of music sales. Forrester Research does not expect digital music to reach 50 percent of the overall pie until 2011.
Quote,
Analysts said they were surprised that Atlantic — with the highest overall market share in the industry this year — had such a high percentage of digital revenue.
“That’s a lot,” said David Card, a digital music analyst at Forrester Research. “That’s very high. No one is near that.”
As you can see by the above quotes from your article, the overall trend is still two thirds CD, and does this take into account small businesses and second hand sales? A couple of years ago we were seeing variable figures stating 2010 to 2014 for things to take hold with digital music, as we can see in the current industry this is a little behind, as we are only now starting to see better than basic MP3 downloads for sale, gain popularity.
As we may also deduce from the second quote Atlantic's position may be due to their own marketing and changes in their business structure, they may have cut costs and changed their strategy, anyone wanting to make money knows downloads are more profitable and far easier to manage.
As the above quote ends with, "That's very high. No one is near that" I think it safe to assume CD players WILL still be around and required by music lovers for some time yet.
To add,
Quote,
Audio CD players are dead. Stand alone players now use Computer based mechanisms, the age of new dedicated red book audio CD mechs from the likes of Philips has gone. In fact computer based CD mechanisms have also gone, everything is now DVD with backward read capability.
Another opinion with no fact, IE hype. Many stand alone players also use CD mechanisms, they DO NOT all use computer based mechanisms. I could probably take the time to list every CD player reviewed by HiFi Choice through 2008 as an example to highlight the variable types of transport mechanisms used by manufacturers. But won't, suffice to say some utilise new dedicated red book audio CD mechs.
As reviews of NEW CD players outweigh New record players which in turn outweigh MP3 players, which in turn outweigh both home audio squeeze boxes and audio servers, well it does not take a genius to work out the true state of affairs. Proof Pudding Blah Blah Blah.
Edit,
January 09 edition of Hi Fi Choice, 9 CD players, not all with DVD drives!
I suspect most "enthusiast" based audio systems will eventually have "streaming" music (for want of a better term) as another input to go with LP, tuner and CD sources. Apparently, internet radio is something really good and worth having.
Me? I just don't have enough time to sit for hours listening to music right now. I listen every lunchtime for a couple of hours and my CD and LP collection is more than enough for now.........
Phil Bishop
17-12-2008, 21:14
Interesting debate! A few other perspectives.
I am approaching 50 and remember buying my first separates system, occasional upgrades, aspirations, etc, so I am where I am now and until recently owned a CDP. Most of my contemporaries had the same rite of passage (mainly men, of course!). I may be wrong, but the current young generation seems totally grounded in ipods and downloads - why will they ever want a CDP? So, surely, the market for CDPs will end up only being for minority audiophiles, rather like the turntable market is now?
OK, the vinyl/turntable market has seen a resurgence recently, but the only way you can play an LP is on a turntable. There are many ways of playing a CD, including through ripping to computers.
OK, this is an audiophile forum so we aspire to the best sound quality. But "when I were a lad" there was a real general (not just enthusiast) interest in sound quality - squeezing that last detail out of "Dark Side of the Moon", etc. I just don't see that amongst the music consumers I know these days (and most of these are in their 20's - 40's)- they are quite happy with downloads and just one earpiece stuck in a lughole!
To quote Fraser in Dad's Army - the CDP is "doomed, doomed". Not that I mind as my Mac sounds better anyway!
Phil
In some strange way we have have to thank the DJ generation for keeping vinyl going a few years back it was very dark indeed but a lot of people will now release limited vinyl as well as CDs and downloads.
I hope CDs do not totally die out in the next few years as there are so many millions out there but the record industry loves nothing more than a new format to hear your fav album and CD will not be saved by the audiophile community in the long run
For me my biggest loss has been losing the obscure local record shop, I now have to search ebay or Gemm for those hard to get albums and sometimes quality is not the same as you cannot check before hand
I would bet that CD will be around for a while yet, perhaps 3-5 years, but it will not last like vinyl has simply because, unlike vinyl, it doesn't have a cult following from DJs and audio enthusiasts, the combined total of which is keeping the format alive now and for the forseeable future.
I don't have a love affair with CD like I do with vinyl, so I will eventually invest in some form of computer audio set-up. I certainly would never spend big bucks on a CDP again and I would not advise others to do so either. Downloading music and ripping to a computer hard drive, then streaming it losslessly is undoubtedly the way to go, digitally, for audio enthusiasts and music lovers.
It's just a pity though that many people never got to hear CD at its best in its heyday roughly between 1989-1998. It took until the late 80s for the major Japanese manufacturers to iron out the gremlins and get it right, and when they did, boy was it good! Some of the top, 'no-compromise', genuine Red Book, CDPs from that era really did make the most of the format and produced a sound virtually unheard in today's 'chrome-plated' sonically compromised designs - and I mean at ANY price. Fortunately, I use a prime example of one of the best from that era daily and revel in its rich, deep, detailed, 'analogue' sound - just as CD was always meant to be heard when done right...
Marco.
Phil Bishop
17-12-2008, 22:29
John,
I agree losing the local record shop is a real shame, but e-bay almost makes up for it. I have temporarily withdrawn from vinyl (since my daughter knackered my £600 MC cartridge), but I did pick up some amazing vinyl bargains from ebay. Most were fine, but there were a few duff ones. Unfortunately, the grading system for LPs seems flawed - a very marked LP can still be classified as "good" condition.
Marco - you have much more experience than me here - I have only owned a few CDPs and nothing that could be called "high end". However, I agree that at it's best CD can sound wonderful. Rob has commented that the Mac seems to coax out a consistently good quality from CD. I have also found this to be the case - pretty well everything sounds good - no nasty surprises, for example, excessive harshness. Whether this is my imagination or whether Macs read the digital info more accurately with better error correction I can't say for sure, but I am happy for now!
I also love the flexibility of the Mac. I have compiled a "family playlist" where myself, my wife and my two daughters each add 5 songs of our choice from the entire 450 GB ripped catalogue every so often (hence the list gets longer with time). Then stick the system on "shuffle" - good family entertainment and we each learn about each other's music (OK, there is only so much Miley Cyrus or Amy Winehouse I can take)!
Phil
i must move to a Mac at some point use a laptop with good results but not my priority at the moment
Phil I had similar issues with ebay recently but on thw whole its been good
Marco
Tend to agree with the 3 to 5 years
Beechwoods
18-12-2008, 07:33
I agree losing the local record shop is a real shame, but e-bay almost makes up for it.
:( I lost my local record shop a few years ago, Imperial on Park Street in Bristol. I'd spend upwards of £50 a week there buying stuff I'd never heard before based upon staff recommendations and the ability to sample stuff before laying down the money. The staff there used to do little post-it notes on new releases describing what to expect and I picked up a lot of really good stuff that way. They were very strong on the electronica and experimental stuff; noise, avant-garde etc - stuff you'd see featured in The Wire magazine. Ebay and even the best online stores like Boomkat, can't compensate for being able to browse, ask questions of staff you trust, and sample stuff.
It is so sad what's happened to Britains independent music retailers.
:unfair:
Filterlab
18-12-2008, 10:49
...Rob has commented that the Mac seems to coax out a consistently good quality from CD. I have also found this to be the case - pretty well everything sounds good - no nasty surprises, for example, excessive harshness...
That's been my primary finding with computer based audio, I used to play about ten percent of my music as the other 90 percent sounded dreadful through the CD player, switched to the Mac and about 90 percent sounds good now with the remaining 10 percent being down to atrocious recording.
...we each learn about each other's music (OK, there is only so much Miley Cyrus or Amy Winehouse I can take)!
I've heard of the drug taking waste of space (as she's always in the news), but who is Miley Cyrus? Is she part of the Mission group? :lol:
Beechwoods
18-12-2008, 12:54
who is Miley Cyrus? Is she part of the Mission group? :lol:
Get with it Rob, you may not know her but you must be familiar with her dad... Billy Ray... Achy Braky Heart...? Musical genius obviously runs in the Cyrus family!
Miley Cyrus is / was Hannah Montana, Disney's modern teen answer to something like the Monkees vs Sabrina the Teenage Witch... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_montana
Am I supposed to know this sort of stuff? I have no excuses. Kids too young and I'm too old. Ah well. It's important to keep up with the kids. I don't want to sound like a 'funky dad' wittering on about the Interweb and that new fangled 'drum and bass' music!
Filterlab
18-12-2008, 14:55
Oh yes, Bill Ray Cyrus - I've heard of him although I'm not really a fan. Is Miley part of this High School Music lark that the little'uns are into?
Beechwoods
18-12-2008, 15:11
She's a superstar in her own right :) Hannah Montana is the name of her own show... jeez. Talk about thread drift!
Phil Bishop
18-12-2008, 17:04
Nick,
Thanks for helping me out educating Rob! Sounds like you are in the same boat as me (too old, with kids too young), albeit you are much better informed - I am impressed!
Just to redirect this threat back towards sound quality, what I can't get over is how bad such music (Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montanah) sounds (yes, even via the Mac). It has a kind of flat, one-dimensionless quality - just awful. Likewise recent Killers album bought for daughter no 2 sounds crap. I am just wondering if a lot of modern music is recorded specifically for the MP3 market - loud, but no subtlety?
BTW Rob, I had same experience with Mac vs CDP. With my old system, I was finding I was
playing Bob Marley and little else because Bob sounded good, but other stuff sounded bad/harsh. With the Mac, I have no fears playing anything. However, the ADM9.1s are also probably playing a role here. My previous system, although more expensive, did not give anywhere near as good results.
Phil
Nick,
Just to redirect this threat back towards sound quality, what I can't get over is how bad such music (Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montanah) sounds (yes, even via the Mac). It has a kind of flat, one-dimensionless quality - just awful. Likewise recent Killers album bought for daughter no 2 sounds crap. I am just wondering if a lot of modern music is recorded specifically for the MP3 market - loud, but no subtlety?
Phil
Yes please bring back real dynamics!!! There is a pitition going round somewhere about this very issue
Beechwoods
18-12-2008, 20:41
I'm a biiig Laura Nyro fan ('tis her in my avatar :)) and I was really disappointed with the 'remasters' of her milestone albums from the late 60's and early 70's. The issues from the 80's are far more pleasing to the ear than the remasters from the mid 90's which sound harsh, unsubtle and tiring. I got the remasters more for a few bonus tracks that were on each but always listen to the earlier releases.
The last 'teenie pop' album I bought was JoJo's 'The High Road' which is terribly overdriven. Albums like that are definitely aimed at radio-play, 24 hour video channels and MP3 downloads, where compressed dynamics and 'cut through' are everything. It's a shame 'cos often there's good production trying to break through. I can't imagine the recording engineers mixing it all that hot unless they've got lead ears. It must be down to the mastering.
Phil Bishop
18-12-2008, 22:48
Yes, remastering is a bit hit and miss in my opinion. Andy (who is a member on this site) pointed me in the direction of Steve Hoffman remasters which seem to be universally good. The remastered Mamas and Papas, for example, sounds just wonderful - incredibly fresh. However, with other remasters I have been disappointed. I have Caravan's "In the Land of Grey and Pink" on vinyl and aswell as being a psych masterpiece, it is superbly well recorded and engineered. So, having moved to digital, I bought the remastered CD but was rather disappointed.
On the whole now, I am quite happy going for ther original CD releases via ebay, etc.
Phil
Beechwoods
18-12-2008, 22:54
I have the 'Land Of Grey And Pink' album but only on CD, so don't have any reference point. It's a great album. The first I got into by Caravan. Now I have them all. And I mean all. With all the archive releases in recent years we're talking upwards of 20 of em, I've lost count :)
I started a Canterbury music thread over here (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1167) which stalled after a few posts. If you feel inspiration strike you may like to kickstart it again with your own thoughts. It's such a great scene being so nepotistic :)
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1167
Filterlab
19-12-2008, 12:47
Yes please bring back real dynamics!!! There is a pitition going round somewhere about this very issue
John said it! There's a link in the Links Box that'll click you through to a site dedicated to getting dynamics back into music, and rightly so. Recently I ran a comparison of dynamics; Coldplay's X&Y against Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms, the visual difference has to be seen to be believed! The Coldplay album is wound right up so that every peak is level at the upper limit whilst the Dire Straits album is beautifully balanced in the middle of the range - the instruments have room to breath and when the dynamics are called for there is range to be had. The album plays at a lower volume (for a given volume setting) but then again one can turn up the volume to compensate, one thing that's not short on availability these days is stable amplifier power.
I'll dig out my Audacity graphs later and post them up - you will not believe how some modern mastering completely destroys the integrity of music!
Phil Bishop
19-12-2008, 17:10
Rob,
Yes, very interesting. I am aware of the debates, but did not really understand the arguements - what dynamics are, etc. But my ears know! I have the CDs you used. I have always thought Coldplay sounded crap. Take the key mega hit "Fix You" off that X&Y album - at the end when things wind up, drums, etc, it all sounds distorted and claustrophobic. By comparison, I have Dire Strait's "Love over Gold" ripped at 256 AAC and it sounds great!
Nick,
I have owned several Caravan albums but none matched "Grey and Pink" in my view. The first album and the second are good - I sold my vinyl copy of the second "If I could do it again...." on ebay last year for over £40! Realising cash where I can.
Phil
sastusbulbas
19-12-2008, 20:57
John said it! There's a link in the Links Box that'll click you through to a site dedicated to getting dynamics back into music, and rightly so. Recently I ran a comparison of dynamics; Coldplay's X&Y against Dire Straits' Brothers In Arms, the visual difference has to be seen to be believed! The Coldplay album is wound right up so that every peak is level at the upper limit whilst the Dire Straits album is beautifully balanced in the middle of the range - the instruments have room to breath and when the dynamics are called for there is range to be had. The album plays at a lower volume (for a given volume setting) but then again one can turn up the volume to compensate, one thing that's not short on availability these days is stable amplifier power.
I'll dig out my Audacity graphs later and post them up - you will not believe how some modern mastering completely destroys the integrity of music!
Hear Hear,
And can we expect any better from any higher res formats in development, for me this is a pain, I think anyone after true fidelity has already cottoned on to buying old recordings and ditching remasters where possible.
Providing you don't chuck the baby out with the bath water. Some of the latest re masters are very good. the current Van Morrsions for example.
Filterlab
19-12-2008, 22:19
...I think anyone after true fidelity has already cottoned on to buying old recordings and ditching remasters where possible.
I fully concur, the latest Supertramp "remaster" was a bit of a bright tinny mess, certainly that's what I found out when I compared it to the earlier recordings.
Beechwoods
19-12-2008, 22:24
And can we expect any better from any higher res formats in development, for me this is a pain, I think anyone after true fidelity has already cottoned on to buying old recordings and ditching remasters where possible.
One of the things I worry about with hi-res formats is that the content shouldn't be designed to be played on multi-channel setups with tiny little satellites and big subwoofer in the corner. Over compressed recordings at whatever resolution will play to the weaknesses of systems like that, whereas proper speaker setups will expose the compromised source signal. Good material at 16/44.1 will always beat poor material at any bitrate or word length.
Filterlab
19-12-2008, 22:33
As I mentioned, take a look at these two tracks imported into Audacity. The first is Ride Across The River by Dire Straits, the second is Talk by Coldplay. It's no wonder that so much modern music sounds terrible when the headroom is max'd out for most of the track, there's just simply nowhere for the dynamics to go and a peak gets blended into the rest of the music resulting in a complete dynamic flatness and total lack of excitement.
http://s560.photobucket.com/albums/ss49/aos_images/random_stuff/RATR-DRlarge.jpg
http://s560.photobucket.com/albums/ss49/aos_images/random_stuff/T-DRlarge.jpg
Beechwoods
19-12-2008, 22:41
That is really interesting. And sad, really. If I were recording a tape to digital I'd have redone the transfer if the waveform had come out like that Coldplay one. It looks awful.
I'll try and get some time to do some comparisons between the same track 80's vs 90's or later remasters. Could be equally as enlightening.
Filterlab
19-12-2008, 22:52
That is really interesting. And sad, really. If I were recording a tape to digital I'd have redone the transfer if the waveform had come out like that Coldplay one. It looks awful.
It is awful, truly awful. The songs themselves are superb (on X&Y) but the mastering is so lame that it now never gets played by me. Oddly Coldplay's other albums are all excellently recorded, especially their first which is delicate and balanced and intimate. I guess the pressures of the record company means that they speed releases through in order to rake in the money fast. Shame.
I'd like to see those comparisons Nick. :)
Phil Bishop
19-12-2008, 23:32
Rob,
Very interesting. Like I said previously, the classic "Fix You" from X&Y sounds very compromised in my opinion. The climactic end, which should be the highlight (and probably is to many an MP3 user) is just a sonic mess. Always wondered why this was, but now I can see how your arguement fits - there is no headroom for the sonic peaks to go.
Phil
Filterlab
19-12-2008, 23:39
It's such a shame too as the songs are very good. I've attempted to introduce some dynamic range into a couple of the tracks by remastering them myself (in so far as reducing the volume and then gradually adding compression and repeating the process until there is an appreciable dynamic range and then equalising it to simulate a loudness circuit) but as the source material is so mangled the results are hit and miss and frankly sound just-not-quite-as-bad-as the original. I guess the old adage of 'you get out what you put in' is bang on the nail for this type of recording.
What this does highlight of course is that just how good recordings were in the 70s and 80s, in my opinion that's when recording quality was at its peak (if you'll pardon the pun).
Phil Bishop
20-12-2008, 10:28
Rob,
Yes, Andy who contributes to this site pointed me in the way of some 70's/80's disco music and although I was pretty indifferent to it at the time, now I love most of it and it sounds wonderful!
Phil
This issue has been around for years, seems some mastering engineers still don't get it.
http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicdeath.htm
snip.... Blah Blah Blah.
Edit,
January 09 edition of Hi Fi Choice, 9 CD players, not all with DVD drives!
HiFi Choice, quality mag. My esteem for Malcom Steward has gone up greatly, yes really.
I can’t be arsed to a nit pick through all the ‘CD’ players listed but a few minutes looking I can tell you the Unison Research uses a TEAC CD5010A which is an 32x speed ATAPI drive, I have one in an old PC, TEAC made some noises about its designed for audio… all I could find is it’s meant to be acoustically quieter and perform DAE well (which is does), it supports all the computer based CD modes. Dedicated audio mech…..balls.
I see Roksan claim to use a dedicated Sanyo CD mech…cool, must be a rare beast…but I highly doubt it, Advance Acoustic MCD403…audio only CD player at first look but the high levels of jitter and support for MP3 indicate yet another computer mech. The others with SACD support indicate hybrid or multimode mechanisms all available off the shelf and hardly of dedicated audiophile function even though Cambridge Audio I admit makes some great sounds having listened to one earlier in the year, still a computer based mech though. Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah.
The bullshit here is not recognizing the change that is happening, CD and SACD still available today: yes…but the trend and decline is there for all to see. With bands releasing new material for download and on vinyl only (now that’s ironic) CD purchases is in decline. Its already happened with CD single sales and albums will follow however they have a way to go yet so yes they will be around for many years. With this decline, sales levels of CD player don't justify all new mech development so off the shelf multi function mechs are the norm.
More irony in that full fat versions of download material is still too difficult to find, only crappy MP3 versions are available in the main so that means to feed a computer based setup you need to continue purchasing CD’s to obtain the best quality…. and that’s just bonkers.
11.6million iPhones sold this year, iPods make up over 40% of Apple revenue and increased 10% in sales this year alone, bloody good in a 'mature' market....this is why nobody else is releasing new MP3 players, mature market with a very large dominant player. And every phone launched today plays MP3.
StanleyB
20-12-2008, 14:17
It's such a shame too as the songs are very good. I've attempted to introduce some dynamic range into a couple of the tracks by remastering them myself (in so far as reducing the volume and then gradually adding compression and repeating the process until there is an appreciable dynamic range and then equalising it to simulate a loudness circuit) but as the source material is so mangled the results are hit and miss and frankly sound just-not-quite-as-bad-as the original. I guess the old adage of 'you get out what you put in' is bang on the nail for this type of recording.
There is a simpler way to do it. What you need is the audio program called Pro Edit( or was it Edit Pro?). Adobe bought them out and the program is now called Audition. It has a feature in there that can detect the compressed waveforms, and then recreate the original uncompressed one from it.
Ali Tait
20-12-2008, 17:43
Sounds interesting Stan.Have you tried it?
sastusbulbas
20-12-2008, 19:25
Snip blah
Yes some good points, maybe it will fall down sooner rather than later.
:)
StanleyB
20-12-2008, 20:03
Sounds interesting Stan.Have you tried it?
Yep, and that how I know about it;). A lot of vinyl rips on the internet have been done by people in a hurry, or who haven't got a clue about doing a good rip. In order to tackle the problem of those compressed peaks I helped to design a cheap phono preamp with a variable output. It is sold as the TC-750LC by a few companies, but I have a few in stock that I hope to sell off on my site and eBay soon. They are a must have for people who want to do accurate ripping of vinyl.
Filterlab
22-12-2008, 11:09
There is a simpler way to do it. What you need is the audio program called Pro Edit( or was it Edit Pro?). Adobe bought them out and the program is now called Audition. It has a feature in there that can detect the compressed waveforms, and then recreate the original uncompressed one from it.
Oooh, that sounds like an interesting program. My attempt was merely an 'off-the-cuff' style experiment which, if I'm honest, didn't really work. I'll have a look at Audition.
Ali Tait
22-12-2008, 20:30
Sounds good Stan,though I only have cd these days.Maybe you should market the stage again?
Beechwoods
23-12-2008, 23:15
I said earlier (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showpost.php?p=25912&postcount=176) how I'd been disappointed with the remasters of Laura Nyro's old albums, and promised to share the results of some comparisons.
Her music is in the Brill-Building style, soulful, gutsy, orchestrated arrangements, often brassy, certainly needing a deft touch on recording and playback. The remasters are heavy handed to say the least.
In chronological order of release... note that I've added obligatory YouTube links so you can get a feel for what the track itself is like.
Eli & The Thirteenth Confession, 1968
Track 1: Luckie (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=I1E63DfIhQc)
Original - Columbia CK 9626 (1990)
Remaster - Columbia Legacy 508068 2 (2002)
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Eli_Orig_01_Luckie_s.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Eli_Rem_01_Luckie_s.jpg
New York Tendaberry, 1969
Track 5: Save The Country (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E21KH_YOk7Y)
Original - Columbia CK 9737 (1990)
Remaster - Columbia Legacy 508069 2 (2002)
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Tendaberry_Orig_05_SaveTh_s.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Tendaberry_Rem_05_SaveThe_s.jpg
Gonna Take A Miracle, 1971 (with Labelle)
Track 4: Monkey Time / Dancing In The Street (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CxRUOYMwG0A)
Original - Columbia CK 30987 (1990)
Remaster - Columbia Legacy 508070 2 (2002)
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Gonna-Orig_03_MonkeyTime-_s.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_Nyro_Remaster_Comparisons/Gonna-Rem_03_MonkeyTime-D_s.jpg
The differences are pretty obvious. I find all three remastered albums hard going compared to the originals. Save The Country in particular is utterly spoilt during the later minutes as it reaches it's crescendo, and everything is squashed to death...
I was surprised at how low some of the original masters were. Gonna Take A Miracle peaks around 50% of full possible amplitude. But it doesn't sound quiet.
Anyway, forgive this indulgence. But while I'm at it, I'd just like to share my favourite picture of Laura, c. New York Tendaberry. I love this picture.
http://homepage.mac.com/beechwoods/AOS/Laura_NYC.jpg
Such a crime with the remasters
Wow she was nice Never heard anything by her
Always so much music out there
Filterlab
24-12-2008, 09:02
It makes me wonder if they simply turn up the volume and add a bit of treble, add some new packaging, run a TV ad and call it a remaster. If I weren't so cynical I'd hope they did it properly, but I bet that's just what they do.
Beechwoods
24-12-2008, 09:14
I think it reflects a new style in A>D transfers. These transfers sound different in 'detail' to the originals; I'm assuming that they really did go back tot he original tapes. CD masters in the early days often came from the 1st gen cutting master, good remasters will go back to the original stereo mixdown tapes. The f--- up comes later! What surprised me was that the compression appears to be applied asymetrically to the left and right channels. I need to do some careful listening tests, but looking at the waveforms there are transients specific the left or right channels which are lost in the general volume - it's almost like they compressed L+R separately, then normalised to 100% :)
Filterlab
24-12-2008, 10:55
That's a weird way of working, especially given a music track should be taken in its entirety rather than dissected, treated and rebuilt. If anything a slight volume increase is desirable but not at the expense of dynamic peaks, even a simple audio editor program will warn against clipping before undertaking an overall level increase. You'd think as professional engineers they'd be more than aware of the consequences of clipping, maybe these remasters should be done by audiophiles.
Primalsea
24-12-2008, 11:10
Someone who used to work in the industry told me that on many remasters and compilations they would just send someone into town to buy CD's from the shops to use as the masters.
I suspect that a lot of engineers come from the school of "It Shouldn't Be Audiable" and just like to mental masturbate over their new shiny up to date equipment that has more features than the last which really means more ways to f**k up in evermore interesting ways.
Sorry, must have swallowed a cynical pill.
Filterlab
24-12-2008, 11:48
Someone who used to work in the industry told me that on many remasters and compilations they would just send someone into town to buy CD's from the shops to use as the masters.
I suspect that a lot of engineers come from the school of "It Shouldn't Be Audiable" and just like to mental masturbate over their new shiny up to date equipment that has more features than the last which really means more ways to f**k up in evermore interesting ways.
Sorry, must have swallowed a cynical pill.
I think you're bang on the nail, as lovers of quality we have a right to be cynical about the poor quality of so called remasters. Yes, they're remasters, but are unquestionably worse which kind of defeats the point really.
For anyone wanting a (good sounding) compilation of Laura Nyro,I can recommend Stoned Soul Picnic.
Laura Nyro - New York Tendaberry.aiff
Track gain : -4.10 dB
Peak : 0.835541
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y198/davhar/ln.jpg
This comp. was released in 1997,Columbia/Legacy CD.COL 485109 2
As you can see from the waveform,it's certainly not compressed.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stoned-Soul-Picnic-Best-Laura/dp/B000024J7A/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1230121333&sr=8-3
Maybe Beechy can inform us if the content is representative of her career,as it's the only Laura Nyro I've heard.
Beechwoods
24-12-2008, 13:47
'Stoned Soul Picnic' is a great place to start! The first disc is representative of all her best stuff - what's sometimes called the Trinity of the first three Columbia LPs. The second disc is a little more patchy...
I've not got a copy myself 'cos I have all the original albums, but it looks from your waveform like it's nicely transferred. Another reason to get it as an intro to her work.
Save The Children (Mono Single Version) is superb, and it's nice to haver that featured here. It was also on the remaster of her first LP on Verve from 1966, which is a brilliant album by the way.
I can really recommend the following as a good 4 to start with...
A Brand New Discovery (Verve, 1966 - remastered and reissued on Rev-Ola CD, 2008).
Eli & The Thirteenth Confession (Columbia, 1968)
New York Tendaberry (Columbia, 1969)
Christmas & The Beads Of Sweat (Columbia, 1970 - not available as a remaster yet!)
Christmas & Eli / Thirteenth Confession are my two all-time favourites.
I don't have the LP's (yet) but do have her stuff on factory mastered reel to reel as well as CD. They sound great on reel to reel. The Eli one in particular; running at 7 1/2 ips :)
Hey there.. im new in this forum (i dont feel comfortable creating a whole new topic to introduce myself) :scratch:
I recently invested in analogue cables and amp, primarily for a better CD experience. But since ive discovered Last.fm i havent touched my cd-player. Its a GREAT site for extending your musical taste and profiling it.
Its the main reason i switched to computer-based audio.
The sound that comes out of my computer is (yet?) not as good as my (budget) cd-player but with some tweaks installed its not bad at all.
I use Foobar for playing my MP3's (usually 320k) and FLACs. Its a nice *free* lightweight app, thats fully customizable.
I use several plugins with that app, like Kernel Streaming (which is supposed to bypass Windows' way of handling the audio, but im not really hearing any difference) and a Resampler (currently set to 192k, i know it probably a bit of overkill, but i like it so far!)
I would like to stretch things a lot further.
Im planning to buy a Beresford DAC (as soon as Paypal will let me use my bankaccount, doh! :steam: ) and connecting everything digitally.
Right now i have it setup analog using cheap and crappy cables and extended it with various switches and stuff, yikes :/
Maybe ill buy a audiophile soundcard, like the Asus Xonar D2. Currently i have it connected through an onboard Realtek sounddevice, ...yikes twice
I already invested in a quiet computer, so i can leave it on 24/7. I totally love it! No more whirlwind sounds.. plain silence !
My question is, can i ever make my pc sound as good as my cd-player?
If i connect everything digitally, use audiophile stuff like the Beresford DAC, Asus soundcard, good cables, things can come pretty close eh? :)
StanleyB
29-12-2008, 12:42
Hi YoG, welcome to the AoS.
First of all if you already have an optical or digital coax output on your PC soundcard, don't invest in another one if you intend to connect it to the Beresford DAC. The DAC reclocks the data from your PC. So the DAC only needs a decent signal from your PC digital output.
I expect this set up to sound better than your CD player. The TC-7510 DAC has after all been compared to the Naim CDx5 £5K CD player by quite a few folks.
Stan
Hi YoG, welcome to the AoS.
First of all if you already have an optical or digital coax output on your PC soundcard, don't invest in another one if you intend to connect it to the Beresford DAC.
Yep i already got one, it comes with the Asus motherboard. Cheap stuff, but i suppose it'll okay for the Beresford DAC.
But im not sure if all digital outputs provide the same decent signal.
Ive recently stumbled upon stuff like "Bitperfect (http://code.google.com/p/cmediadrivers/wiki/Bitperfect)" (supposed to handle digital audio in a better way??) and hi-quality chips, like the C-Media 8788 (found on hi-quality soundcards, the Asus Xonar has a 'rebranded' 8788 chipset based on it)
Im aware that the digital output will bypass the DAC of my cheap Realtek, but still, that signal needs to be 'driven' to the output, my guess is that its still processed by various electronic stuff.. so a hi-quality chipset may be still needed?
..is my assumption, correct me if im wrong.. im not very technical with this!
The DAC reclocks the data from your PC. So the DAC only needs a decent signal from your PC digital output.
The software from Realtek will let me tweak the output to a higher samplerate. Will this have any positive effect or only make things worse?
http://jhkok.deds.nl//temp/samplerate.gif
I expect this set up to sound better than your CD player. The TC-7510 DAC has after all been compared to the Naim CDx5 £5K CD player by quite a few folks.
Stanargh, I cant wait !!! :dummy:
thanks for the quick replies so far.. also on ebay.. your Dutch skills are great, i expect your DAC to equal that ;)
StanleyB
29-12-2008, 13:55
Im aware that the digital output will bypass the DAC of my cheap Realtek, but still, that signal needs to be 'driven' to the output, my guess is that its still processed by various electronic stuff.. so a hi-quality chipset may be still needed?
..is my assumption, correct me if im wrong.. im not very technical with this!
The good thing about a digital signal is that it is either present, or missing. By reclocking it I can drag the signal back to its reference frequency like say 44.1KHz or 48KHz. So timing errors can be attended to.
Stan
sastusbulbas
30-12-2008, 22:23
Just curious, what sort of clock accuracy or do I mean transport speed accuracy or timing errors? are people getting with their Macs and PC's?
My own PC with digital output at 48khz 16bit (spdif) direct from motherboard has a reading of 189 ppm, whereas the likes of my EAD transport has around 5ppm variable to around 16ppm dependent on disc?
Filterlab
31-12-2008, 09:17
Good question, never bothered to check to be honest as it seems irrelevant, mainly because I'm pleased with the results and so the requirement to do 'fiddling about' has all but vanished.
StanleyB
31-12-2008, 09:28
Anyone remember those Japanese amps of the late 70's and most of the 80's that had 0.00000001% distortion of any sort? I guess today's amps are no better than that, but I don't see anyone buying their amps/speakers/CDP etc. after EVER asking those questions:scratch:. However, quite a few seem to engulfed by their obsession into jitter etc. when it comes to digital audio:mental:. Can someone, anyone, sit and listen to digital music and say with certainty every time a digital error occurs? Is it easier to distinguish from a static discharge or a scratch on a vinyl record?
sastusbulbas
31-12-2008, 14:30
Anyone remember those Japanese amps of the late 70's and most of the 80's that had 0.00000001% distortion of any sort? I guess today's amps are no better than that, but I don't see anyone buying their amps/speakers/CDP etc. after EVER asking those questions:scratch:. However, quite a few seem to engulfed by their obsession into jitter etc. when it comes to digital audio:mental:. Can someone, anyone, sit and listen to digital music and say with certainty every time a digital error occurs? Is it easier to distinguish from a static discharge or a scratch on a vinyl record?
I am not stating clock accuracy as being a problem but I have said before in the past I prefer my CD transports to computer audio, and funny enough computer audio in my experience seems to have higher jitter and poor clock accuracy, and less enjoyable to my ears. (even with jitter removal and re-clocking, though these make a big difference to the quality)
On the subject of timing error, an error of 100ppm I have read equates to a half second over a 70 minute recording, so may be undesirable, or not?
Of course this is basic computer rubbish compared to my preferred Teac , EAD and Theta transports which are very well made and measure very well.
With broad band jitter removal clear benefits can be heard, though in my opinion the better the dac the lesser the benefit. (particularly with newer Dac technology)
Jitter is a known factor in audio, it is why it has been addressed by Dac manufacturers. It may also been claimed that it may be a reason why the new Denon Blue Ray transport is poor with CD compared to it's XLR output player brother (Feb Hi Fi News 09), though it does seem to get addressed pretty well by the matching processor.
Of course I was only discussing clock accuracy and any significance in its measurement, which is not jitter. I think the terms obsession and mental are a little rude.
Of course better than being so narrow minded as to think all 0's and 1's are identical therefor all digital sounds the same and anything that shows a difference is rubbish, and anyone who hears a difference being an idiot. Or to believe there is some conspiracy.
:)
Maybe one day I will see the light, sell everything and replace with an Apple laptop with a pair of ADM9's.
Really good discussion about jitter on the SD forum...
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=56425&page=1
sastusbulbas
17-01-2009, 16:20
Playing again with some music on a PC.
Have just ripped a old CD and digital Re-master of the same album, twice with each via EAC and Windows both as WAV, for Playback comparisons with Media Monkey and WM11.
Bloody annoying how re-masters get completely messed up by idiots pushing the levels up and using compression. With such a re-master in superb condition I get a superb copy via EAC in comparison to errors and such with the old copy original CD, but the re-master sounds bloody appalling.
Hellooooooo! I started reading this thread 2 days ago, ok I don’t sit at my pc all day, I am one of the few left who thankfully still has a job...
I am going to rip my cd collection to a hard disc.. Again, because I have heard it can be done better and I see this, 'computer based audio discussion'. Well it’s been a ride; I’ve had a few lol's and a reet laff. The problem is it seems to have ended a bit abruptly; I had a bit of a panic attack and had to run for more strongbow! to be honest I was expecting more, Sorry, I was kinda hoping all my questions would be answered in this one thread, I guess I was hoping to bypass that tedious search thing. Ok I am going to go out on a limb and risk the dreaded link:
Here is what I want... I want the best rip possible, for this I think I need to use EAC with WAV. I don’t really want to get into, 'you can’t hear the diff if you keep at or above 320kb mp3'. I don’t mind big files if it gets me 'audiophile' sound, I prob won’t be streaming as I have plenty of Tb external storage and my PC is really a download tool. At the moment I am not really listening to my music collection, I’ve gone renegade and turned my living room into a home cinema. I have a TivX 6500A that I watch my collection of HD movies on and I would like to use this as my jukebox. Before anyone starts to diss the TivX, I know it positively sucks playing music, I plugged it into my KT88 and I unplugged it just as quick, that’s a lie, I unplugged it a lot quicker but when its plugged into the AV amp and that’s set to all chan stereo, we have a party. Now I want convenience and quality, Is this too much to ask?
I have several projects on the go to achieve my goal, one of which involves 4x TDA1541 S1 DAC's in parallel but I hear there’s a new DAC on the block, the Beresford DAC.....
Basically I want to make sure that this is the best method of ripping my CD's to hard disc at this present time and that buying a MAC isn’t the only way to achieve audiophile sound from these rips?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Alan
StanleyB
23-01-2009, 23:06
and that buying a MAC isn’t the only way to achieve audiophile sound from these rips?
Where are they proclaiming that?
If you really want the best rip, then do a CD to ISO conversion. Then use an ISO mount using say Daemon Tools or Super ISO. Play the ISO mounted file.
Stan
Where are they proclaiming that?
Well I must admit I am basing this entirely on this thread because this is my first dip and you must admit that is the overall tone here?
If you really want the best rip, then do a CD to ISO conversion. Then use an ISO mount using say Daemon Tools or Super ISO. Play the ISO mounted file.
Stan
Is Iso an option in EAC? sorry I havnt even used the software yet, I wanted to avoid ripping my entire collection a third time, I am sure people will agree its bloody laborious? As I said I want to use my TivX as a jukebox/media player not the PC, I know the TivX will read an ISO movie but I dont think It is going to be an option for music so I am back to my main desire of 'convenience and quality' ? Should I be ripping all my discs to ISO then use this img to rip again for playback on my TivX? Seems a bit exteme as the ISO will then in affect become purely a 'master' copy?
I did a search and noticed the TivX has no history here. thought I would post this just incase anyone has missed it, have to say I love this device for playing movies, It's the only hardware I know that will play all HD formats incuding Blueray, ie m2ts. here's a link, http://www.kjglobal.co.uk/acatalog/TVIX_M-6500A.html
rip the tracks using EAC, it's the most accurate way to get the data from the CD to your hard drive...
Some links that might be of use:
http://www.teqnilogik.com/tutorials/eac.shtml
http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm
sastusbulbas
24-01-2009, 11:42
I have found EAC to be hit and miss, at least with Windows and such you can get more playable tracks off a damaged CD.
I am also wondering how many hear a difference as opposed to imagine a difference with such rips, and how many reported errors are drive and not disc related?
As a point a heavily damaged double album I have had 21 tracks, my CD transport would play 18 tracks without audible problems, EAC would only rip 16 tracks, and WMP ripped all 21 tracks with only one having audible problems.
It seems there may be more foo than fact going on? I am under the impression that many lossless file rips from various ripping software are identical, and from what I have read, many listeners cannot tell the difference between any of these various rips. EAC in other words seems to be nothing more than paranoid ripping which takes ages and does not make any actual audible improvement? Is this true?
I also feel the same way about Media Players, having used most of them I still prefer WMP and MediaMonkey, but I do not see anything as audibly superior with any factual evidence, just opinion and preference. Both play EVERY type of audio file, WMP has less issues with rarities and art work. All require some set up work, and WMP seems to be judged more due to brand it comes from.
http://www.designwsound.com/dwsblog/?page_id=535
Ive found EAC to be 100% dependable. I suspect any issues with it will be down to settings and the drive used to perform the DAE.
That link failed to test disks with known errors, given a good disk with no C2 errors I'm not surprised at the result.
sastusbulbas
24-01-2009, 13:34
So in my above case EAC could not rip the complete 21 tracks due to errors which WMP copied and I found inaudible?
Does EAC correct errors that all other ripping software misses? Or does it fail to rip a track with errors due to an inability of some sort?
What sort of audible differences are we talking of? And to be honest, how big a difference is not hearing the track at all due to an inability to rip?
I have another copy of the above CD, plus various re-issues and re-masters, of various condition, should I rip every single one for comparative tests to measure what data?
I personally got fed up with EAC, 20 minutes it went on for with one track, failing to rip or correct.
Cheers for the links guys.
sastusbulbas
'EAC in other words seems to be nothing more than paranoid ripping which takes ages and does not make any actual audible improvement? Is this true?'
I have a very good friend who lives too far from me to 'pop' round, I cant defend EAC because I dont have my amplifier back from repair but...... He is going to re rip his rather large cd collection again because he has tried EAC and he thinks its a big enough improvement over his wmp rips. Now he wouldnt do that on a whim or a press release, ive known him long enough to believe him and hense my initial post.
It doesnt really matter to me that EAC can rip damaged cd's because I have 1 that is physically scratched and thats it, I only want the best sound. That article is interesting sastusbulbas, It would have been complete with a blind test though. I see he didnt test wmp either? I think I will get hold of Wavelab though, I really dont want to wait forever to re rip my cd's if there is no benifit, I shall be testing both progs when I get my amp back.
sastusbulbas
24-01-2009, 15:58
No worries LOL, I am a little biased anyway.
I prefer PC to overpriced fashion Macs, I think iTunes is sh*t, I prefer the convenience of WMP11 to Mediamonkey which F**ks up the art work and such, and think the best sounding way to record music onto the computer is WAV, but I prefer CD transports to all of them anyway.
Of course I use an old DAC, and everyone knows that such stuff is rubbish. :lolsign:
No worries LOL, I am a little biased anyway.
I prefer PC to overpriced fashion Macs, I think iTunes is sh*t, I prefer the convenience of WMP11 to Mediamonkey which F**ks up the art work and such, and think the best sounding way to record music onto the computer is WAV, but I prefer CD transports to all of them anyway.
Of course I use an old DAC, and everyone knows that such stuff is rubbish. :lolsign:
Dont get me wrong, my friend and me have high standards, we aint children of the ipod! we both started off buying 'audiophile' CDP's in the 80's, we have a few stacked around, we have had fairly expensive systems and we have wasted god knows how much cash. We also have old DAC's, we are hoping these are going to play a role in a new Hard Disc based audio system but its not going to have a 4 figure price tag per component! My mate is looking at audiophile sound cards, valves on board, I2s connections and I will be using the TivX or something simler, (weres that spell checker :doh: )
I got to agree though, I hate Itunes, maybe I just havnt played around with the settings enough but if I cant get it to work without reading a help file then its in the bin! The way it puts all the songs in a massive list on the screen, :steam: I love mediamonkey pro though, click on an album in the tree from anywere including usb hard drives and that album appears in the window, I just couldnt do that with Itunes, maybe I am getting old but thats fine, maybe mediamonkey is made for people like me that dont want to spend time reading help files, you look at the GUI and within 5 mins youve ripped, tagged and bagged a few discs, I havn't found any issues with artwork and such, oh... unless your doing box sets, thats a bit of a pain, you have to put all the songs in one folder so it will name them all.
So in my above case EAC could not rip the complete 21 tracks due to errors which WMP copied and I found inaudible?
Does EAC correct errors that all other ripping software misses? Or does it fail to rip a track with errors due to an inability of some sort?
What sort of audible differences are we talking of? And to be honest, how big a difference is not hearing the track at all due to an inability to rip?
I have another copy of the above CD, plus various re-issues and re-masters, of various condition, should I rip every single one for comparative tests to measure what data?
I personally got fed up with EAC, 20 minutes it went on for with one track, failing to rip or correct.
EAC is designed to get the most accurate rip possible using a number of error recovery methods including the drives C2 correction (if implemented in the drives firmware). Theses recovery schemes can make some rips painfully slow and in some case fail. However, EAC is fully configurable and you can set it so as to ignore or give up and move on if the error is beyond what the drive can correct, in this case EAC will just rip whatever it can like the other programs available...
Failed rips are not a problem of EAC but a failing of the user to set the options to suit their expectations. If you are happy using WMP then so be it but don't criticize EAC because you failed to set the options correctly.
sastusbulbas
25-01-2009, 14:52
Failed rips are not a problem of EAC but a failing of the user to set the options to suit their expectations. If you are happy using WMP then so be it but don't criticize EAC because you failed to set the options correctly.
Hmm,
So I failed to set up EAC properly, guess it's the same with Ripstation, DBpoweramp and any others I use...
Oh look , I pressed a button and it worked! Oh look, you don't use EAC your uncool, blah blah blah, face it you could set up EAC all bloody night and guess what, you are not guaranteed anything superiorly audible to a basic windows or itunes rip with the average disc. You complained about the CD used in the link, I have played with damaged CD's, fact is that EAC did not under various settings rip the CD, and that four ripping programs I used gave the same file size and audible results with a regular OK CD but not with a damaged CD, so most are wasting time with complex ripping solutions and media players when something as simple as using Mediamonkey or Windows or Itunes with standard rips is just as easy and good.
But of course you made your mind up that you know what I did.
Again I will criticise EAC, because its hyped up foo unnecessary for most users, and a waste of time in for most users. My damaged CD is an example, EAC cannot fix everything, I made an effort to get as accurate a rip from the CD with various settings in EAC with ridiculous waiting times, WMP ripped the damaged CD with less effort and input quickly and suitably.
:)
Hmm,
So I failed to set up EAC properly, guess it's the same with Ripstation, DBpoweramp and any others I use...
Yes you did, you also fail to understand what EAC can do with its myriad of user controllable settings. Don't blame the tools when the job goes wrong and when don't understand how to use them in the first place. :)
Oh look , I pressed a button and it worked! Oh look, you don't use EAC your uncool, blah blah blah, face it you could set up EAC all bloody night and guess what, you are not guaranteed anything superiorly audible to a basic windows or itunes rip with the average disc. You complained about the CD used in the link, I have played with damaged CD's, fact is that EAC did not under various settings rip the CD, and that four ripping programs I used gave the same file size and audible results with a regular OK CD but not with a damaged CD, so most are wasting time with complex ripping solutions and media players when something as simple as using Mediamonkey or Windows or Itunes with standard rips is just as easy and good.
The CD test had the results I'd expect because it was a test using a good disk, I've just performed a test with a damaged CD so damaged that the drive cannot recover using C2 and flags every read as unrecoverable, guess what, setting EAC to burst mode copies the track fine, setting C2 error correction to on EAC goes over every block re-reading and it take ages to rip it. The files are different...does it matter? No, certainly not for me, with a really bad disk I just rip using burst mode and let the drive mask any errors it can internally. Such CD's are so bad that EAC isn't going to perform any miracles.
But of course you made your mind up that you know what I did.
You obviously made yours up because you failed to understand the settings and dismissed it.
Again I will criticise EAC, because its hyped up foo unnecessary for most users, and a waste of time in for most users. My damaged CD is an example, EAC cannot fix everything, I made an effort to get as accurate a rip from the CD with various settings in EAC with ridiculous waiting times, WMP ripped the damaged CD with less effort and input quickly and suitably.
:)
That's your prerogative. The author of EAC never made any claim that it was the be all and end all ripping program, you seem to have drawn that conclusion yourself. The author made it as flexible as possible but with flexibility comes a lot of configuration options and this leads to confusion for people who don't understand it, its a program that gets cristisim due to its success. As you have proven its not for everyone and there are easier to use options available.
:)
Beechwoods
25-01-2009, 16:08
Hey guys, lets not get too personal about this! It's only flippin' hi-fi afterall!
I should also add its worth keeping in mind that when EAC was introduced the CD drives of the day, certainly the vast majority, had poor firmware with features improperly implemented or sometimes features that the manufacturer said they had but in fact didn't. Time moves on and current drives, now DVD, are very good with regards to DAE and error correction etc....so perhaps EAC has had its time and there is simply no need for such a complex program when the majority of users just want a simple click 'n' go solution...
sastusbulbas
25-01-2009, 16:49
I should also add its worth keeping in mind that when EAC was introduced the CD drives of the day, certainly the vast majority, had poor firmware with features improperly implemented or sometimes features that the manufacturer said they had but in fact didn't. Time moves on and current drives, now DVD, are very good with regards to DAE and error correction etc....so perhaps EAC has had its time and there is simply no need for such a complex program when the majority of users just want a simple click 'n' go solution...
Thankyou NRG,
This and the above replies confirm my opinion well. And thankyou, I can configure EAC well enough to do as I require, it's amusing that at times one may have to configure it to do what Windows does without configuration, due to EAC being unable on certain settings to give a playable RIP.
Anyway, I still use EAC and plenty of other software programs for doing rips, it what I was doing many years ago for my comparisons with digital audio via computer back in the early days, I still use it today for comparative rips of software of variable disc condition against other ripping software rips, my hard drives are quite well endowed with many variable music files. That is how I managed to deduce a preference between all the media players and ripping software and conclude that most of it is hype (In the context of my needs).
;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.