Cassette's Not Dead, Apparently!

[Marco]

Is it because of your new dress?

Marco.

[DSJR]

Hello Dave,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Marco]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Marco.

[Mike]

Was there something in this thread about cassettes somewhere (he said with tongue in cheek)?

[Marco]

Quite a lot, actually! But we're enjoying a bit of renowned AOS thread drift at the moment.

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

Marco.

[Mike]

We can talk about beer and food a bit if you like

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

[Marco]

Sounds good! I'm having Vietnamese chilli chicken with Udon noodles, Pak Choi, and baby sweetcorn - yum!

Marco.

[Mike]

Kashmiri rogan josh, Aloo gosht, Masaledar basmati, and Pyaz ka laccha for us tonight. <insert 'rubbing belly' smiley here>

[DSJR]

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

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

Anyway - sorted..

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

[Marco]

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

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

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

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

Marco.