PDA

View Full Version : Yo're in the wrong business...



AD5MB
03-02-2015, 08:01 PM
make turntables for the self delusional golden ears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWd7zvYYFo

PixMan
03-02-2015, 08:47 PM
Good Lord.

It's obvious to me that the engineers who designed those have never seen how even "the best" pressed vinyl records are made.

The phrase "as casting pearls before swine" comes to mind here. And I often thought a $2000 Thorens was a little over the top.

Rosco-P
03-02-2015, 08:55 PM
Or these: http://www.tonepublications.com/old-school/oracle-alexandria-turntable/

CCWKen
03-02-2015, 08:56 PM
Yikes!

But I'll stick with my Sony USB turntable. :)

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-PS-LX300USB-Stereo-Turntable-Black/dp/B0015HOFZI

kendall
03-02-2015, 10:13 PM
Audiophiles are one of the few groups who's hearing improves with larger price tags.

becksmachine
03-02-2015, 10:59 PM
Good Lord.

It's obvious to me that the engineers who designed those have never seen how even "the best" pressed vinyl records are made.

The phrase "as casting pearls before swine" comes to mind here. And I often thought a $2000 Thorens was a little over the top.

Agreed, but they have seen how "the best" salesmen can spin a tale of "excellence", "quality" and most of all "need".

Dave

J Tiers
03-02-2015, 11:16 PM
Agreed, but they have seen how "the best" salesmen can spin a tale of "excellence", "quality" and most of all "need".

Dave

Those are crude tools.

The best bludgeon for extracting obscene amounts of money from that class of customer is to agree with them concerning the fact that the prospective customer observes no difference..... One condescendingly makes the statement that "Well, if you observe no difference then you are simply not a customer for this level of equipment." Instead of emphasizing "need" you emphasize the "lack of need".

Nothing arouses the audiophile to a more rabid and foaming need to purchase "item X" than the suggestion that they are too much of a hick to hear or care about, the difference that "item X" makes..... Whether or not "item X" makes, does not make, or even COULD make, any difference at all.

macona
03-02-2015, 11:28 PM
Wait till you see this pile of BS:

http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html

Optics Curmudgeon
03-02-2015, 11:41 PM
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/11/25

darryl
03-02-2015, 11:49 PM
OOH- nylon filament suspension- it's fishing line for crying out loud:(

becksmachine
03-03-2015, 03:39 AM
Those are crude tools.

The best bludgeon for extracting obscene amounts of money from that class of customer is to agree with them concerning the fact that the prospective customer observes no difference..... One condescendingly makes the statement that "Well, if you observe no difference then you are simply not a customer for this level of equipment." Instead of emphasizing "need" you emphasize the "lack of need".

Nothing arouses the audiophile to a more rabid and foaming need to purchase "item X" than the suggestion that they are too much of a hick to hear or care about, the difference that "item X" makes..... Whether or not "item X" makes, does not make, or even COULD make, any difference at all.

Does this term "hick" also apply to owner/designers of extravagant pressure washers?

;)

The shoe does seem to fit.

Dave

Forrest Addy
03-03-2015, 04:22 AM
The cretinously impractical sold by the unscrupulous to the witless harboring delusions of pretence.

Back in the '20's hucksters sold white porcilain plumbing fixtures to oil-rich Oklahoma Indians who set them them up as yard art.

Paul Alciatore
03-03-2015, 04:34 AM
Boy you got that right. And even if you show them in a blind test that the $10 component is just as good as the $1000 one, they do not believe what they just finished saying.

Been there! Done that! Should have made a video of the test.




Audiophiles are one of the few groups who's hearing improves with larger price tags.

wheeltapper
03-03-2015, 05:32 AM
Obviously aimed at people who hear all of the sound and none of the music.

Roy.

wendtmk
03-03-2015, 07:25 AM
And then there are these:

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm (http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm:D)

lwalker
03-03-2015, 07:45 AM
I noticed years ago that the reviews for high-end audio and "fine" wine were scarily similar. In some cases you'd think it was the same person reviewing both and just changing a few words.

Lew Hartswick
03-03-2015, 07:55 AM
What is the old expression? "A fool and his money is soon parted" and the famous one from PT Barnum , "There's one born every minute" . :-)
...lew...

Toolguy
03-03-2015, 10:47 AM
I'm still trying to find out how the fool and his money got together in the first place - in hopes of getting some for myself!

Stuart Br
03-03-2015, 12:09 PM
I would like to put a little defence up for the "audiophiles" (not a term I like BTW) here. What you have here is some stunning design and superb engineering. Is this any different to buying a budget car or a Ferrari?
I would also ask anyone who has a budget USB turntable, if they have ever heard a decent vinyl setup? The difference in sound quality and consequential enjoyment of music is massive. The USB TT's are nasty, full stop.
I happily admit that my hi-fi system including a significant turntable setup is worth much more than the contents of my workshop. It gives me a huge smile every time I listen.
All I ask is for those who doubt this stuff to take a listen before rubbishing the whole industry. I'm not denying that there is snake-oil out there though. But a modest investment brings huge enjoyment.
Another analogy I guess is comparing an import lathe with a DSG?

The Artful Bodger
03-03-2015, 03:23 PM
I have a number of tubes including RCA 845s new in their boxes, I just need to find the right audiophile and I can retire!

rowbare
03-03-2015, 03:24 PM
make turntables for the self delusional golden ears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLWd7zvYYFo

I bet they used a lot of BILLET to make those eh!

I wonder about the cartridges though. Some looked like the coils were wound by 6 year olds. Everyone know that the best coils are hand wound by blind children between 4 years and 3 months old and 5 years and 1 month old...

bob

sch
03-03-2015, 03:25 PM
Stuart is probably right, but audio snobs are really a world apart. The equivalent on HSM would be talking about machining 300Lb blocks of "billet" 6Al4V titanium to micron tolerances at 293° K.
in a room temperature controlled to +/- 0.02° K. One weirdity popular in the '90s were sets of 'hockey pucks' which IIRC were metallic disks that were artfully placed on tops of speakers, amps
or other housings to modulate the sound to perfection. Sort of feng shui for the golden eared. One either has a golden ear or not, the golden ear allowing one to hear things only a few other mortals
could. One hilarious sendup LTE in the Absolute Sound discussed the letter writers experiments with moving nude young women around the room in lieu of pucks. CDs were bad enough for the
cognoscenti with their 64kb sampling, MP3 and earbuds have drastically reduced the market for such high end equipment. The sound you get out of that from a smart phone would cause cerebral
hemorrhages in a 'golden ear'. And then there were the moving magnet cartridges selling in the '80s for $1000-1500 made by 80 yr old Japanese craftperson on one at a time basis in a hut in his
backyard in rural Hokkaido.....

HWooldridge
03-03-2015, 03:42 PM
NatGeo has a cute show titled "Brain Games" which airs weekly. One of last night's episodes centered around cake samples that were given out in a heavily trafficked urban area. Both cakes were made on the same day to the same recipe by the same baker using the same ingredients - but the cake marked $55 was universally liked better than the cake marked $15. Even after the ruse was unmasked, many of the test subjects still claimed that the more expensive cake tasted better. The commentary that followed stated that these remarks were actually true, as the brain has a higher expectation based on perceived value so the actual experience truly is "better" because the pleasure receptors are tuned to greater results.

So the audiophiles may hear the exact same frequency from lower cost equipment but enjoy it less because their expectations are higher based on the pricier products.

One more good reason to raise prices on anything you can't sell - after all, it must be worth more now than yesterday because it is more "vintage"...:rolleyes:

AD5MB
03-03-2015, 06:10 PM
I happily admit that my hi-fi system including a significant turntable setup is worth much more than the contents of my workshop. It gives me a huge smile every time I listen.
All I ask is for those who doubt this stuff to take a listen before rubbishing the whole industry. I'm not denying that there is snake-oil out there though. But a modest investment brings huge enjoyment.

will it bring out previously overlooked subtle nuances in the musical crafting of Ozzy Osbourne, Ted Nugent or Alice Cooper?

motorworks
03-03-2015, 06:18 PM
Music:
The best way to listen to music is Live !
The second best is a great recording played through a good system*
*there's a big difference between good and high price....
I enjoy live via my son and daughter , both musicians and "listen" on a good system.
go to a good stereo shop (if you can find one ) and sit and listen!
You will be surprised...even with old machine shop ears!
:D
eddie

J Tiers
03-03-2015, 06:26 PM
I would like to put a little defence up for the "audiophiles" (not a term I like BTW) here. What you have here is some stunning design and superb engineering. Is this any different to buying a budget car or a Ferrari?
..............
I happily admit that my hi-fi system including a significant turntable setup is worth much more than the contents of my workshop. It gives me a huge smile every time I listen.
All I ask is for those who doubt this stuff to take a listen before rubbishing the whole industry. I'm not denying that there is snake-oil out there though. But a modest investment brings huge enjoyment.
Another analogy I guess is comparing an import lathe with a DSG?

Hah... Spent several years directly in that biz (repairs, and some sales) while in school. The 28 years in the music biz....

I KNOW that a *very significant amount* of it is snake oil.... it's NOT A QUESTION.

I have SEEN the application of the sales technique I mentioned, seen it work great... Had it done to me, and looked the guy straight in the eye and told him to save it.... I know that system, and it doesn't work on me....I buy what I like.

I have had a test equipment maker relate to me calling on a maker of $ hundreds per foot cable with a suitable tester (I know who, but will not say). They had never tested the cable, and were interested to see the results.... but it made no real difference to them, they sold "mystique" and said so.

There is good stuff, there is great stuff, and there is plenty of crap. I have repaired it, designed it, used it, even sold it. I can, or could, back when I still cared, hear the differences and could nearly always pass a blind test, because I had specific sounds I was listening for.

Some of the expensive stuff was crap, some of the mid priced was very good indeed. Price is simply not a marker for quality. Cheapness tells, price does not.

The high end audio biz has been polluted by charlatans... lots of 'em, and for decades now. There is plenty of "fracking"... on the wallets of the rich and unknowing, or unwary. It does loosen them up for easy flow... of money.

loose nut
03-03-2015, 06:36 PM
Thousands of $$$ to buy the best turntable with the best pic ups and pre-amps, the best amplifiers and the best speakers just to hear the SNAP, CRACKLE AND POP on an old record.

kendall
03-03-2015, 07:14 PM
Thousands of $$$ to buy the best turntable with the best pic ups and pre-amps, the best amplifiers and the best speakers just to hear the SNAP, CRACKLE AND POP on an old record.
Ah, but now they have laser turntables, no static.... And only $9,000

I have a large collection of LPs, I like the sound of them. I'm not an audiophile, but I do like clean clear sound. My system is 'overpowered' for my listening levels, because I don't like when bass goes flat because there's nothing to back it up. I mostly listen to classic rock, old country (other than subject matter, New country isn't much different than a lot of classic rock)
My current turntable is a cheap kenwood, very light weight, currently sitting on foam vibration isolators with 4lbs of lead on it to dampen any harmonic vibration.

Baz
03-03-2015, 07:25 PM
Are mains plugs with gold plated pins still doing the rounds?

tlfamm
03-03-2015, 07:30 PM
I knew a young lady whose physicist father built his own 1950's-era HiFi system: the turn table was a concrete disk that turned on a marble. I never saw the thing myself, but heard about it from friends. I wonder if the idea was completely original, or perhaps it was from something published in enthusiast magazines of the era?

PixMan
03-03-2015, 09:43 PM
I would like to put a little defence up for the "audiophiles" (not a term I like BTW) here. What you have here is some stunning design and superb engineering. Is this any different to buying a budget car or a Ferrari?
I would also ask anyone who has a budget USB turntable, if they have ever heard a decent vinyl setup? The difference in sound quality and consequential enjoyment of music is massive. The USB TT's are nasty, full stop.
I happily admit that my hi-fi system including a significant turntable setup is worth much more than the contents of my workshop. It gives me a huge smile every time I listen.
All I ask is for those who doubt this stuff to take a listen before rubbishing the whole industry. I'm not denying that there is snake-oil out there though. But a modest investment brings huge enjoyment.
Another analogy I guess is comparing an import lathe with a DSG?

I can appreciate what you are saying, to a degree. My system is "pedestrian, level 2.1" with late model Denon AV receiver and KEF louspeakers. I appreciate clean crisp highs with being overly "bright", midrange that delivers even response and bass that is tight yet true to the original instruments (not overwhelming.)

To my mind there is a short point of diminishing return with turntables because of the limitations of the vinyl recordings. A digital recording (please, not MP3's!) has such a cleaner sound and significantly higher dynamic range, better channel separation, markedly lower signal-to-noise ratio, and so on. I rarely listen to the vinyl recordings I have, mainly because of the inconvenience of the packaging. They've got a certain appeal, but I prefer the higher quality of digital.

Circlip
03-04-2015, 04:38 AM
Worked for Leak Wharfedale many years ago. Monthly amusement was reading the Hi-Fi comics and how much better for anal(ysis) his front room was in comparison to £1M worth of anechoic chamber. Distortion and harmonics that he could hear were fantastic. Sadly, the numpties reading all the c*ap in monthly doses never seemed to realise the overblown wages these "Experts" were demanding were extracated from their hard earned. One "Reviewer" never gave a good report unless his review product was left as a "Sample" for his disposal.

Hans Christian Anderson got it right many years before. "The Kings New Clothes"

Regards Ian.

jackary
03-04-2015, 05:22 AM
Is the background music from a CD or is it just muzak hard to tell on my computer speakers ?
Alan

janvanruth
03-04-2015, 05:39 AM
bull**** is, and will allways be, the commodity prized highest by the whealthy ignorant.

J Tiers
03-04-2015, 08:23 AM
To my mind there is a short point of diminishing return with turntables because of the limitations of the vinyl recordings. A digital recording (please, not MP3's!) has such a cleaner sound and significantly higher dynamic range, better channel separation, markedly lower signal-to-noise ratio, and so on. I rarely listen to the vinyl recordings I have, mainly because of the inconvenience of the packaging. They've got a certain appeal, but I prefer the higher quality of digital.

Curiously, your digital CD recordings ALWAYS have LESS dynamic range than good vinyl.

They use 16 bit integer encoding. Actually 15 bits plus a sign bit, same basic thing.. The SACD, which never was a success, used oversampling, but IIRC no radical difference in the encoding.

As digital reaches the lowest levels the distortion rises hugely due to the low bit resolution. You don't get 16 bits, you get maybe from one to 5 at the low end of the range. It's a "hard limit" when you finally run out of bits. Like digital TV... its there, or it's gone, no snowy picture.

The last bit is not usable sound, it is just "static-like" noise. For several bit positions above that it is nearly the same.

As a result, much digital has to be "MP3'd" by compressing the loudest parts, and raising the average level enough to get the soft bits out of the "digital mud".

For any assumed dynamic range, you have to decide how many bits reduction you can accept and still call it "sound". Then you can see what the real dynamic range is before you get to your pre-defined limit.

Analog vinyl has a dynamic range that extends down into and below the noise. Your brain can separate the desired sound from noise, as it HAS TO at any live acoustic music venue.

Whether or not the range is USED is another story, but it's AVAILABLE.

More could have been made available if a floating point format was used, but other technical limits were presumably thought to make that less attractive. The basic noise level of the electronics is one such.

Rosco-P
03-04-2015, 08:38 AM
bull**** is, and will allways be, the commodity prized highest by the whealthy ignorant.

Not unlike the "new SouthBend" labeled lathes and accessories.

sch
03-04-2015, 12:33 PM
Re the concrete table rotating on a marble in the 1950s, it was fairly common to mount turntables on a shaft that rested on a single ball bearing at the bottom of a hollow shaft in the 50s-70s.
The AR turntable was so setup and driven by very small motors, one inside to kick start the turntable and a second belt drive for the turntable.

cameron
03-04-2015, 01:48 PM
I have a theory, completely unproven, untested and based on an almost complete ignorance of digital technology, as to why vinyl sounds better to some people than digital.

The character and perceived quality of the sound of a musical instrument depends on the relationship of the harmonics to the fundamental tone, and the effect can extend at least up to the thirteenth harmonic. Vinyl recordings will lose the higher harmonics, with little perceived effect other than giving the impression of a less brilliant, but somewhat "warmer" tone. The sampling technique used for digital can capture bits of the upper harmonics, but only in a random manner, not completely. The impression, when played back, can be that there are harmonics not typical of the particular instrument's sound, and of harmonics that are out of tune with the fundamental note. The result is that to most people, digital sounds more brilliant, but to many, it also sounds harsher, and even somewhat noisy.

To put that another way, a recording may sound better to some people if the upper frequencies are lost, rather than present in a distorted form.

The Artful Bodger
03-04-2015, 03:24 PM
Curiously, your digital CD recordings ALWAYS have LESS dynamic range than good vinyl.

They use 16 bit integer encoding. Actually 15 bits plus a sign bit, same basic thing.. The SACD, which never was a success, used oversampling, but IIRC no radical difference in the encoding.

As digital reaches the lowest levels the distortion rises hugely due to the low bit resolution. You don't get 16 bits, you get maybe from one to 5 at the low end of the range. It's a "hard limit" when you finally run out of bits. Like digital TV... its there, or it's gone, no snowy picture.

Ummm, errrrr, not sure I am really convinced.

16 bits is 65536 steps of level and I believe a CD is encoded with 44100 samples per second. The linear speed of the pickup in the vinyl groove is something like 62 cm per second, 620000 microns of groove travel for each second of music. 620000/44100=14.06 microns per sample (about 0.00055354 inch), can you really make a steel press plate to that resolution?

BTW, this is pure BS
"You don't get 16 bits, you get maybe from one to 5 at the low end of the range.", you still get 16 bits but the first 11 are '0'.

J Tiers
03-04-2015, 08:20 PM
BTW, this is pure BS , you still get 16 bits but the first 11 are '0'.

Ummm.... NO!

Using that logic, all CDs have resolution to 128 bits, but the first 112 are zero.....

You fail entirely to understand resolution.... and decibels, etc.

with one bit active (the LSB), the difference of the LSB being "0" or "1" is rather larger as a percentage than it is with larger numbers of 10 or 12 bits. The difference between nothing and something.

Once you have more than one bit "active", you are comparing two "somethings" with values.... But the difference between nothing and something is "kinda large".

PixMan
03-04-2015, 09:31 PM
You're the expert, not me. All I do know is that my old Dual turntable with Ortofon cartridge playing the same vinyl album back to back with a CD of the same music, I like the sound I get out of the CD better.

John Buffum
03-04-2015, 09:47 PM
One blessing of age is a deterioration of hearing ability. Just ask any oldster. A very few have an increase, but the majority have a decrease. Mine was the '60's generation. Sex, drugs, and rock n' roll. Music at the blood drawing level. The person next to you could be screaming her head off, and all it was to you was lips moving.

Let's add to that hobbies. Rifle and pistol marksmanship, hotrodding of boats and cars, motorcycles, industrial arts of various kinds, and your hearing ain't what it's s'posta be. Mostly the high frequencies get lost. Ask your family doc.

Walk down the street. See the ear buds? Can you hear their music? If you can, hearing damage is happening right before your eyes.

Those who claim they can hear those high frequencies either spent their lives in a cave, with no music, or are lying.

Interesting blind test occurred in Ft. Lauderdale last year. Starbucks and McDonalds laid out unmarked cups of coffee. People off the street were asked to choose the best. McDonalds won. Toyota Camry beat Cadillac in ride comfort blind test.

But, all that being said, I still love my Marantz 62700 direct drive turntable. Cartridge brand unknown, but bought from Radio Shack in 1988. Played on a Sansui 8 Deluxe, model year 1974. Polk speakers. Mamas and the Poppas, Skirl of the Pipes, Fantasia, Stokowski and Wagner, Mary Kay Place, Burl Ives. Parliament. Buckwheat Zydeco. All on vinyl. Hard to find on CD. KEEP YOUR TURNTABLES! NOT ALL YOUR MUSIC MAKES IT TO CD! Treat them with reverent care. Yeah, your heirs won't know what dumpster to throw them in, but you can enjoy them as long as you live.

J Tiers
03-04-2015, 10:07 PM
A lot of what might be called "middle of the road" equipment is quite good. The audiophiles are really working in the last 2 to 5% of the "goodness range".

That's especially true with standard amplifiers and receivers, etc. It's not hard to make a product that is really very good at reproducing the signal. There tend to be the fewest compromises with even just reasonably good amplifiers and their connecting wires. That's NOT what the people who sell to audiophiles want to have spread about... And even the audiophiles don't really want to hear about that... they like their delusions....!

The weakest link is the speaker. Every speaker is a compromise, and there are as many types of compromise as there are designers. Some are better than others, and there are well recognized ways of assessing goodness with speakers. But every compromise has good and bad features.

Another weak point is storage of the sounds.... vinyl records are actually quite good, given what they are, and even their bad features are not as bad as the bad features of many digital media and digital recovery devices (CD players, etc.) But again , all of these are a compromise of one sort or another.




I have a theory, completely unproven, untested and based on an almost complete ignorance of digital technology, as to why vinyl sounds better to some people than digital.

The character and perceived quality of the sound of a musical instrument depends on the relationship of the harmonics to the fundamental tone, and the effect can extend at least up to the thirteenth harmonic. Vinyl recordings will lose the higher harmonics, with little perceived effect other than giving the impression of a less brilliant, but somewhat "warmer" tone. The sampling technique used for digital can capture bits of the upper harmonics, but only in a random manner, not completely. The impression, when played back, can be that there are harmonics not typical of the particular instrument's sound, and of harmonics that are out of tune with the fundamental note. The result is that to most people, digital sounds more brilliant, but to many, it also sounds harsher, and even somewhat noisy.

To put that another way, a recording may sound better to some people if the upper frequencies are lost, rather than present in a distorted form.

Missing is indeed better than distorted in most cases. But digital recording is quite capable of reproducing the entire audible spectrum (of most human hearing). The 44 kHz sampling frequency will, with suitable filters, be perfectly sufficient to give all the information contained in the audible recording.

However, you actually have a very significant point, that you probably do not realize you have. It hits several factors in the electronic reproduction of sound.

First; if the sound frequency is ABOVE HALF of the sampling frequency, that is, above the 22 kHz limit for a 44 kHz sample rate, the sounds above that limit WILL NOT be reproduced correctly. they will add a bunch of extra signals (distortions). The phenomenon is called "aliasing", it is rather similar to what you described, and as you mentioned, it does not sound very good.

Second; To avoid that, the makers of CD players and recording equipment put in some rather fancy filters to block any such "interference". If they expect to block what's above 22 kHz, but allow as much as possible up to 20 kHz, the filter has to be a "high order" filter, which essentially means it has a lot of parts that work together and in opposition to each other to cause a "very steep rolloff" of high frequencies.

This has two problems. First, such filters are not perfect, they may let through some of the higher frequencies, and thus produce some of the bad sounding "aliasing". Second, the more perfect they are at blocking frequencies that are over the limit, the more they distort the "phase" of the frequencies that are still under the limit. Your ear is somewhat sensitive to effects that are related to phase, so you may "hear the filter", even if you don't "hear the aliasing". Depending on the type of filter, and the mathematics it is based on, the effects of the filter may reach down into areas where many people can hear.

Both of these real effects come generally under the description you gave. So, your theory has some merit, even if maybe not exactly how you initially thought about it.

kendall
03-05-2015, 12:15 AM
You're the expert, not me. All I do know is that my old Dual turntable with Ortofon cartridge playing the same vinyl album back to back with a CD of the same music, I like the sound I get out of the CD better.

I'm the opposite, I prefer the LP. I have several copies of the same albums, Led zep III, album, cassette and CD,(As well as in through out door, houses holy, physical graphitti and 1, 2, runes/4) Beatles SPLHCB Album/cassette, Elton John Goodbye yellow brick road Album and CD. The albums have cleaner highs and stronger, less 'mushy' bass in my opinion. (A solid thump instead of a thud) Cassette is closer to the album than the Cd as well. I have a couple of moody blues in cassette and CD, and find the cassette -seems- to have better range than the CD. That could be the CD player I have though as it is an old sony I purchased for work. Most of my cassettes have been recorded to Flac now though.
Even the MP3 copies I made from albums sound better than the same songs copied from CD.

The Artful Bodger
03-05-2015, 12:25 AM
Ummm.... NO!

Using that logic, all CDs have resolution to 128 bits, but the first 112 are zero.....

You fail entirely to understand resolution.... and decibels, etc.


Obfuscation! A 16 bit sample is still 16 bit even if the value of the sample is zero.

Stuart Br
03-05-2015, 03:48 AM
I am still buying CDs, but they are very much constrained, by the 16bit 44.1KHz sampling. I have a few hi-resolution downloads 24 bit 96 or 192Khz sampling and the difference is night and day. Can't say that there is a massive difference between 96KHz and 192KHz though.
You do have to be very careful with the hi-res downloads though as the quality very much depends on the original master. If the master is not up to scratch, or has been upsampled from a lower resolution,then there is no point. One of the UK Hi-Fi rags carries out sprectrum analysis on hi-res releases and can soon spot when all is not it seems.
The hi-res downloads are much closer to the Vinyl sound. And I do buy new vinyl as well as CDs, but only for chosen recordings.
Most of my vinyl collection though is 30+ years old.
Ther is also the physical factor, there is a real pleasure in having a large format, being able to appreciate the cover art and reading the sleeve notes. Something you just don't get with CD or downloads.

J Tiers
03-05-2015, 08:12 AM
Obfuscation! A 16 bit sample is still 16 bit even if the value of the sample is zero.

Nonsense... You need to become educated on how this really works. You just DO NOT GET IT.

You CANNOT arbitrarily increase the "local resolution" of a sample by declaring "X" number of extra bits and saying "well they are all zero". That's the point of suggesting 128 bits of which 112 are zero.... that is nonsense, and so is your statement.

if you look rigidly at the voltage change for a single bit change, well, that is correct, it does not change with signal level. But that is not how you hear.

What is important is the change related to the value before the change. The "percent change" if you like. For signal levels this is commonly stated in dB, decibels.

Now, you have made up your mind, and likely will not change even faced with facts. So I don't know why I should bother, but maybe someone ELSE can learn something.

Look at the way the sample value changes..... the "local resolution" around the sample value. THAT is what's important.

So, all zeros vs a 1. That is a set amount of voltage change in the circuit. But as far as signal level in dB, it is from zero to some positive value... really an "infinite" change, because the dB change is the log of the new value divided by the old. The new value is "Y", the old value was zero.... the ratio of voltages is undefined, because the change is infinite, Y/0.

Now from a sample value of 1 to a sample value of 2... a 100% signal voltage change, doubling... the dB value of that change is 6dB, log(2/1).

If the sample value were much larger, say 100, and it increases from 100 to 101, the ratio is far smaller in dB. Log (101/100)

So the dB value of a change in the least significant bit (the LSB) CHANGES with signal level.

THAT IS THE MEANING OF DECREASED RESOLUTION AT LOWER LEVELS. The distortion caused by those large dB changes is very significant at low levels.

Rosco-P
03-05-2015, 09:57 AM
J Tiers, are you saying that it's the 44k sampling rate that limits the CD format from being the best thing since sliced bread, not the 16 bit word??

The Artful Bodger
03-05-2015, 03:02 PM
Nonsense... You need to become educated on how this really works. You just DO NOT GET IT.

All very interesting but why do you avoid defending the assertion I called you on?

PixMan
03-05-2015, 03:34 PM
My system consists of a Denon AVR-1912 receiver, an Oppo BDP-95 Blu-ray (multi format) disk player, Dual CS-503 turntable with Ortofon OM10 cartridge, NAD 6340 cassette player, KEF LS-50 front, iQ10 rear, and iQ60 center. It seems to make me happy despite the range of old and newer components. Perhaps my vinyl collection is just too beat up from being played so much (in years past) with less then high quality cartridges that they just don't have the sound they once did. Maybe it's just time for a new turntable, cartridge and vinyl recordings.

Too much money for me. Most of my spending lately has been on snowblowers and SHOP TOOLING.

John Buffum
03-05-2015, 03:38 PM
After the first few seconds, you get into the music, and, unless the quality is really B A D, the quality issue fades.

My favorite speakers were Polk 10. Passive woofer, two powered 5" midrange, and a piezo tweeter. They died after about 30 years of service. The midrange cones crumbled. I miss 'em. Great sound quality from very quiet to uncomfortably loud.

You get into the argument about speakers, and it would boggle the mind. Of course, Audiovox and Pyramid ain't in it. And, they're certifiably AWFUL. But above that, the debate becomes one of personal preferences. Polk, vs. Bang & Olafsen? Spendors Vs Yamaha? On and on.

We have, in the photography hobby, a group similar to "audiophiles". They're called "pixel peepers". They blow up pictures looking for chromatic aberration, loss of image quality, vignetting, and a host of other things. In blowing up the picture, the whole composition is lost. They don't even see that, they're just into "image quality" issues. The world's greatest photographers of the 1960 had equipment that would be considered mediocre, today, yet they created wondrous art.

Musicians also have these same arguments. Which guitar is better? Which violin? Which Native American Flute? Ridiculous fortunes are spent on instruments by a certain maker.

Yeah, you can bring in lab results, but it comes down to preferences, prestige, how deep the pocket.

The Doctor
03-05-2015, 07:41 PM
THAT IS THE MEANING OF DECREASED RESOLUTION AT LOWER LEVELS. The distortion caused by those large dB changes is very significant at low levels.

On most modern music this is meaningless. Everything is so severely compressed there's only about 10db range in the entire track. Yes, I do understand decibels. And no, I don't like that trend at all.

J Tiers
03-05-2015, 07:48 PM
Nope, the 44 kHz isn't the issue, at least not directly. If they had added some more bits, they would have had a good system. Or made it floating point, so resolution was pretty much constant.

Professional recording systems can have more bits, like 24 bit, etc. You don't need it for the S/n, you need it to keep resolution at low levels, so you don't end up trying to represent a signal using only the lowest 1 or 2 bit positions. With too few bits, your range of possible amplitudes has to be represented by only a few levels.

It's like trying to use bricks to adjust the weight of something to an accuracy in ounces... the bricks are too big, they weigh many tmes the resolution you want. But if you used sand, or even marbles, you could get much closer to any given weight, by adding only a few as needed.


All very interesting but why do you avoid defending the assertion I called you on?

WTF?

I explained it INCLUDING that.... Which you didn't "call me on", you asserted nonsense....

Seems like you are starting a game of "I know you are, but what am I?". I may be a playah but I ain't playin that one, dude.

One last try.... if you don't like it, don't bother askin more, I ain't playin that.

The reason it's nonsense is that you wind up trying to represent a small signal with only a total range of 2 or maybe 3 bit positions, because the signal is so low that it is only at an amplitude corresponding to that many bit positions of the bottom of your FIXED amplitude range.

So the resolution is perhaps only 9 possible levels for low signals, but may be 4000 levels for a middle to high amplitude. With 24 bits, and teh same small signal with the same maximum level, you would still have a signal represented by 9 to 11 bit positions, averaging several hundred possible levels.

loose nut
03-05-2015, 07:49 PM
I don't care how expensive a turntable and sound system you have, if you play a CD on a record player it sounds like crap.

rythmnbls
03-05-2015, 08:36 PM
I don't care how expensive a turntable and sound system you have, if you play a CD on a record player it sounds like crap.

Only if you play 'em at 45 rpm, they need to be spun at 78 ;)

garagemark
03-06-2015, 11:41 AM
I don't care how expensive a turntable and sound system you have, if you play a CD on a record player it sounds like crap.

Now that's just funny. Thank you for my daily laugh.

I have, for me, what I consider to be a decent stereo setup (Denon PRE 1100 preamp, Denon PRA 2400 power amp, Infinity Kappa 7 speakers, Technics SL1200 turntable w/ Shure R1000 EDT cart., Sony five disc CD changer, and several tape decks). All early 80's vintage, sans the CD deck. I learned long ago that there is a point where the debate of "best" is almost nothing more than opinion. To a point, money can buy audio happiness. After that point, money buys bragging rights. I believe I landed in the happiness category; I am satisfied with what I have.

By the same token, there are many folks out there that would be satisfied with a transistor radio from the fifties. And some of those people see anything more as just plain idiocy. So the way I see it, it works like this: An "audiophile" will never convince a non audiophile that more is better. And a non audiophile will never convince and audiophile that he's crazy for spending the money. That is why so many hobbies exist. It's all about passion. No one is wrong or right. Hobby interests are just different, and the attainable level of any hobby is directly proportional to the size of the wallet.

The CD versus turntable wars is an ongoing saga playing out mostly within the audio enthusiast world. It, too will never end. We all have our opinions. I prefer vinyl over compact disc most times because the tone simply feels warmer to me. I can take two identical soft sound recordings, and on the analog record I can hear the singer taking breaths between lines, whereas on the CD, much of that "data" appears to be missing. I have done this experiment many times. However, since new recordings are recorded differently anyway, then CD, MP3, or whatever comes next is of no real consequence. It was recorded in digital, so you may as well play it back with digital.

Oh and by the way, the biggest contributing factor to the true audio experience isn't the equipment. Oh no. It is by far the room acoustics. Lack of room treatment allows sound to bounce all over the place. Your ears can actually hear every note many times, which can make even the best equipment seem inferior. Simply plopping speakers on either side of a room of hardwood floors and drywall with a few pictures hanging around is ludicrous. The sonic wave must be absorbed peripherally so your brain doesn't get confused. But there is one caveat. The War Wagon will absolutely have something to say about you hanging sound absorbers all over her living room. It just ain’t gonna happen in my world! Fortunately, she gave me a dedicated listening/ drinking room. I win.

kendall
03-06-2015, 01:30 PM
And now you have people paying $750 for used albums purchased from thrift stores...

https://www.yahoo.com/makers/why-this-record-stores-750-lps-are-hot-sellers-112730604250.html

dockterj
03-06-2015, 03:56 PM
ha! that was too funny. I demagnetized my speakers just like they said. The noise floor dropped so low that I couldn't measure it but my dynamic range is now 0.

John Buffum
03-06-2015, 08:45 PM
Oh and by the way, the biggest contributing factor to the true audio experience isn't the equipment. Oh no. It is by far the room acoustics. Lack of room treatment allows sound to bounce all over the place. Your ears can actually hear every note many times, which can make even the best equipment seem inferior. Simply plopping speakers on either side of a room of hardwood floors and drywall with a few pictures hanging around is ludicrous. The sonic wave must be absorbed peripherally so your brain doesn't get confused. But there is one caveat. The War Wagon will absolutely have something to say about you hanging sound absorbers all over her living room. It just ain’t gonna happen in my world! Fortunately, she gave me a dedicated listening/ drinking room. I win.

I quite agree. A friend has a Dahlquist 10" subwoofer. He found the best place to put it was on the part of his living room floor that is ceramic tile. When it was on carpet, it absorbed a lot. In addition, he has the Dahlquist speakers. The mount angle is critical. Five degrees of tilt gives wondrously good sound. Straight up loses "something". We don't know what it is, but it is there.

I think whoever invented Feng Shui was a stereo installer. Movement of a few inches, though generating terrible inconvenience in a room, has very noticeable effect on sound and sound quality.

I'm quite happy with my Best Buy Polk 5" x 14" speakers. I didn't spend $8,000, like my neighbor. Sound is enjoyable. We don't blast, anymore, and have no subwoofer. The one area he did better with his $8,000 was the FM receiver. Mine, in my 1974 Sansui 8 Deluxe, is WAY less than optimal. A station my car brings in clearly, I just barely receive with the 8. But, with CD's and vinyl, I can live with that.

oldtiffie
03-06-2015, 10:03 PM
And what of those of us who do not have good let alone perfect hearing and are not in a perfect auditorium/room/surround?

cameron
03-06-2015, 11:29 PM
You'll just have to bin your audio stuff, oldtiffie.

oldtiffie
03-07-2015, 12:33 AM
Don't think so Cameron.

Its all in the TV.

Tapes and disks were all binned quite a while ago - and not missed at all - other than a few we keep to play on the computer or TV recorder.

garagemark
03-07-2015, 07:50 AM
Shame Tiffie. Those old tapes and discs are wildly coming back into favor. You may have had a e-bay gold mine.

The new generation is buying up every old vinyl pressing machine they can lay their hands on. These kids are going to make a killing if they play their cards right. The link is one of hundreds documenting the resurgence of the snap, crackle and pop:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/arts/music/vinyl-records-are-making-a-comeback.html?_r=0

Who knew.

Seastar
03-07-2015, 08:47 AM
Shame Tiffie. Those old tapes and discs are wildly coming back into favor. You may have had a e-bay gold mine.

The new generation is buying up every old vinyl pressing machine they can lay their hands on. These kids are going to make a killing if they play their cards right. The link is one of hundreds documenting the resurgence of the snap, crackle and pop:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/10/arts/music/vinyl-records-are-making-a-comeback.html?_r=0

Who knew.
Yep
And a very good source for vinyl is your local Goodwill Store.
I have "harvested" over 200 reasonable quality vintage vinys in the last year from my local two Goodwill Stores.
Ignorant kids give away Mom and Dads records.
Bill

J Tiers
03-07-2015, 09:00 AM
And what of those of us who do not have good let alone perfect hearing and are not in a perfect auditorium/room/surround?

Oddly, imperfect hearing is often still able to easily distinguish live from recorded, and so can benefit from decent equipment.

Of course, bad enough and it really becomes moot.....

loose nut
03-07-2015, 10:56 AM
And what of those of us who do not have good let alone perfect hearing and are not in a perfect auditorium/room/surround?

That's what beer is for.

loose nut
03-07-2015, 11:00 AM
Oh and by the way, the biggest contributing factor to the true audio experience isn't the equipment.

That's right, but the biggest contributing factor is you and a hot girl, sitting on a sofa with a bottle of wine, the lights turned low and evil on your mind. After that who gives a damn about the sound quality.

Toolguy
03-07-2015, 11:04 AM
Now we're dealing with reality!:D All the previous arguments are merely vaporous theory.:rolleyes:

John Buffum
03-07-2015, 12:07 PM
That's right, but the biggest contributing factor is you and a hot girl, sitting on a sofa with a bottle of wine, the lights turned low and evil on your mind. After that who gives a damn about the sound quality.

You don't hafta be in your 20's for that! I was in my 50's.

And I married the gal! Ten years ago! Najee, Alannah Miles, Miles Davis, Kenny G, after a good, modest meal. We were destined for the altar, but the ol' Sansui sealed the deal! That was when I still had the Polk 10's.

Never underestimate the power of music!

John Buffum
03-07-2015, 12:25 PM
How I got the Marantz turntable.

In 1988, CDs had not yet come to dominate the music scene. You still bought LPs from Columbia House, BMG, and your local store. Marantz turntables were arguably the best on the market. Radio stations used a different brand, but among consumers, Marantz was king. In 1988 money, you could pay over $500 for one. Today's money? Eeeeyow!

Fort Leavenworth has a yard sale every Spring. I was poking around, and saw this Marantz turntable. Direct drive. Direct drive was considered superior. But this unit was only $2.00. The plastic lid was cracked, and the tone arm mount was broken in two. The tone arm mount was some unknown plastic. I went to Gronis' Hardware, and bought a tube of glue reputed to be able to fix it. It has held up fine for almost 30 years. The sockets for the two points the tone arm rode on were worn. I replaced them with fresh made from an aluminum nail. I had used my electric drill as a crude lathe. At Radio Shack, a cartridge with needle would run $26 to $255. I spent about $40. After 30 years, no problem.

For about $50, a top of the line direct drive turntable. Saved from the dumpster. All parts were there, and otherwise in good shape.

Just a stumble down memory lane.