Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Yo're in the wrong business...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    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.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by The Artful Bodger View Post
      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.
      1601

      Keep eye on ball.
      Hashim Khan

      Comment


      • #48
        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??

        Comment


        • #49
          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?

          Comment


          • #50
            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.

            Comment


            • #51
              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.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by J Tiers View Post
                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.

                Comment


                • #53
                  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.

                  Originally posted by The Artful Bodger View Post
                  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.
                  Last edited by J Tiers; 03-05-2015, 07:52 PM.
                  1601

                  Keep eye on ball.
                  Hashim Khan

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    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.
                    The shortest distance between two points is a circle of infinite diameter.

                    Bluewater Model Engineering Society at https://sites.google.com/site/bluewatermes/

                    Southwestern Ontario. Canada

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by loose nut View Post
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by loose nut View Post
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          And now you have people paying $750 for used albums purchased from thrift stores...

                          https://www.yahoo.com/makers/why-thi...730604250.html

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by garagemark View Post
                              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.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                And what of those of us who do not have good let alone perfect hearing and are not in a perfect auditorium/room/surround?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X