OK Carl, unfortunately the 'makers' are the last place to realise any truth, one only has to look at physics to realise the possibilities, if a maker is offering something outside the envelope of reality, then it is probably NOT REAL, this is not just the case in Hi Fi terms, but is the case in all aspects of life. Most things can be 'fully explained', if all the facts are known, now Hi Fi and sound reproduction is not new, most questions have been answered, most of the facts are known, if an improvement was to be found in cable design, would the phone companies not find it, if 'demagging' a CD were an improvement, would not the CD companies promote it, if putting a 90p op amp in a CD player were so much better than a 30p one, would they not do it?
If putting a 20p transient suppressor were such an improvement in a CD player do you think they would not do it, well I've been inside many CD players and they do, so how come your external 'mains conditioner' does the same but at £70 extra, even my £15 DVD/CD player from Tesco had that small enhancement, if any equipment is so badly designed not to include these features then KEEP AWAY.
Most professional organisations 'do their homework' and use the technology that best suits them, from my knowledge of 'international broadcasters' to 'feature film sound production' none, that is not one, take any interest in the 'audiophile' view of things, and they produce the sounds that we ultimately hear!
IMO the audiophile fraternity seem to be in their own world, a world of reading the mags, listening to mates in the pub, comparing cables with no disciplined method and spending obscene sums on products that actually do nothing.
I bet if I were to market the ultimate 'hearing enhancement drug' then it would be a winner, even at only a pound a pop, guaranteed three hours of sonic bliss, bargain or what?
I find this thread quite astonishing, with some correspondents hurling the name of physics to justify their statements. Physics can solve only the simplest systems perfectly, but is anyone here able to give an analytic solution to even as simple a problem as the three-body problem! A hi-fi system is like most real world systems, complex physical systems. Sure, the laws of nature apply and we can understand generally the basic physical effects, but sometimes it is only through experimentation that more subtler effects can be understood. Consider the weather, for example, never mind climate change. We're still trying to understand probably quite minute effects to be able to forecast the weather better.
Similarly, with hi-fi. Physics can help one understand what is principally going on, but it gets more difficult as one tries to look at very subtle effects.
Finally, in response to Pluto's experiment, I'm afraid that I have done a lot of copying of a 'Master CD' and do find that the copies can differ significantly. Unfortunately, music is an analogue phenomenon. To reproduce it as accurately as possible, you need to sample the waveform as often as possible. Hence, the introduction of SACD. Problem with copying is the error correction, which actually corrupts the music, as it corrects by putting in some interpolated value. If there is an error, it means that information is lost and you cannot retrieve it. The error correction makes a 'best guess' as to what to replace it with. At least, that is my understanding of why copies might sound significantly different
However, clearly, in the end, if you can't hear it, why be so bothered? If others, through all this hi-fi tweaking, derive such great pleasure from the resulting listening experience, then good for them. No need to think they might be being duped. One thing science is supposed to have taught us is to keep an open mind. Then, investigate for oneself and judge for oneself! But, don't forget about all the systematic effects!
May I say it was kind of you to "pop next door" from your record-breaking Thread to visit the relative "paupers" in the "Cable Blind Test" section of the Forum !
Dick...you are a profound, well balanced guy, who makes a lot of sense, but I can only say...brace yourself !
Thanks dick for your input - my thoughts as well - there is more to this world than any body will ever solve??
Bill - and to think all this through one problem - Phew? - Still awating thread input from Isotek - but don't blame them - not getting involved ???? Thanks both ....Carl
Unfortunately, music is an analogue phenomenon. To reproduce it as accurately as possible, you need to sample the waveform as often as possible. Hence, the introduction of SACD. Problem with copying is the error correction, which actually corrupts the music, as it corrects by putting in some interpolated value. If there is an error, it means that information is lost and you cannot retrieve it. The error correction makes a 'best guess' as to what to replace it with.
While music is indeed an analogue phenomenon, its resolution is not infinite being limited by noise, wherever and whenever it arises. Were this untrue, dither would simply not function.
Error correction is exactly that – it is not a guessing game. The Reed-Solomon coding used by Red Book discs is designed to CORRECT, not interpolate as far as it is able. Most CD decoder chips have an output to indicate when correction is taking place and, past that point, interpolation then muting. It truly defies logic why makers of CD players don't make use of such indications which reveal how healthy the data read actually is. If you play CDs on equipment modified to show error levels (or play a disc on a CD-ROM drive with error display capability in conjunction with some suitable software), you will see that on a CD in half-decent condition, C1 errors are par for the course – the system copes with, and corrects, these with ease. C2 errors are correctable in moderate quantities but a CD with any C2 errors is arguably knackered*. The Red Book system is designed so that too many C2 errors should result in muting rather than interpolation. The interpolation zone is small and only encountered on discs in the worst condition, discs that are only marginally usable. The vast majority of discs we play on decent kit do not exhibit anything other than routine C1 errors which are 100% corrected.
* There was an anti-ripplng system around a few years ago (thankfully more or less dead) that involved deliberately placing C2 errors two or three times a second. The idea was that an audio player with its powerful correction would 'ride the storm' whereas a rip on a CD-ROM drive running at high speed would not include that level of error correction and the resultant rip would be covered in clicks. The system DID work; it was hugely unpopular because it was perceived as deliberately reducing the inherent ruggedness of the CD medium and thus reducing the life expectancy of the discs, but it was an invaluable testament to the power of the error correction built into the Red Book specification.
To Dick, the comment, Physics can solve only the simplest systems perfectly, Now that is an understatement of monumental proportions. Practically all advances in Hi Fi since the earliest cylinder recordings have been based on physics, all modern equipment be it computer, Hi Fi, furniture or house building are all based on physics, space travel, sat nav, broadcasting etc. all based on pure physics and imagination. Note that all the major manufactures, Sony, Philips, Sanyo, Panasonic etc. and all the broadcast companies, and nearly all the major studios in the world take NO NOTICE of the 'cable' claims, the 'demag' claims or the 'mains conditioner' claims. And nor do the feature film sound makers, the CD music producers.
So prey tell me are your 'golden ears' better than all the major players put together, do you know something that physics and nature don't, if so I'd love to hear it!!
To Pluto, interesting that the CD error correction is basically 'lossless', that rather knocks out the claims of many and rightly so, if a digital copy is identical in every digit, then it is identical, and must sound identical. If it does not then look for alternative reasons, not stubbornly stick to the 'but I hear a difference' look for the possible reasons elsewhere as to why you hear a difference, I've no doubt that you do but the reason may not be as perceived.
To Carl, there is more to this world than any body will ever solve?? Yes maybe so but very little in music reproduction, it has been around for a hundred years, it has the best brains on the planet working on it, and many of the most passionate of people. But no one has ever scientifically proven that any of the following has any repeatable and reproducible effects:-
CD 'demaging, mains leads, expensive interconnects, £1000 speaker cables etc.
But while on the subject equally no similar proof has been made for:
telepathy, spiritual healing, acupuncture, astrology etc. So the human race does have the capacity to take on board many things that actually have no grounding in reality, but still believe in them and spend on them. That does not make them real or provable or scientific, no it simply makes them expensive and impossible to disprove.
The fact that one cannot disprove a claim, does not make it real.
interesting that the CD error correction is basically 'lossless', that rather knocks out the claims of many and rightly so, if a digital copy is identical in every digit, then it is identical
Indeed. I was able to prove with my little disc copying experiment that I could take an original CD, check it with AccurateRip and then confirm that the original's great-great-great grandson gave an identical AccurateRip result – bit-perfect down six generations.
The only scope for different sound is if a particular transport reproduced one of the discs with a large amount of errors – enough, that is, to be beyond the capability of the not-too-bad error correction system.
Another thing – when discussing mechanical jitter and its audible consequences, audiophools often forget that the data recorded on the CD are NOT the ones and zeros of the digitized audio signal. Oh no. The fact that the data on CDs is eight-to-fourteen coded and therefore undergoes two complete electronic re-assemblies before it gets anywhere near a DAC is often entirely ignored when discussing the possible effects of mechanical shortcomings of discs and players.
Well, well, well, I never knew that, sorry but don't understand 'eight-to-fourteen' coded.
Re: The only scope for different sound is if a particular transport reproduced one of the discs with a large amount of errors – enough, that is, to be beyond the capability of the not-too-bad error correction system. I asssume that all copies were made with the same transport systems, so how can that introduce another error senario?
I could add to your list John UFO sightings - Ghost's -Religions ???
Can you prove or disprove them ! - - No - - like a lot of thing's on this very planet you nor i will will ever know the full truth!. Best wishes .....Carl.
O.K. Carl but we can try, and we can at least think we know the truth, some truths I have found impossible to believe, but after sifting though the information many times the apparently impossible truth does shine out, but like so many things in life it 'hightens' ones awareness of the truth.
No we may never know the full truth, but we can be aware of the massive lies portrayed by important organisations.
John...
PS I did think of religion but thought that a no-no on this site, but it really is the ultimate portrayal of 'unproveables'
i must agree on corporate organisations i work for one - and i have to say that compared to stock holders profit margin's the Quality of their products come in at second place -- Now that's madness???
While on the subject of truth. Music reproduction really is the search for ultimate Truth, or absolute faithfulness to the original sound or musical event.
Sadly...CD ain't it...with or without Golden Ears and even if you can replicate it 10 times and it sounds as bad as the first. I've never seen so many technical specs propounded on a forum for a concept that, while a miracle of digital engineering, still isn't fit for the above purpose.
No Carl It is called business savy, it may seen like madness, but stockholders create the worth of a company, stockholders can seem like their profit. Now like you, I see it as madness but profit is the main motivation of organisations therefore quality will come down the 'pecking order' because quality does not produce the 'instant' profits, however in the long term it will be their demise. Unfortunatly most companies and most govenments only see a five year future if that, if they were to look further then a better future is possible. Only today I had a long conversation with a business associate re the concept of a 'customer for life' to me that must be the best route, grab a customer, treat him/her well and they will return, simple principle but not often folllowed, most companies seem to go out of their way to find new customers whilst neglecting their faithful long term customers. IMO that is bad business, but remember I am from a different planet, or so it seems.
Totally agree with you on these points - what they don't seem to under stand is that once they lose their good name for Quality the customer - WILL - look elsewhere - leaving the big company's to wonder where they went wrong??? ....Carl.
And they do, I have for some time now believed that a customer is for life, nick a few quid here and next year you can nick a few more but not for long, companies like 'Homebase' seem to feel that to get a new customer now is more important than keeping your established 'customer base' but I'm sure they are wrong, and will in time 'go down the tubes', just wait and see. I have had some serious conversations with Homebase to the point that they have said, and I quote, 'WE WILL DELETE ALL FURTHER E-MAILS FROM YOU' now if that is customer commitment then what is?
The word exasperated comes to mind in your conversations with homebase - through the policies of this company it is always the front men/women that bare the brunt of customers complaints and although they can do a lot to alleviate the problem they can only do so much- they are after all human beings with feelings well most of them - and i do sympathise with your problem some times it is for the best to step back calm the situation down and take a different route - I have had similar problems in the past and yes it makes you blow hot and cold and you end up banging your head against the wall but i find a warmer friendlier approach does bring better benefit's - Even when all you want to do is shout !! Hope things get sorted for you. ....Carl
Yes Carl we did get things sorted, but we always do. Now I had a warm and friendly approach from an electroluminescent wire company today, I will quote part of her reply 'Hi John, It was lovely to speak to you.' now that is customer care, I do get results most of the time, so when a company like Homebase pisses me of, I know I am not completely 'barking', incidentally the enquiry was over a £800 radiator, so not exactly trivial, after many calls they agreed that I could not see this item in any store, but I could order it and if I wasn't happy they would offer a refund. That to me was complete madness, they would not offer to let me see said item, but if I ordered it and did not like it then they would take it back, err am I the one whose 'barking', sorry I am straying from the subject here.
To recap CD isn't perfect, but for the most part a great improvement on vinyl, and 33 was a great improvement on 78, and that was a great improvement on 'cylinders' no doubt SACD is a great improvement on standard CD, but I do believe that so many other factors have to be near perfect for the differences to be audible.
"And they do, I have for some time now believed that a customer is for life, nick a few quid here and next year you can nick a few more but not for long, companies like 'Homebase' seem to feel that to get a new customer now is more important than keeping your established 'customer base' but I'm sure they are wrong, and will in time 'go down the tubes', just wait and see. I have had some serious conversations with Homebase to the point that they have said, and I quote, 'WE WILL DELETE ALL FURTHER E-MAILS FROM YOU' now if that is customer commitment then what is?"John...our local Homebase was closed down...and replaced by a larger B&Q....Kind regards, Bill.
Hi Fred - all,
