Wow Pluto now that is a serious rant, much as I like it you are now approaching T3 status, I'm sure everything you state is true, I realise that you know the subject. However having just returned from a serious listening session I have to say that CD source is as good as anything that I have heard before and having a vinyl playback system then the comparison is real.
So maybe the differences is really in what we expect, what sounds more 'familier' or even what we like, sounds that may not be accurate or correct. So if one prefers a 'dumbed down sound' then vinyl may be a preferred choice, if one prefers the 'soft cosy' sound then vinyl may be a good choice.
But if one wants to hear a recording like it was intended then CD is the answer, personally I prefer the intention rather than the 'dumded down', but having said that I would even more prefer the 24bit 96KHz totally new CD concept!
Hi, Pluto, I'm sorry that you are so annoyed as to throw so much technical detail at me. Are you then a working researcher in the area of error correction? Otherwise, it seems to have come to the point where it all needs to be discussed with an expert.
Maybe I am doing something wrong. But, the plain fact is that we are hearing different CDs of the same recording sound different, which did come as a shock, as I had expected them to sound the same. I try to be as careful as I can with the recording process, even using not a domestic CD recorder, but a professional Tascam recorder, recording laboriously not at multiple speed, but at 1-to-1 speed! I've also used audio quality CDs. I preferred at the time TDK's Studio CD-Rs, but they have since discontinued them. I've also used the quite expensive HHb professional audio CD-Rs. Also, I have had an occasion when I had some dozen retail CDs of the same recording, and both my wife and myself did hear that they sounded slightly different too! So, if it's not due to different errors, what is it due to?
I'm sorry I confused you over classical music vs. pop music. I only wanted to say that my experience is really with classical music and that maybe the situation is different when it comes to pop music.
I also remember when the Japanese brought out direct drive turntables with the most awesome specifications. But, they turned out to be rather 'unmusical' and we returned to belt driven turntables! So, I'm afraid that I'm sometimes a little sceptical of technical specifications, in that they may not be the full truth. I agree that there has to be a physical explanation for anything mechanical, but, as I've said before, it may not be so simple when we are dealing with a complex system. In the end, you really just have to hear for yourself and judge for yourself.
Maybe it's like fine wines. A lot of people wouldn't be able to tell a fine wine from a good wine. But, it's all physical. So, why can't all wines be as good as the finest wines? Or, what about a fine malt? Can't we just put the chemical ingredients together to make such a malt? Well, moonshine can pack quite a punch, at least!
Hi, Pluto, You are a really distant planet! I've just re-read your posting and think you've misunderstood me. I actually love the sound I am getting from most of my CDs and, as I have said, it is my preferred medium for playing recorded music! I've also attended orchestral, chamber and solo concerts, as well as opera, for over fifty years now, so feel that I have a good standard to which I can compare recordings. Indeed, most of my musical friends do feel that it is more important to go to concerts, to actively support the arts, than just muse over recordings! It is important, otherwise where will our next generation of artists come from?
I also remember when the Japanese brought out direct drive turntables with the most awesome specifications. But, they turned out to be rather 'unmusical' and we returned to belt driven turntables!
That's very easily explained. The Jap DD turntables generally didn't have a suspended subchassis which made them horrbly microphonic. They were accurate in speed to the nth degree though.
Hi, Pluto, Here's an article you might find fascinating: <http://www.digido.com/bob-katz/jitter.html> It might explain what I am experiencing with making CD copies. Cheers
I've read the link, very interesting, maybe my hearing is not as good as I thought.
A difficult one to stomach, but all the same I may be missing some of the subtleties that you guys talk about.
That article does make so much sense that I cannot ignore it, his facts look real, and I thought I new about A/D converters but he highlights many important and previously missed facts.
Yes, it might explain what I am experiencing with making CD copies.
Dick - I think something in one of your postings DOES give a significant clue as to why you are creating CD copies that do not sound the same as your originals but before proceeding further, let me ask you what I should've asked some time ago, a simple question: exactly how are you making the copies with which you are not satisfied?
My stance has always been that bit-perfect CD copies will sound identical and your pointer to Bob Katz's piece changes nothing, for one simple reason that is mentioned at least 3 times in Katz's article. Jitter is only a problem when the data are presented to the final D to A converter. It's oddly coincidental how he cites a test very similar to the one I did a couple of weeks ago – a 99th generation copy of a CD that sounded indistinguishable from the original. The important point is that jitter is not cumulative. As long as the data can be recovered at each stage, the jitter problem will only be as bad as the very final data that arrive at the converter whose job it is to convert the numbers back to analogue audio.
I cannot emphasize just how important this point actually is, so here's a really silly example. Suppose you used a hexadecimal editor to read all the data from an audio CD and printed it out – about a ream of paper. You then take each sheet of printout and start typing the data back into the hex editor, byte by byte until you finished. Working 12 hours a day, the whole process will probably take about six months. The error correction in this process is poor so you'd better have someone else check the work; another six months. When all is done, you write the data to a new red book CD. Provided no mistakes have been made it's a safe assumption that the disk will sound just as good as the original, in spite of the massive jitter (about a year) inherent in the copying process. And so we return to the vital point...
Provided the data remains recoverable at all points along the way, jitter is only of significance at the very final presentation of the data to the D to A converter. It is there that you need the most jitter-immune system that you can afford.
Hi, John and Pluto, Thanks for the replies. I gathered as much from Katz's article, but it is technically a bit above my head. However, he does say "a good scientist always leaves a little room for doubt in the face of empirical (listening) evidence, and I have discovered certain audible exceptions", with which sentiment I heartily agree!
I thought, Pluto, that I had stated my recording process quite explicitly. But, to be absolutely explicit, here goes, hopefully I have a DAT recording of a live concert. Using the professional Tascam DA-20 MkII DAT machine connected to the professional Tascam CD-RW700 CD recorder via a digital cable I record using the digital direct mode onto a TDK Studio CD-R. I make several CD-Rs in this way and audition them using my Marantz CD60 player. And, they all sound somewhat different. For listening to CDs, I am now using a Theta Data Basic II transport with a Musical Fidelity A3.24 DAC, and they still sound different.
Dick - I wanted to be certain about your recording setup before commenting, hence my asking you to repeat yourself. The cheap Tascam stuff was good value for money but I have my suspicions. I have reservations about the A to D converters in DAT machines of that class but you have your master recording for better or worse. I feel that the problem lies with the CD recorder. While these machines have their uses, from my experience I would describe them as 'fickle'. While it is a little surprising that making direct clone discs from your DAT results in CDs with obvious differences between them, it isn't that unlikely either, I suppose. I know of no way to be sure that the data transfer from an audio DAT is bit-perfect.
If you like I will transfer your DAT to CD using a top grade pro DAT machine (with proper error notification). It will be interesting to compare it sonically with your results. While I can do nothing about deficiencies in the original recording, I know I can achieve a top grade transfer from one medium to the other. Let me know if you would like to take up this offer.
Latest : AVR Review of the Isotek Mira Mains Conditioner
Oh no!!! Lord 'elp us! Should we prepare ourselves for a "McCarthyite" style "Witch Hunt"???
(On Mains conditioners -)
Bill said :
"Still on the subject, I believe I mentioned the effect on my TV a while back? My lounge has a poor acoustic. Without help, dialogue was indistinct and difficult to understand. Re-introducing a filter or 2, helps considerably and makes voices clearer and more intelligible."
Pluto said :
"You refer, in wonder, to the effect that your filters have in resolving the difficulties you attribute to poor room acoustics. I have to say, Bill, that you really are adding 2 and 2 and making 5. The two issues are chalk and cheese – a kind of alchemy at the very best."
AVR Review of the Mira : "But it was in dialogue intelligibility where the big gains were heard - very low level dialogue almost uttered under the breath or by characters in the background now became clearly discernable while the main dialogue channel showed substantial gains with dialogue gaining more presence and sounding more natural. This was echoed musically where vocals gained greater weight and presence in my system, bringing out subtleties in the vocal performance which were simply lost when the receiver was plugged straight into the wall.".....So that now makes 2 of us who can hear vocal differences with filters.(Perhaps I should advise the AVR Reviewer to leave town while he still can...)Kind regards, Bill.
Have just read the first few pages of these messages and I must say that while they are truly fascinating, I do wonder if some of the differences in the way that people in general hear music may be down to differences in the hearing abilities of people themselves. I am partially deaf in one ear so may never be able to hear the "perfect music reproduction" that many people strive to attain. I tend to always be on the hunt for songs or pieces of music that emotionally move me (though admittedly these are few and far between) and I am not sure that having very high end equipment would change that much. This is my personal opinion and I would never knock anyone that has high end stuff but I am happy with my odd assortment of "cheap" black Japanese boxes because when I hear my favourite music its the music that moves me and not how well it is relayed to my ears. Good luck to those that would spend time and money looking for the ultimate system only to listen to the same music that they would maybe listen to on a cheap system like mine. My point is this: it's the music that comes first and technology second.
P.S. Maybe we should have a forum set up specifically for those individuals that seem to enjoy having a pop at each other. Come on, what does it cost to be courteous?.
Haven't read every post on this thread but have found some of it very interesting. I have to agree with Mark on the fact music should come first but also have to appreciate that really the two things i.e. music and technology need to go hand in hand to enjoy the best experience.
Anyway before i waffle on and start talking about certain things that i don't fully understand i shall back out of this thread.
Sbrunette Quite right, - but you can talk about things you don't fully under stand any time - even if the answers are confusing - like yourself we are all still learning - ( never too old or young )!.
Bill, long time no talk, had good giggle at your response to av reviews Mira mains conditioner - good timing by them !!
Well looks like Mr Isotek has backed out on the invitation to join in on thread, - cant blame them !! After surfing the net for quite a while and sending out email's to the professionals the reply on test's for these subjects have drawn a blank, one said it would be a great hurdle to prove or disprove but he liked a challenge.
So there you have it? just our ears and love of music to judge for or against differences in Quality!!!!
Good to speak to you again! Indeed, Isotek have been very disappointing in their response. I was looking forward to reading their views - especially after your kind invitation had been extended.
Yes...on the AVR review, it's as if there's a funny kind of echo in here !! The Reviewer's prose and literary style is to be admired though - I could never match that !
"S" is right to remind us that there can be no music without the machinery.
Isotek they must have test data on the disc - perhaps i will send another email to them??
"s" is from same neck of woods as myself - read your response on music - Catherine Jenkins - wow,
Whilst in comets store checking out pioneer's full Hi def Kuro tv that was playing a blue ray player i bent down to check out what cable set up they had hooked up and when i stood up i came slap face to face with Catherine with a deep neck line top, on the set - wow if she looks that good on hi def what does she look like in the flesh!!! drool ?
I don't think Ms Jenkins is looking at the moment but if she ever does, there will be a very long Q
Mike Moorcock, whom I mentioned, was/is a Country & Western performer along with his band "The Deep Fix", in his spare time. A fine singing voice (Tenor) - like most people I know from Wales !
