airy - Pertaining to treble which sounds light, delicate, open, and seemingly unrestricted in upper extension. A quality of reproducing systems having very smooth and very extended HF response. (Stereophile Glossary)
286 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
I cannot speak for Jaycoy, of course, but I think both of your senses of air are tightly related. With the greater quiet and blackness of the noise background comes more information on the venue including ambience and reverberation. I would characterize it as sounding more real or having a sense of being there. |
| Post removed |
"Aproximately 1.5 amps per rail. Make sure to look at the unit first to see what you are getting into. There a *lots* of conections to deal with. Off the shelf linears are one not the best approach because the power supply should be decoupled within the unit itself." Exlibris- appreciate the info. It's very easy to place some caps inside the unit to decouple an off the shelf linear like the Condors which are available at these rating. I've seen the stock supply and realize there are additional connections. The connectors are readily available. |
I had a linear power supply custom made from individual parts. All I really know is that I now have a two-box unit and that there are some relatively big transformers and new capacitors in the boxes. Now that I know that it works great I will ask the technician: 1. to try and explain to me -exactly- what he did. 2. if he would do anything different if he had to do it over again. 3. is there anything more that could be done. |
RealityCheck with Linear Power Supply Modification If one were to express the difference between duplicates made with the RealityCheck (RC) and original compact discs (CD) in percentage terms, one could argue that the duplicates are 20% better than the originals. If one were to express the difference between duplicates made with the RealityCheck with Linear Power Supply Modification (RC/PSM) and duplicates made with the standard RealityCheck (RC) in percentage terms, one could argue that the RC/PSM duplicates are 40% better than the RC duplicates. Yes, there is a greater difference between the RC/PSM and the RC duplicates, than there is between RC duplicates and the CD. Differences: Harmonic structure is greatly increased. The insides of drums and wooded instruments are more apparent as are the inflections in a singers voice. Transients are quicker and have much better attack. Drum hits have much more snap and definition. Pace, rhythm and timing are improved. The digital glare (digital screen) in front of the presentation is greatly reduced. The presentation is less aggressive, more relaxed, and less chaotic. Vocals sound more natural and there is less emphasis on sibilants. Cymbals stay back with the drum kit rather than projecting out to the front of the soundstage. Images are more distinct and there is less smear. There is greater space between images on the soundstage. The bottom line is that one gets a much better appreciation of what the musicians and vocalists are trying to get across. The presentation is simply much more real and emotionally satisfying. |
Exlibris- Tbg sent me pictures of the stock SMPS, it's a: AK2 A65A1-02M 65 watt output +5 volts at 3.5 amps +12 volts at 4.0 amps Sounds like your tech either under rated the amps on the transformer or regulator. Did he measure the current draw on the +5v and +12V rails? There's some great off the shelf linears available for under $100. I'd be happy to upgrade the SMPS for you, if you're interested. See my system. Anything that reduces power supply noise in digital circuits, should be worth the effort. |
Jayctoy, I find the RealityCheck results far greater than these alternatives. I had been using them on originals for years, and although the improvements proved substantial, they were never of the level achieved here. Also more recently I have tried using the RealityCheck black blanks in my computer to redo originals including all of the cleaning prior to burning. Again the results fell far short of what I got with the RC. I even tried burning another RC blank using the copy I had made on the computer using the RC blank and copying it using the RC reproducer. I then compared it with a prior direct copy from the original using the RC. I heard no difference between the two copies. I have found benefit to using the Furatek demagnifier on the cdrs, but no benefit using the AudioDeck trimmer. Even the post by Slothman above citing work by Genesis Tech. shows the importance of the blank used, how it is cleaned, what is used to copy it, and the burner software. All that I really know is that I very much enjoy the further benefits I derive from the RealityCheck that I have not otherwise been able to achieve. Maybe as Audioengr suggests a better burner would outperform the RC. That maybe true, but the jury is still out at least as far as I am concerned. |
I think some of the opinion I am reading here, Mapleshade has been doing them long time ago,like treating their cd with their own solutions,before recording, It works. What I do just simply spin the original cd and the blank CDR on my bedini ultraclarifier, after treating them with either fynil or the mapleshape solutions,and it is even better if you use the MF CDR.This is very simple with good result and not expensive. |
Herman wrote: "why, given the low cost of memory and computing power, doesn't every player above the entry level read and re-clock the data to the dac thereby eliminating this variable from the equation?" This is understandable. To make a system like this behave just like a normal CD player is a HUGE undertaking. There is a lot of software development because of things like: what happens when you decide to skip ahead on the current playing track or skip back to the last track? This is simple for a regular CD player, but if the data is cached in memory, there may be a large latency to flush the memory cache and refill it with new data and then begin playing it. The system must actually "look-ahead" and predict what the user will likely do with the remote buttons, otherwise, there is a big latency penalty. There is also the issue of DVD-A and SACD. The computer model wil not work for these, so the player must revert back to a standard-type player. It's really a can of worms to make is behave like a standard universal player. |
Tvad wrote: "If one burns a black CD on a laptop computer running on battery power, and the copy is made at a low speed, would it then follow that this burned CD would conceivably be better than the original, notwithstanding the inferior clock on the computer?" Could be better, but no guarantees. Depends on the power and grounding in PC and the clock jitter, as well as the quality of the burner CDROM or DVDROM. |
Herman, great thoughts. Were I to have the equipment I would try it. Audioengr, I had two cds that would no longer play because of scratches. I did succeed in copying them using my computer. When I got the RealityCheck, I tried to copy one from the original. It failed partially through the burning. I then copied the copy. It was far superior. Recently I recopied using my computer and one of the black cdrs supplied by George. I then copied it using the RealityCheck at home it was further improved. I found it somewhat better than the RC copy using the silver cdr. |
Audioengr, your lower jitter theory is a reasonable hypothesis, but if jitter from reading the disc is the culprit, this then begs the question of why, given the low cost of memory and computing power, doesn't every player above the entry level read and re-clock the data to the dac thereby eliminating this variable from the equation? This seems like a much more elegant solution to the problem than the meticulous cleaning of discs and then re-writing to a blank CD which has a limited lifetime. There are numerous high end players that do re-clock the data. I wonder if this re-writing process has any audible effect on their playback? I am also curious why I never see any test data on the bit stream coming from a transport before and after such treatments are applied. With the right equipment it would be very easy to analyze this stream of bits and see what if any differences there are. It might not tell us what it would sound like but at least it would demonstrate that there are differences. |
| Post removed |
Based upon the rewritten CD's that I have tried, I believe it is just jitter in the pits of the original. If the data is transferred to a computer hard disk and then rewritten by a burner with a precision low-jitter clock and clean power, such as batteries, and the copy is made at low speed to get more accurate pit shapes, then the copy should be significantly better than the original. Makes perfect technical sense to me. |
Onhwy61 wrote: "He doesn't explain why storing the data on a hard drive degrades the sound which leads to question along the line of whether just storing the data in a memory buffer also degrades the sound?" This makes no sense to me either. Copies from the hard-disk should be every bit as good or better than ones from the original CD. |
The fact that the original and the copy sound different is not even debatable. Whether or not the copy is 'better' than the original, is. There is certianly more openess and better depth on the copy. Stanhifi, You should post the details of your system; it might give us some idea of why you can't hear what is blatantly obvious to the rest of us (and our non-audiophile friends). |
Wellfed, in my case a suspicion is a step below an opinion in the hierarchy of belief statements. After reading multiple websites and threads on the issue I still haven't gotten enough detailed information to say what is really going on with the RealtyCheck process, but I've still gleamed enough information to make a conjecture. I am not saying RealtyCheck doesn't give the results people have reported, but that the sonic improvements claimed can be equaled by other CD-R burning procedures. I could very well be wrong, but RealtyCheck seems to be a very refined application of a phenomena that was reported more than a decade ago. As a turnkey system (and depending upon the pricing of the proprietary cleaner and CD-Rs) I suspect it could even be a good value for someone interested in taking the time and effort to correctly apply it. Miklorsmith, please report back your findings on the comparisons. In my opinion your opinion on the subject would be most valuable. |
I have been running a Gary Koh-type burner rig for about a year. In my mind, there is no doubt the discs are better sounding. Other systems and their owners have sided with me on this. Mr. Koh's Melody discs are not available in the US, though I've had good luck with Mitsui Golds and Memorex Blacks. Recently, I burned 5 well-recorded discs and sent them, along with the originals, to Mr. Louis. George copied my originals to the same type of blanks, using his process, listened, took notes, then sent all of it back to me. So now, I have 5 originals, 5 copies the Gary Koh way, 5 copies the George Louis way, and George also sent me 5 of his Onix black discs to burn my way to compare. Whew! I haven't had time to compare yet. I'll definitely get around to it this weekend and report back. With the toil it took to get the dedicated burner together, I'm leaning toward RealityCheck as a better answer for most people. It's plug-and-play after all. For now, I'll just say Georges discs sound very good indeed. I'll need to spend some more time before I'll go further. |
>>The more I read the more I suspect there is nothing special being done with the Reality Check<< I agree. This product, along with many other new products, is being hyped by a handful of enthusiastic folks who have spent serious money. The result is justification of the purchase in the form of rave reviews IMO. |
The more I read the more I suspect there is nothing special being done with the Reality Check CD burner per se and what people are hearing is simply the result of the improvements inherent with very carefully copying massed produced CDs with better quality burners and using obsessive media cleaning techniques. People reported improved sound quality from burned CDs back when Meridian offered the first dedicated audio burners. I don't have the link, but I saw on Audio Asylum the George Louis was involved in the manufacture/sale of Finyl CD cleaning solution. Is that similar to his current cleaning solution? |
I met Gary Koh at RMAF in October in Denver. Nice guy. He even gave me some black CD's to try. I am purchasing a CD writer that he recommended and I'm planning to mod it with Superclock3 and battery power, as well as digital mods. CD's written with this machine should be almost as good as Computer-Driven Audio. In fact, I'm considering rewriting CD's as a service. The first time I heard this effect was at CES in January on generic CDROM media that was CD's rewritten by Mark Harmon of Zcable. Really outstanding results. Steve N. Empirical Audio manufacturer/modder |
Wow, Slothman, this is a very important posting based on very thorough testing. It sounds like George Louis has done his homework and reached the same conclusion as Mr. Koh. Some black cdrs are exceptional, cleaning with the right liquids is imperative, some copying softwares and hardwares are superior, and the results are "more life-like." The question remains as to whether buying the right black cdrs, finding the best cleaners, and getting the best hard and softwares allows you to equal or exceed the RealityCheck. |
Interesting thread. Perhaps another alternative for tweakers (note: link is to a PDF file, may want to right click and download first): In Quest of Absolute Fidelity: The Saga of the Black CD - Finding Black Gold "music CDs using this (burn) process results in a spectacular improvement to the musicality of the CD playback" Apparently similar results maybe obtained utilizing equipment we may already have - provided we find the correct media. Would be interested in hearing more comments on this - or is it just more "snake oil"? |
Onhw61, you assume that cd manufacturers care what their cds sound like. I too do not understand what is going on in this process, but it may have some tie to cdrs not cds. It also may have some to do with cleaning cdrs and cds properly. Vincent Sanders of VRS using an original and RC copy I sent reports that he could clearly hear the improvement playing on a player, but that when he burned both to hard drive, he could no longer hear a difference. Hidden within all of this may be some clue as to why Louis could not market this to a manufacturer. |