How I tamed digital glare.


For months I have been trying to eliminate digital glare in the my system, which showed up most noticably in the upper middle frequency vocal range, especially female vocals. I tamed some by replacing the stock fuse in my dac with HifiTuning Supreme Cu on the sage advice of Chris Van Haus of VH Audio, resulting in a significant improvement in tonal density, detail and clarity. So far, so good. Today I lightly dusted the laser lens in my CEC transport with a microfiber cloth and was astonished to discover a substantial improvement! And the laser lens and drive compartment appeared clean to begin with (in a smoke free environment). I tried cleaning contacts, swapping power cords and interconnects, rolling the tube in my MHDT dac, and so forth, but this simple protocol was more effective than any of those experiments. I suppose results may vary as every system is unique, but for me this simple tweak was revelatory: greater clarity and a signifcant reducton of hash. Wish I had thought of tt in the beginning; it would have saved me considerable time and frustration.
pmboyd

Showing 5 responses by cleeds

kosst_amojan:09pm
@cleeds 

Can you stop flagging posts that point out that you cited NO EVIDENCE?
Please direct your complaints to the moderators.
geoffkait
“Perfect Sound Forever.” Apparently there are quite a few people who swallowed the marketing slogan ...
It's actually worse than that. They not only believe and embrace the slogan, but they have built a whole belief system using the slogan as the foundation. Any information that conflicts with the slogan is dismissed with the wave of a hand, or with an insult - as demonstrated by some of the deleted posts in this thread.

It's unfortunate, because it could be useful to have conversations about this is certain threads, such as this one. But there are ideologues here, so it seems it never ends well.
kosst_amojan
You didn’t cite any research. You posted a link to an industry trade group.
Not so, I wrote see "Also, research by Trock ..." and there is a lot of research by others.

You simply don’t want to look into it because you fear its conflict with your belief system. There is a w-h-o-l-e lot of scientific data on this. Are you an AES member, which would allow access to its presentations?
kosst_amojan
... the mere fact you can run a piece of software off a CD 1000 times with a 100% success rate demonstrates the reliability of the medium.
Apples/oranges. There's a difference between reading a data CD and playing an audio CD in real time, as has been demonstrated in the research I referenced. There's no need to pretend that prior research doesn't exist.
nonoise
Just because it can misread doesn't mean it will misread. There's so much built into it that compensates for errors as well as the fact that most are very well made, that it all comes down to trying to prove a negative.

Anyone can pipe up and ask how sure you are that it's not misreading the data? That's just trolling for trolling's sake.
Actually, no, errors on CD are well established and widely researched.  See IASA website. Also, research by Trock (which I think you can get from IASA) and others. There's no need to reinvent the wheel here, or to pretend that prior research doesn't exist.