Yes!!! IT LIVES!!! Thanks to Kitch29 for resurrecting one of the best!! |
Was anyone else out there forced to read the "Transactions of the Royal Academy" between Newton, Huygens and Hook over the refraction of light? Once you got past all the s's looking like f's it's a pretty hilarious account of the science, a la Newton, vs. the B.S. from Hook, and thirty years later, I think Linus, with his "homonculus", the little guy that bends the light. Anyway, this thread reminded me of that, it only remains to assort the cast of characters. A little knowledge is truly a dangerous thing and apparently breeds bad manners. Of course that didn't keep me from splitting my sides. |
This is unbelievable. I'm reminded of the TV show 'Dallas' |
You guys are unbelievable. Carl, take a pill, or two. How can a topic such as this get so many people so worked up? Really, who gives a flyin' f**k about upsampling DACS unless you're selling them ? CHILL!!!!!!!! |
My thanks to Kevin Halverson at MUSE for posting his explanation of up and over sampling-- I just read and copied it-- it's great. And I agree with Treyhoss' post above-- it caps this confusing issue nicely. Thanks. Craig. |
Joe; for a 25 year old you certainly have a mature and positive outlook on life. I read your long post carefully and it's excellent-- I share your views, and apologize for contributing to some of the negativity found here. The only quibble I chose to mention (and it's minor) is that I would not be "in awe" of meeting people such as J. Atkinson or audio industry leaders, but of course I would be pleased to meet them. But that's my perspective at age 57, and after completion of a 32 year career as a Senior Forest Soil Scientist (last 15-16 years) with the Dept. of Interior here in Oregon. I only mention my profession to let others know something about me. Men (especially) often define themselves by their professions, businesses or job(s) etc., and I would be interested in knowing about others in this regard. But it is seldom ever noted here on Audiogon; as a positive example, I respected David99 for telling us he was a nurse as that tells me a lot about him. Carl, what pray tell, does PI mean? As I want to know what kind of a blowhard I am (if you're referring to me)? And I'm glad to hear that you and Deborah1 and her husband have become email friends. I had occasion to exchange emails with her too-- nice lady. I hope she'll come back on Audiogon. Cheers (and I mean CHEERS). Craig. |
Just read Kevin's article at the Muse site. I think it caps this discussion nicely. Check it out: http://www.museelectronics.com/download.html |
Just came across a commentary by Kevin Halverson on the MUSE Web Site in their DOCUMENTS SECTION which I found EXTREMELY interesting and informative entitled -- Sample Rate Converters (up & oversamplers) & their use in Digital Audio CHECK IT OUT AT: http://museelectronics.com |
Very well said, Joe!! I apologize for my contribution to the more distasteful parts of this thread and will try to raise my bar. On the subject of journalists, I wasn't speaking about John Atkinson or "J-10" in my post above. Actually, the specific article that I was referring to was the Wadia/dCs comparison in "Hi-Fi News and Record Review". I do think it was irresponsible of them to compare two different processors and try to attribute the differences to "upsampling vs. oversampling", particularly since they are two words for the same thing AND everything else about the two units was also different. That just shows that they did not understand how to set up an experiment to test for differences (eg. compare same processor and change only the oversampling digital filter, for example). Anyway, point well taken, Joe!! Live the good life! Jordan |
I most certainly did not "run" Deborah out of this forum! She is a very busy musician and educator, and doesn't spend every waking moment in this forum. She has better things to do, mostly. I'll have all of you know, that I have become acquainted with both Deborah, and her husband Robert. We see eye to eye on TWO pieces of equipment that we both own (one is the CD50), and I find them to be very well heeled and intelligent individuals, both in audio and music (especially music, I pale before them). And I resent all of the attacks that I have received in this whole episode. I AM NO BIGOT, NO SEXIST, NO SOPHOMORIC THROWBACK. I am just more honest than many of you PI blowhards, that's all...Joe, I appreciate your attempt to conclude this thread on a high note, and regret that I needed to add this. You'll get over it...BTW, you aren't the first to make the observations you make, many are obvious. On mics: ever try "Blue" omni mics? Saw them in "Musician's Friend" catalog, look interesting, but are expensive (for me), and I have no mic pres with phantom power (cuts out essentially all the good ones)...Knocking on the door of the Neumann price range... |
I think about the technological triumphs that have ocurred during my short lifetime(25 years), and it makes me proud. I'm proud to have been born into an era that has seen more progress, in less time, than any period before it. When I was born, calculators took double "A" batteries, vast amounts of information was kept on microfilm, and the only computers around were roughly the size of my listening room, and could scarcely outperform my TI-85 graphic calculator. People didnt depend on computers the way we do today, simply because they didnt have the choice; if the reality of Kubrick's 2001 could have been possible, I feel certain we would have lept foreward, collectively, at once in a moment of wonder and also of nostalgia for things which we had as yet only dreamed about. I remember in 1994, when I was a freshman in college, before I purchased my first "serious" stereo thingie (a pair of Polk S10 speakers, bought in the fall of '95)when my roommate explained the "internet" and "WWW" to me, "Pretty soon", he said, "you'll be able to dig up anything you want on the information superhighway". 6 years later, and the prophecy of young Bryce Carlson has come true, and you can dig up pretty much whatever you want at the slightest whim. I can look up Shunyata Research, or B&W Loudspeakers, or (gasp) Matthew Polk's latest speakers, or the CIA, or one of several recipes for crack cocaine, for that matter, all on the internet, all in seconds. I guess what I'm saying here-BTW,thanks for the bandwidth Audiogon, and sorry for the off topic thoughts, but I started this thread, and I don't likee the way it's going- is that the internet and all the cool knowledge contained therein and so quickly dispersed thereby, is sort of a double edged sword. True, as it relates specifically to this hobby, it allows me to get a pretty good idea of a particular company's goals in designing a piece of electronics, and possibly, whether I'd like to try to audition it(and if I do, the best place to do so). It allows me to connect with other like minded people, and sling used gear amongst and between us, point to point, at fair market prices, no less. But it also creates a sort of emotional rift among humans, a decline in social situations, and therefore a loss of social skills, demonstrated in AOL chatrooms since day 1 of AOL, and more recently, in this very thread. I seriously doubt anyone that has posted anything on this thread is anything less than a kind person, with a great soul (if you believe in that sort of thing), that feels some sense of unity to the rest of the Audiogon patrons by a love of music, and perhaps a penchant for audio equipment. If you put any of us in the same room together, there is no doubt in my mind that it would be a pleasant meeting, without the least bit of latent alpha-male-I'm smarter that you-my stereo is better-BULLSHIT that has become the norm, both on internet sites like Rec.audio, Audiogon, even old Audioreview, and also magazines like the letters section of Stereophile and other printed magazines devoted to our hobby. People like JA and J-10 (Johns, Atkinson and Scull,for the non-Stereophile readers) are a huge benefit to our hobby, and, agree or disagree with their opinions, you should remain in awe and appreciation for the information they have made available to us. As far as the different opinions expressed in this site, and specifically, this thread, you all should be just as appreciative and open minded as if you were talking to John Atkinson, or Jeff Kalt, or Kevin Halverson, or John Curl, or Ray Kimber, or Paul Hales, or John Dunlavy. We all have the same goal. Promote a love for the reproduction of music that is dear to us. Some person may thrash the opinion of John Atkinson in a letter in Stereophile, but I'd bet the farm that if that person were to bump into JA at the grocery store, it would be all-"Nice to meet you Mr Atkinson, I'm a fan of your magazine...What's it like to have access to some of the coolest gear on the planet??" As a recording engineer (in my own mind), I'd ask him how he likes his B&K Omnidirectional microphones, and has he tried the new Microtech Geffell cardiods, and so forth. Off the subject, I'm a little disappointed that he allowed the recent down-grading of the B&W Nautilus 805 speakers, because the magazine reviewed the larger 803 speakers a couple of months later, and they were also found to be "Class A, Restricted Low Frequency" so the 805s were down rated to "Class B, Restricted Low Frequency" apparently because they are both made by B&W (and apparently, this was NOT KOSHER with someone). Now this seems to be a case of the business office having a say in the editorial process, and they accept advertising, so how can this not be... But that does not discount all the things Mr Atkinson has done for my hobby. I would be honored to speak with him about our common interests, and agree or disagree, I would not resort to name calling or insults to try to make my point seem more worthwhile. This is precisely the problem with "E-Pinions"(I think I just made a buzzword!), such as the opinions offered here. They lack the face to face kind of interaction that we apparently need to retain our civility. It's the same principal at work that to some degree occurred (so I'm told) when the telephone was first becoming common. People would call whomever had the device, total strangers, amazed that they could talk to someone across town, or across the country, or later, across the world. On the flip side of that coin, who among us never participated in some sort of prank call? Sorta takes the wind out of your sails if you're standing directly in front of the person you're about to prank call doesn't it? I find it much harder not to be nice to someone that is standing in front of you compared to a telemarketer, for example, on the telephone. Here we are, talking to each other, and we dont know each other, were just sorta "in here" together, and we don't have the common courtesy we might offer the grocery store clerk down the street, or a used car salesman, for that matter, simply because we have to look into their eyes, but here in this electric world, there's the feeling of anonymity, that allows us to be so rude. This, in my opinion, is what is wrong with our hobby, and why the general public is so dismissive and critical of "wierdos" that spend thousands of dollars on stereo equipment. Never mind the snobbery that occurs from time to time in HiFi Boutiques, you need but look into a popular information exchange medium, be it printed or electronic, to see the kind of male dominant ego type of behavior that most of us no longer give a second thought to, (And someone asked why there are so few women audiophiles). Gentlemen, (I think most of us are men, and therefore we can choose to be gentlemen) I'm asking all of you who read this to raise your own bar, so to speak. Not because I'm offended by anything I read here, but because I've seen it happen before. Lets all try to be a little more tolerant of people that may be mis-, under- or differently- informed that we are, OK? Lets try to behave as if we were meeting that person, face to face, to talk about a common interest. Lets all go out and attend a local audio club or group. If there's not one, then lets make one. Just think, you can be the president! I suggest that we try to remember why we're here, and conduct ourselves in this forum, and in life, in a manner that would make our mothers proud. Respect each other, respect the common love. Thank your lucky stars that it's 2000AD and we have the means, both to hear any piece of music imaginable at the drop of a hat, and to be able to talk with other like-minded individuals on the other side of the planet about it. Joe Cunningham |
Regarding the enjoyment of recorded music, what difference does it make whether the equipment upsamples, resamples, oversamples or nosamples (Sakura and Auido Note). Stop obsessing over the internal workings of the complex internal workings of our electronics. Great sounding equipment is being made using a wide variety of designs. Sit in the sweet spot and enjoy the music. |
Pheew! Anyway...One thing that does seem to be true is this: We all don't have engineering degrees, myself included, and that goes for the audio mag reviewers as well! If there is a "silver lining" to all this, it would be that the information learned here came from the highest sources! C'mon - direct input from Kevin Halverson at Muse, no less:-)! BTW: Thanks, Kevin. Jordan and Craig have contributed greatly to another ("Up and Oversampling") thread and have credible answers from reliable sources. Carl, you have as well on a variety of topics. I, for one, THOUGHT I HAD a solid understanding of the digital process from A-Z. I now know I have been a "victim" of the confusion set forth by digital "buzz words" in the industry - flowing out of the mouths of dealers, reviewers and corporate marketing. The point here is, at the end of the day, we have gained knowledge. This thread may very well save someone from spending $$$ on "new" equipment - or it may make them go buy it (either way)! I think everyone's motives have been sincere here and it has done the Audiogon community a great service. BTW: I'll STILL read Stereophile! |
Did I miss something? Don't we all have a common bond here.Are'nt we all a bunch of obsessive, 2 channel, sweet spot loners? Dont we need to stick together here? I have an idea!!! GO ANALOG and then we will all get along very lovingly! Everyone knows(but won't admit) analog devotees are more pleased and enjoy their music more.Do you hear analog lovers arguing about this crap! |
Carl; In my above post I was complimenting you for bringing it to Audiogon readers attention that JA and Sterophile have been talking about and promoting "upsampling" for quite awhile-- the rest of us kind of glossed over that important fact. The media (Stereophile) can do a lot more educating than anyone on Audiogon can, but they haven't done it in this case-- and I read and like Stereophile, and respect John Atkinson. I got particularly curious about your name interest thing when you almost singlehandedly ran Deborah1 off Audiogon; I have no interest in dwellining on this, but it seems important to you: I've been happily (mostly) married to the same woman for 35 years, and I'm totally secure in my sexuality. And I realize some of your "name play" thing is just in jest. Cheers. Craig. |
Gee, I guess I just like to know who I'm talking to. Imagine that? I expected people in this hobby to have more manners than both of you do, that's all...............I think, Jordan or Janie or Jackschmit or Jackass or whoever you are, that if you think that, somehow you know more about audio than John Atkinson (whether he's been right or wrong about any benefits of upsampling, is of little consequence...who are you, the patron saint of highend digital? For one thing, you'd need to die first...but that's another matter), that it is you who needs to keep his ego in check. You could never be anything other than envious of him, and sniping about him bears that out (and J-10 is his polar opposite, everybody knows it). There will always be those that hate people of prominance in the industry or in journalism, and he is well liked by most of us, and has done far more good, than bad (unlike you two, here). I NEVER CLAIMED TO KNOW AS MUCH AS ANY LEADING DESIGNER IN THE INDUSTRY (regarding digital audio, or anything else), so why in hell do you keep harping on this subject? I said it tens of times, that by all means, I defer to the real experts in the field (I said "Jeff Kalt is a better man than me", go look it up...what else would you have me do, sacrifice a burnt offering to him?), and to please not take what I say (when I honestly tried to explain my views, when asked to do so) as "gospel". SHOW ME WHERE I CLAIMED TO BE A MANUFACTURER, or an industry expert. I believe all I did was explain my view on the subject. I am not a manufacturer, don't pretend to be. What else is left to do, before you finally shut your pie hole on this, Jordan? Last time I checked, I wasn't on your payroll, so I guess you can't fire me. How's this, I'll continue to try shedding whatever "pathetic" (imperfect) knowledge I have on subjects in this hobby, right here in this forum...and you change your diaper, and move on. Are you obsessed with me, or something? You need a therapist. One thing I will NOT do, is stop trying to help people in this forum, where I feel like I can. You can try to stop me (for real), but please stop whining, because your posts on the subject of me are wasting Audiogon's server's memory space, and electricity for that matter. Music through audio reproduction is what's important, not interpersonal obsessions (like yours, with me)...and I should remind you that I don't play for the same-gender team (I think you've said you recently got married, but as Craig says, "who knows?"...indeed), so kindly focus your attentions on someone else. Craig seems like a good candidate, I'm sure you'll both be very happy together....unless of course you're both the same demented person. I USE MY REAL NAME, BECAUSE I, AND OTHERS, FEEL IT LENDS MORE CREDIBILITY AND HONOR, and because we are serious about the hobby. I absolutely refuse to apologize for wanting to know who I'm talking to, so get over that right now, both of you. You're both crybabies, stop wasting your time obsessing over me. I'll NOT stop participating in this forum, and I DARE you to stop me. You can't, so shut up! And if you go crying and snivelling to Tom this time, he might just be with me, so watch your back...perhaps Neil will be too...Anyhoo, I suggest you start talking about audio, and keep it off personalities (who's "right", who's "wrong"), or it is likely that YOURS will be the memberships that get revoked, not mine. And if you don't care about your member status, then you are scum, and have no business here AT ALL!!......good riddance! |
Craig, I feel the same way. Some of the journalists (it seems) either did not know enough to be speaking on the subject or were intentionally misleading. It's a shame. Carl, most of us will readily admit when we make a mistake; however, some find their personal egos are more important than truth and understanding. How about you? |
Off the subject. Carl.... I've been curious for a long time why you seem to have such a preoccupation with people's Audiogon User Name(s), and for that matter their real names. Afterall, this is cyberspace and anyone can use whatever name they want (in good taste). For all we know, your real name could be Carla, I could be Geraldine, and Jordan could be Janie. But really, I think we're all genuine, ie what we appear to be. Chow. Craig. |
Hi Jordan and Carl; Last night I read (twice) J. Scull's Stereophile review of Accupase's newest CD player. On the opening page, JS refers to the process Accuphase uses as oversampling, then throughout the rest of the review he refers to it as up-sampling. BTW, JS marginally preferred the Accuphase to dCS gear. Of course some question J. Sculls judgement. It was definitely confusing. And I know in previous posts on this subject, Carl has pointed this out-- that at least some of Stereophile's reviewers-- including J. Atkinson, have really extolled the virtues of high quality "up-sampling" devices. And that's why I also originally believed that up & over sampling were different. It was only after hearing from some of the leading industry people such as Jeff Kalt and Kevin Halverson that I changed my mind. In short, Stereophile led me and many others down a "screwy amd misleading path". I see no point in trying to contact Stereophile about this as I've tried emailing them in the past with no results. Cheers. Craig. |
Jordan, you are quite right, I'm full of nonsense, have never known what I'm talking about, and never listen to anything but pink noise on my system. I'm glad that you are so humble as to proclaim that you know so little, yet are perfectly open minded, and have found the truth of truths. Yes, indeed, nobody likes a blowhard. We all make mistakes, and it is you who is the blowhard now. Shut up already! At least I have a real man's name, and not an ambiguous-gender one.... |
Carl, I did let "those who design them speak for themselves" by seeking out an answer on this topic from one of the leaders in digital design and then posting Jeff Kalt's e-mail reply here. Did you search for answers OR did you already know it all?!! I humbly entered this thread looking for answers to my questions regarding upsampling/oversampling. You, however, replied with your usual collection of technical terms (organized in nonsensical ways) AND got hostile to boot! Carl, nobody likes a hostile blowhard. From my limited understanding of how a digital processor works, I suspected that upsampling was the same, or nearly the same, as oversampling. After seriously considering your nonsense, I asked Jeff Kalt for an answer. I chose to ask Resolution Audio for two reasons: 1.) Resolution Audio now markets an "Upsampling" processor. 2.) I could kick myself for it now, but I actually thought that MAYBE you knew what you were talking about and just couldn't express it in a way I understood. Since you spoke so highly of Jeff Kalt's talents as a digital designer, I thought, perhaps, he could express what you could not. As we all know now, you didn't have a clue what you were talking about and upsampling and oversampling are the same thing! Oh, I performed your test. Heard a little golf ball in the top octaves and about a 2 footer in the upper bass. I don't know, I prefer listening to music (Miles Davis sounds good today), but to each his own. Jordan |
As soon as the author gives me permission, I will post a note on this thread and will likely also build a link from our web site. Kevin Halverson |
Regarding "taking the Pepsi Challenge", I logged on to the Pepsi web site, and cannot find where they actually market a Upsampling DAC of any kind. Thinking Gthirteen confused Pepsi with Coca Cola, I visited Coke's site too....still no DAC's. Are you guys sure that these fine soft drink companies are into digital, or perhaps their "fizz" is all "0's" and no "1's". |
|
And Jordan, how many CD players or DACs have YOU designed? I want to know, because it seems to me that you are pretending that you have. How about letting those who design them speak for themselves? Also, onon of you have answered how your systems perform on my little test. I submit that you are afraid to perform it. |
Hi Kevin; Can you tell us where the article re: upsampling/oversampling you refer to will be posted or published? Thanks. Craig. |
Kevin, I'm glad to see your post here............Jordan, I only meant that Kevin's description was semantic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get over yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!! George, you can go to hell, and I'll be happy to send you there...name the time and place, old man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
There is an article being written on this very subject that should go a long way towards clearing up the confusion. Contributors include many of the individuals mentioned here and the author has assured me that it will be as free of marketing hype as possible. I am uncertain of its intended completion date, but should be within the next month. |
Merriam-Webster: "brag: engage in self-glorification" There is no point in competeing with a master so I restrain my posts to the simple facts of my direct experience. |
Carl, a couple of points for your "gray area": 1.) oversampling/upsampling without "interpolation" is meaningless!!! Interpolation is simply selecting the best bit value to assign to an oversampled data point. You could linearly "interpolate" between (real/original) data points or you could fit some base curve between those data points. If you increase the sample rate, you MUST interpolate! 2.) The ONLY difference Kevin Halverson mentioned was semantic (and I'm sure he meant it as such)!! "Upsampling" units started as stand alone oversampling digital filters to improve the performance of lesser processors. There is NO difference!! The term "upsampling" caught on, in part, due to ignorant journalists, and now everybody is using the word to claim some magic improvement. Also, both external oversampling digital filters ("Upsamplers") and internal oversampling digital filters are upstream of the "DAC". A digital processor and the DAC(s) are quite different. A digital processor has 4 main sections: Input receiver (reclocking), oversampling digital filter, DAC (digital-to-analog convertor), and analog output. So, we have once again come full circle: upsampling and oversampling are the SAME THING!! SYNONYMS!! Ask Gmkane for further details. Jordan |
Carl you are a horse's behind, a point that you continue to prove. Oh, and BTW - come back when you get a real system. Maggies compared to Soundlab Ultimate 1's. Hardly. What a joke. You are boring. I'm out of here. Nothing to learn from you, that's for sure. How did those Barney tapes you are so famous for recording work out? Did those on 8 track tape, didn't you? |
And also, don't tell me about hearing tests with headphones. They're flawed from the get go, no matter how "calibrated" they are. My HD-600's are infinitely better and more extended in the treble than the phones they use in hearing tests, and THESE SENNEHISERS ARE NOT FLAT IN THE TOP OCTAVE. My Maggies are much more flat in the top octave. I think it has to do with the fact that the trasducer is right on your ear, and phase anomalies occur, with sound wavelengths that are, what, half an inch long? Anyway, speakers in a correctly treated room, a good test CD, a mic referencing a 1 kHz sinewave to the mid 80's decibels range, is all you need. My Maggies stay focused DEAD CENTER in every band of uncorrelated third octave pink noise. They make a ball about 2 feet diameter in the upper bass, and a golfball size "ball of noise" in the top ocatves............................DOES ANYONE ELSE'S SPEAKER SETUP/HEARING YIELD THIS? Me want to know........I CHALLENGE YOU TO DO THIS TEST RIGHT NOW (the Sheffield "my Disc" will do the trick. Otherwise, don't go telling me what I can, and can't hear, through my system, old man. Go pipe your pompousity up your own keester for a while, George.... |
Please don't tell me that the phono stage doesn't have the equalization that re-boosts the treble response, because that is basic, and everybody should know it. Why don't either of you (Albert or George0? There is no "inherent" roll off. There is only pre_equalized roll off, that is "decoded" by the treble BOOST (like 40 dB) in the phono stage. All of you need to better eduacate yourselves about that. LP's produce harmonics well beyond 25 kHz, didn't you know that? CD's produce nothing at all above 20 kHz, that is fact. I can hear 20 kHz sinewaves on a test CD with Maggies, and the intermodualtion and squared off-ness that goes with them. Can you? You don't need an anechoic chamber, just a damped lisening room (I doubt George even has that, though). And for your info, I've been in a few dorm rooms myself, and saw no decent stereos, just stale pizza (and a few other nice things). Your comments are anectdotal, and prove ABSOLUTELY ZERO POINT. Take a break, and organize your thoughts in your brain first next time, George... |
I'm fully aware of RIAA pre-equalizaation, and the reason for it. And for your information, I already am a recording engineer (I make my own, which is more than you can do), so there goes that little smug blather-theory of yours. YOU STILL DIDN'T ASNWER THE QUESTION, AND CERTAINLY NO CANECHOIC CHAMEBER IS REQUIRED. You can't hear squat, old man, get a hearing aid, already!!! |
First of all, let me get one thing srtaight about Resolution Audio. I admire Jeff Kalt very much, and respect his work on an exalted level (I love his CD player, and will likely never part with it). I think that far too much is being made of some minor misconceptions on my part(it's not as if I write for a mag that you are all paying for, so why do any of you hold my being "wrong" to such a high level of scrutiny? I mean, somebody freaking asked me to describe my view of that subject the best I could, so I did...I was partially in error perhaps...get over it...I have, and then some. Why can't the rest of you?). Here's where the GRAY AREA on that subject still is for me: According to another's post on here, Kevin Halverson of Muse has said that upsampling CAN be distinguished from oversamplng in the following manner (and this was also how I understood it to be all along, so if you say I'm wrong on this, it would seem you are saying Kevin is wrong also): THAT UP-SAMPLING is upstream of the DAC, AND employs processing that "interpolates"...and OVER-SAMPLING occurs within the DAC. Now, it all depends on what you describe as being "inside" or "outside" the DAC. The only thing I will concede on this, and Jeff has made it clear to me personally, is that with oversampling, the DAC does get a datastream which is already "not redbook", it's higher rez than that already. I did NOT realize that. If it makes all of you happy that this somehow has disproved how I conceived it before, so be it. Doesn't make me a retard, though. I have no plans to design DACS or CD players, a good thing, I guess. I am convinced not to even try any of the affordable "upsampling" dacs, though, even for kicks............I'm no bigot, and you are in need of a hine end correction from my foot. You are the one who is crass, and also judgemental, and are likely too old to realize it. |
I am not Carl, and I do not disagree with your comments about LP. having a high frequency roll off. Perhaps it is the RIAA, or perhaps a flaw in the original design of the LP format (it is quite old). However, the roll off in the extreme highs is less of a problem to my ear than the brick wall filter in digital, and the additional problems with the digital format's phase response. There is no perfect format for the ultimate in home reproduction right now, and in the years to follow, perhaps digital will finally accomplish what was originally promised it would do (20 years ago). However, I have been listening to recorded music for all of those 20 years, and I pride myself in extracting all the performance from my system that can be had. And, as you said yourself, LP. is the superior format right now, so until things change, I am happy to enjoy my rather large collection of music and know that considering the state of things, I cannot do better. |
I am not Carl, and I do not disagree with your comments about LP. having a high frequency roll off. Perhaps it is the RIAA, or perhaps a flaw in the original design of the LP format (it is quite old). However, the roll off in the extreme highs is less of a problem to my ear than the brick wall filter in digital, and the additional problems with the digital format's phase response. There is no perfect format for the ultimate in home reproduction right now, and in the years to follow, perhaps digital will finally accomplish what was originally promised it would do (20 years ago). However, I have been listening to recorded music for all of those 20 years, and I pride myself in extracting all the performance from my system that can be had. And, as you said yourself, LP. is the superior format right now, so until things change, I am happy to enjoy my rather large collection of music and know that considering the state of things, I cannot do better. |
Carl - look for the thread about vinyl and live music. A lot of recording-types and musicians in on that one. There is a great explanation by a recording engineer or two about high reequency roll off in the vinyl recording process. Maybe something to do with RIAA? Anyway, read through the thirty or so posts and try to learn something for a change instead of letting your not insignificant bruised ego stand in the way of reaching an understanding of how the brain processes sound and how the process of recording sound onto vinyl is compromised. As to your juvenile comments regarding hearing - only true way to accurately compare or measure hearing is in a total anechoic chamber using standardized methods. Best place I know of is at an Eye and Ear Hospital. Yours better that mine? Doubt it. I don't really care. What's it going to be next? Dualing triodes at 10 paces? Grow up. Time to go play with my stereo. |
Carl - look for the thread about vinyl and live music. A lot of recording-types and musicians in on that one. There is a great explanation by a recording engineer or two about high reequency roll off in the vinyl recording process. Maybe something to do with RIAA? Anyway, read through the thirty or so posts and try to learn something for a change instead of letting your not insignificant bruised ego stand in the way of reaching an understanding of how the brain processes sound and how the process of recording sound onto vinyl is compromised. As to your juvenile comments regarding hearing - only true way to accurately compare or measure hearing is in a total anechoic chamber using standardized methods. Best place I know of is at an Eye and Ear Hospital. Yours better that mine? Doubt it. I don't really care. What's it going to be next? Dualing triodes at 10 paces? Grow up. Time to go play with my stereo. |
|
I don't know how my automatic transmission works, but I can drive my truck. I am enjoying my Bel Canto DAC1 in the DVD-toslink-DAC set up. If someone would kindly send me some of the other DACs for a comparison, I would be glad to share my thoughts. My address is...... |
Carl, first of all if you're right about something you're right. Just because you were wrong on an issue (that Resolution Audio gentleman's explanation seems to bear that out) doesn't mean that you were wrong on everything. Secondly I was remiss in calling your remarks sophomoric. They were sophomoric and neanderthal. I haven't run into a total throwback like you for quite a while. And it has nothing to do with PC. It has to do with real world experience working with women physicists, educators, engineers, physicians, secretaries, medical personnel, research and tech "weenies", and many of them stereo lovers. From all economic strata. Having two grown girls that love listening to music on a high end stereo. Reading remarks like those from Plsl and his wife, above. Selling some equipment to a woman who "has it all" and just happens to listen to a high end stereo. You cannot make crass generalizations and expect to have them received as gospel when they are just pure prejudicial rubbish. Ever visit a private and predominately women's college or university? Ever look into dorm room after dorm room and see the stereo equipment in the private rooms? I'm not talking about boom boxes here. I'm talking about fine equipment. (BTW - my answer to that question is yes. About a hundred times). But as not all men are stereo lovers not all women are not stereo lovers. And YOU MISS THE POINT in the discussion. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE REPRODUCTION OF THE LIVE MUSICAL EVENT OR AT LEAST THE CLOSEST REPRESENTATION OF THAT LIVE EVENT IN TWO CHANNEL STEREO; AND WHY DIGITAL WILL EVENTUALLY SURPASS ANALOG IN THE ABILITY TO RECREATE THE WIDE DYNAMIC TRANSIENTS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE BRAIN RECOGNIZE A MORE REALISTIC INTERPRETATION OF A RECORDED MUSICAL EVENT. Something that you were unable to do. Now tell me, you've forgotten how to read too, right? Where did I mention HT? To offer your jaundiced view of the world according to Carl and to espouse the notion that your bigotry is the truth is not just nonsense - it is lunacy. But I respect your right to be a bigot. You do it better than most. |
Oh well, he isn't in the mood. Maybe next time... |
Gmkane. I appreciate your answer, I have copied and pasted the part of your statement that I ABSOLUTELY agree with: Suppose you have the best audio gear that money can buy - either analog or digital. I think analog offers the best state of the art at this point in time. Why? Analog is in its old age and is a very mature technology. Digital is in its infancy. As algorithms mature and newer hardware generations turn over, digital will eventually reach an even keel with analog in two to three years at the high end of equipment. But very quickly digital will surpass the vinyl recreation of what your brain perceives as a constant or unimpeded and fluid stream of information that we call music. I (as posted on other threads) would love to have CD offer what it has as strengths, and have what L.P. has as well. Since we cannot have both, we must each decide if it is worth the effort to obtain what either format (at it's limit) has over the other, and then press our system out to the limit of that technology. As I already stated, I have been to the limit with both formats, and made my choice. I am pleased to read your comments, and believe your opinions to be factual and informative. Thanks! |
Plsl, how nice for you, that's almost like bragging. Really, if you're married, must you hog single young ladies who are interested in audio? I'd like to meet one sometime. Anyway, it doesn't prove that these represent the majority of the women in the lives of the rest of us male audiophiles, though. Just makes us wish we were you. let me guess, your last name is Heffner?................George, my brain missed the part where you answered my questions about your criticisms of my oversampled views on women and audio. Regarding vinyl, you are wrong on basic points about the treble bandwidth capability of vinyl, and also abot the portrayal of the dynamic contrast (both micro and macro) of vinyl, over the best of CD. I'll leave it to Albert to lay into you about that (I really wouldn't want to be you right about now, that's for sure...heh heh).....................Regarding your hearing, I have pretty decent hearing, myself. How far away from, say a 32 inch crt TV, can you hear it's 15.6 kHz sweep noise? I bet I can hear it farther away than you can (and around corners, down hallways, and on many pop recordings and movie soundtracks), and I'm not in the habit of using air guns, and I always wear earplugs for any activity even remotely noisy. |
Albert (my name is George, BTW) there is a real problem with vinyl. In another discussion thread on vinyl versus digital, there is a lot of REAL information from recording engineers regarding the inherent limitations of vinyl (mostly) and why it sounds better to some, worse to others. Basically, if I recall correctly, there seemed to be a consensus of opinion that there is a very vocal minority out there in the real world that prefer analog. (You might find the same type of minority out there that prefer tube over transistor). I don't know how good your hearing is, but I was blessed with perfect pitch and great hearing. I can hear things that others can't who are sitting right beside me. Now, this begs the question - do I hear these things because of genetically superior hearing, does my brain just process the information better, or was I actively listening to the music and the other person passively listening? As a follow-up question: is this gender based? I don't believe that it is gender based at all and enough real science has gone into the quest for that answer. The first part of our hearing to USUALLY suffer degredation is reception of the high frequency pitches. If you've ever operated an air gun, etc. without ear protection you might notice a ringing in your ears afterwards. Not good. Repetition of the same stress to your hearing over time will result in your loss of the ability to pick up certain high frequencies. The one thing that vinyl does is truncate the high frequencies because of the way they were rolled off or limited in the recording process. I've picked this up since the first time I listened to vinyl, more years ago than I care to admit. I personally like the higher frequencies to shine through on my music (this is why I prefer digital and I have done enough A/B testing on my own equipment to validate my opinion). But I also want a balance throughout my hearing range and hopefully some impact caused by subsonic frequency air displacement. So vinyl does not recreate the high frequencies that I look for, but it does the rest fairly well and it still offers constant streaming information to my brain. But it does not offer the wide dynamic range necessary to recreate a true "lifelike" representation or recreation of the musical event. Neither does digital - yet. It is very close. Everybody's hearing is different. Digital can reproduce those high frequencies that I am listening for while vinyl cannot. I seriously suspect that this is why some people get what is referred to as "CD fatigue." The higher frequencies are reproduced (above what is reproduced by vinyl) causing an adverse impact on the most sensitive frequency reception range of hearing. Suppose you have the best audio gear that money can buy - either analog or digital. I think analog offers the best state of the art at this point in time. Why? Analog is in its old age and is a very mature technology. Digital is in its infancy. As algorithms mature and newer hardware generations turn over, digital will eventually reach an even keel with analog in two to three years at the high end of equipment. But very quickly digital will surpass the vinyl recreation of what your brain perceives as a constant or unimpeded and fluid stream of information that we call music. Then we will have the trickle down effect into the mainstream or affordable digital equipment lines or models. As we learn more about digital reproduction of music and upsampling or oversampling (and how the brain processes these digital bit streams), the one thing that vinyl can NOT do is offer the incredible dynamic transients that digital can. And this will eventually make digital more "lifelike" or offer a more realistic recreation of a live musical event. But this is a double edged sword. Your amps and preamps may not be able to keep pace with the dynamics that the digital signal will bring forth. Speed will be the essence. In the end, right now, both methods of musical recreation can offer satisfaction to the listener. Depends on how your brain processes the input. The key is to find balance between the individual components that make up your system so that it is optimized for your listening preference. Right now vinyl is ahead by one run in the bottom of the ninth but digital's clean-up hitter is coming to the plate with nobody out and the bases loaded. |
Carl, for what is it worth, my wife and I have listened together to recorded music doing nothing else and in silence during the music for three to five hours at a stretch on most weekends for over 25 years. She used to joke that she married me for my stereo and record colllection. In addition we have two younger female friends who join us regularly and bring music for all of us to listen to. |
GM Kane, I appreciate your claimed support of my thoughts on digital audio. (I should point out that I am a fan of vinyl, and am not a total "digihead". My good friend Albert would be remiss if I didn't point this out. I admire his commitment to the single format, it shows his passion for fine music reproduction in the home)..................I have some questions for you, GM: Why is it that you think my observations about women are sophomoric? I'll grant that they aren't PC, but why must that make them sophomoric? Also, does your wife, or significant other, somehow cause you to forumlate the opposite notion (that most women actually DO enjoy highend audio systems)? We all know that is false, so why argue it? Those "activists" out there would have us believe it is solely "social conditioning" that causes the vast majority of women to "not be interested in sit-down-listening-with-concentration"...but to me, that is just illogical...flies in the face of reality. Nowadays, it seems to me that women are "conditioned" to believe that they can have it all in life, and most do a very good job of accomplishing just that (and are to be admired for it). So, why would they somehow not be able to enjoy listening to an audio system, IF THEY WANTED TO? I submit that it's that they do NOT want to, not that some man somewhere told them that they could not...that it "wasn't their place". Now, we all know that there are a handful of women that are audiophiles, and I celebrate and appreciate them very much. They are the minority, though. And as for enjoying listening to a live music performance (be it symphony, jazz, or rock) THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, HERE. We're talking about 2 CHANNEL AUDIO IN THE HOME (not "home theater", not "live" music at a venue, but RECORDED MUSIC at home)............I say this not to inflame, only to exercise my right to speak in a politically incorrect manner. No one in this forum has ever felt the least bit of pause, when they have sought to offend me in some way, so do I owe it to those same folks to show the same pause? To spout PC rhetoric that I don't believe?.................This is an "open" forum (for now) on the net, not a dinner party at the boss's mansion....ahem... |
Gmkane, I have been reading this thread since it began, and made no comments, as I really cannot contribute. I do have a question though. In the CURRENT state of high end, home (two channel) audio, does the ULTIMATE digital transport, D to A, etc., have a better chance of reproduction of music than the ULTIMATE analog system, assuming best L.P.'s as a source (most of us cannot access master tape!) Mind you, I am including NO cost limit in the question. If you want to include a $30K digital, OK. Be sure to remember the $30K turntables (and above) and the phono stages required to complete their process. I would very much like to hear your opinion on this. I confess, in advance, that my prejudice is for L.P., as I have gone to the limit with both formats, and essentially agree with one part of your comment, where you say we are 5 years away from getting digital "fixed." If I am wrong in the way I read your comments, I apologize in advance. You seem to be very knowledgeable in the field, so I am eager to hear what you have to say. |
Gthirteen, you are more than welcome. Wonderful thing about this forum is that, with the collective knowledge and experience to draw upon, greater understanding will result in the truth. In my line of work, we use quite a bit of very sophisticated algorithm development. MUCH more sophisticated than that found in audio. But it is really hard to make digital theory easily digestible and therefore hard to bring it to a point where it makes sense to everybody. I think the author did a magnificent job in his explanation. Coming around full circle, you can see why Carl was right - digital has the infinite capability to produce more dynamic and "lifelike" quality of music than analog. But, as always, the science lags behind the enabling technology. Therefore, we will have to wait about 5 years, by my estimate, to begin to fully realize the promise of the CD. Biggest thing to remember is that the science of hearing and how the brain distinguishes sounds, transients, harmonics, etc. is really not well understood at all. Therefore, you and I hear (and "understand" music) differently. So it is catagorically incorrect to hold to one's opinion of perceived sound as an unassailable truth. It is THEIR truth but you and I might hear it much more differently than they did. Just take part in a speaker or interconnect cable double-blind study sometime. You will hear differences, sometimes, between various products. But can you really differentiate to the point whereby you say that "Number 1 is Nordost" and "Number 2 is Radio Shack"? Try it sometime. The results are going to amaze you and reveal new truths heretofor undiscovered. Therefor, you are the ultimate judge of the truth and you can only do that by comparing different equipment in your system. NEVER go by reputation. ONLY go by what pleases your ears. Music should just be equated with joy (not ego) whether you cry at an opera or bang your head with Kiss. I've done both and I am the better for it. |
