Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output - Page 3

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 13/05/2013 6:11 PM, felix_unger wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**For the same reason that some drivers prefer Model T Fords. They make  
a statement about the person.



--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I'd be more charitable than that, they have an *opinion* it sounds better  
*to them* and get to spend their money however they want.
Those who simply want to make a statement usually do it with an expensive  
car (or a rare one like your example) expensive jewlery, expensive clothes  
etc.

Trevor.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 5:00 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I was being a little flippant. The vast majority own such products as  
a statement. SOME listeners use such equipment for valid reasons. They  
may include:

* The use of loudspeakers that have been 'voiced' to be used with  
certain amplifiers.
* The use of loudspeakers whose impedance characteristic is such that  
the vast majority of solid state amplifiers cannot deal with it. Like this:
http://www.rageaudio.com.au/modules/gallery/view.php?a=Accustat&image09%1027105452_accu.jpg


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Or this:

http://www.audionote.co.jp/en/products/power_amplifier/ongaku.html

That POS costs a cool $250k and sounds about as good as the output stage  
in my TV set. Not quite as much power though.

Or this POS:

http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/47amp.html

Same output stage that you can find in a TV set. It'll set you back  
several grand.



--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It won't set *me* back anything! I sure that buy that sort of crap.

Trevor.




Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.rageaudio.com.au/modules/gallery/view.php?a=Accustat&image09%1027105452_accu.jpg

That's a craaazy-looking impedance graph.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 15/05/2013 8:13 AM, DavidW wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
http://www.rageaudio.com.au/modules/gallery/view.php?a=Accustat&image09%1027105452_accu.jpg
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**It is pretty nasty, but certainly not unusual for many electrostatic  
loudspeakers. The original Quad ESL57 possessed an impedance curve at  
low frequencies that went extremely low indeed.


--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

True idiots you mean, those that actually have a clue (perhaps not such a  
big percentage admittedly) know that after adding dither and a  
reconstruction filter, there is no quantitisation remaining, only a FAR more  
accurate signal than can be obtained by ANY analog recording method  
available.

Trevor.





Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 13/05/2013 2:05 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Of course, but you should never smarten up a chump.

Audiophiles in the UK used to cite the BBC's Radio 3 (a classical music  
channel) FM service as the gold standard for analogue purity, blissfully  
unaware that the BBC was using digital technology to get the signal from  
its studios to the transmitters.

Sylvia.

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nothing new there. Audiophiles in the early 70's used certain viny records  
for demonstration purposes. Some were direct disk analog recordings, but  
some were digital recordings using vastly inferior equipment than what we  
have these days :-)

I still have a heavy weight, virgin vinyl, 45RPM, 12" "audiophile" disk of  
the day, recorded digitally at 14 bits using a VCR and converter. Still  
better than one using a tape recorder of course :-)

Trevor.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 13/05/2013 2:05 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Unless the sampling rate is specified, you cannot state such a thing.



--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 7:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think it can be taken as read in context that the sampling rate (and  
number of bits sampled) will be high enough that the will be nothing  
left of the quantisation noise that is capable of being heard by the  
ear. The ear itself is not an analogue device.

Sylvia.

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 10:06 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I take NOTHING as read. Unless the precise specs of the digital system  
are specified, there can be no blanket claim that the effects of that  
digital system are inaudible.

For instance: There is abundant evidence to prove that a (say) 24/96  
digital audio system is preferred by some listeners (in a blind test)  
over a 16/44 (CD quality) in a suitably high resolution system, using  
otherwise identical material. I would also add that there is  
considerable evidence to suggest that many listeners can easily pick the  
difference between DACs (Digital to Analogue Converters). In fact, some  
of the best DACs are considered to be those manufactured by Philips back  
in the late 1980s.

The ear is, most assuredly, not a digital system. And, with any audio  
system, the digital signal must be, at some point, converted into an  
analogue signal, before being processed by the human ear.

For my part, I took part in some blind tests back in the early 1980s,  
using 2nd generation master tapes of live music. We compared tape  
(15ips, played through Otari and Studer machines) to a Sony CDP101 and  
vinyl, through a high end turntable. The master tapes were preferred  
over the vinyl, which was preferred over the 16/44 digital. Further  
testing revealed that the CD was preferred over the vinyl, using certain  
contemporary recordings (Elton John's Two Low For Zero).

FWIW: I have not purchased a (new) vinyl recording since 1988. Recording  
companies lst interest in manufacturing quality LPs long ago.


--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 10:41 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I didn't say that the ear was digital, but the processing by the ear  
involves the generation of nerve pulses by hair cells with the frequency  
being encoded into which nerves are triggered, and amplitude by the the  
pulse rate. What the brain gets is hardly analogue.

Sylvia

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Dead right, but then they have no idea what analog is. An "analog" tape  
recorder using high frequency bias can be modelled as a sampled system, just  
the same as a digital sampled system, but without the binary encoding. Both  
use filtering to reconstruct as analog signals in the usual definition of  
the word long before they ever reach the speakers, and then the auditory  
system changes it all completely once again before it is interpreted by the  
brain.
The weakest link of course is the auditory/brain interface, something the  
golden ears claim they alone are immune from, as long as they don't ever  
have to prove it! :-)

Trevor.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Everyone gets an opinion which proves nothing about absolute performance,  
only their personal auditory/brain connections.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

And can be done so quite well, with performance FAR above any purely analog  
system despite your spurious claims.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which is the usual fallacy of using two completely different versions of a  
recording and pretending they are the same when all you are testing is the  
mastering differences and an individuals preference for one level of FR,  
distortion, noise etc. over another.
Preferences are like assholes, everybody has one, and those who think theirs  
is the only one that counts are the latter.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Bugger all! :-)

Trevor.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 4:14 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Of course. Up until a few months ago, I might had disregarded the  
opinions as nonsense. When a client dropped a 23 year old Marantz CD  
player in for service, I took the time to carefully listen to it,  
compared to my late model Harman Kardon. My heart sank, within a few  
seconds of listening to the Marantz. The HK was not in the same league.  
I assumed, as you do, that the printed specs tell me all I need to know.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**And again, SOME digital systems are capable of exceptionally fine  
performance. It depends on the system.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Perhaps you failed to read what I wrote.

I had access to the same tapes that the vinyl and the CD was made from.  
The music was Neil Diamond's Hot August Night. It was recorded on  
analogue tape. The tape I used was a second generation master, stored by  
EMI in their vaults. It was the same tape used to manufacture CDs.



--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope, never assume that. I never assume it is easy to audibly compare items  
by simply swapping one for the other without carefully controlled test  
conditions either.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Of course. The real benefit for most people is even a cheap CD player will  
outperform a turntable costing many mutiples of it's price, and while some  
CD's are badly mastered, finding vinyl that is *not* badly manufactured is a  
far harder ask :-(


Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, the CD cannot be better than an analog master tape it came from, BUT it  
can easily be better than a vinyl copy (or worse if the mastering is bad  
enough), AND it can be far better if properly recorded digitally in the  
first place.
Your test proved nothing other than your opinion of the different samples  
you used for comparison.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which were all different after mastering for the different mediums as I  
said.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

So you don't understand that there are different processes involved in  
getting a tape to vinyl or CD? The differences are easily measured, no need  
for aural guessing games other than to establish personal preference of the  
changes induced.

Trevor.



Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh we are in for one of those "I can hear above 22kHz" arguments "but I  
don't need to prove it even to myself of course!" :-)
OK, there are higher sampling rate options just for you! :-)

Trevor.





Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output
On 14/05/2013 4:06 PM, Trevor wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**_I_ don't claim to be able to hear past 22kHz. I don't doubt that some  
can, however. Back in the 1970s, I worked for a medium sized importer of  
hi fi equipment. I was asked to pop down to the new warehouse that the  
company had leased. I walked in the door and immediately walked back  
out. I found something intolerable about the place. I glanced around and  
spotted some ultrasonic burglar alarm sensors. I located the power  
supply and shut it off. I was then able to complete my job. I returned a  
few days later with a micrphone, preamp, CRO and frequency counter. I  
switched the system on and off and was able to see, very clearly, a high  
level of 25kHz signal throughout much of the warehouse. Given that I had  
already measured my own hearing and found that I could not reliably hear  
past 19kHz, I was surprised. However, it is a common fallacy to assume  
that human hearing 'cuts off' at 20kHz. It does not. It is severely  
attenuated.


--  
Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: Question for Sylvia: Splitting AV output

<snip>
Quoted text here. Click to load it

As are any remaining HF signals on vinyl and tape. Fortunately we now have  
high sample rate digital if you really want to record those ultrasonic  
alarms.

Trevor.



Site Timeline