• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


  • Location
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,552 profile views

Display Name History

  1. Mate honestly NFI. I'm not even that kind of person. The nice bottles of wine in the home are from when people visit and bring a bottle out of sheer good form. They've mobilised into a small army. Pre-vinyl they never really suffered any sort of attrition. Maybe part of it is the memories associated. Not unlike yourself - the first musical media I ever remember was my parents' Boz Scaggs Silk Degrees LP. Went missing years ago along with the equipment it played on. Instinctively when getting some equipment together to launch this gifted deck... I found a nice copy of Silk Degrees and bought it. Now I like Boz quite a lot, seen the man live, I've every CD he ever released. And I would not call the deck I have 'audiophile'. I would call the phono pre... well you would call it a NAD PP4i. At best it's a get-out-of-jail box that allows people that have severe doubts about vinyl to at least plug the thing into a computer and play nice-ish... and that's pretty much it for it's exceptional qualities. Doesn't do anything wrong either. I love the way this sounds. It's warm and rich and enveloping and reminds me of being a boy all over again, with dad's big AR's playing it over the rain on a slow Melbourne afternoon. Is it accurate? I don't think so, I honestly don't. I've got Boz's live CD at Great American Music Hall, I've heard him live and I've been to Great American Music Hall a few times. I can't tell you whether I'm 100% right on that because I'm relying on memory like the rest of us. My CA system sounds pretty damn close, sometimes Loan Me A Dime is dead on and it's freaky, it's amazing. You are there. I've put a lot of time into trying to make my digital rig put me there, and as an instrument it's been responsible. Tuneable. Faithful. Can't fault it and don't regret the (ongoing) experience at all. But you don't have a glass of wine then you are there. I love the way the vinyl sounds, I just do.
  2. Sure but @Tasso who here is putting down vinyl as you suggest? Maybe I missed it, I see no digiphiles, just a few people that have pointed out some potential inaccuracies in your assessment of some digital formats. There's no mention of any 16-bit mantra, FWIW.
  3. Sorry to keep disagreeing with you - what your suggesting could happen is what Nyquist theory's for. Behind that there's a good amount of Fourier theory, and around that there's some small amount of quant error, which as alluded by @Newman is typically very, very small. If you understand spectral energy in a signal, what you're suggesting is very easily abated. Sorry there mate I'm not sure if you had me down as a PCM troll, a digital troll or a 16-bit troll? I'm most likely a digital troll. I've no particular affiliation with any bit depth, sampling rate or modulation method. @Tasso if you've posted something and it's not correct, you might want to accept others sharing a dissenting view. If your views are marginal around specific points, expect a pedantic response. Methinks you're quoting Hamlet out of context.
  4. It's an in-context comment (you'd need to follow the relevant discussion to have it make sense). Agreed. I've had a few fairly marginal hires purchases that were priced to set my world on fire and at best gave the home a highly-resolved account of how poorly mastering can be done... with no refunds. Fo sho. My deck is not awesome by SNA standards. It's a gift from a friend and I literally bought a $100 lot to play on it and another $100 of new stuff (this did not go nearly as far as the aforementioned lot). My digital rig is very accurate, the friend that gave me the deck get a bit of a shock listening to it. And yet the vinyl deck sounds... well... lovely. We plugged it in, set it up and were about 20s into a first track (on the new album) when we stopped to get a bottle of wine. Never quite done that before, it's a totally different vibe. I've got a few albums both on CD and vinyl and they've very different, both very enjoyable but you'd not mistake one for the other. I'm not in the same mood when I'm listening to vinyl... there really is a sense of occasion around it. How much of this is just the joy of playing on vinyl, some sort of occasion-based placebo I don't know. I had thought vinyl was just a black hole for good money, now I know it makes for enjoyable listening too (seriously, you'd have wanted to be present when I went out to buy a stylus for the first time - I'm pretty much fully-digital and my reactions to price vs product were apparently amusingly naive). The same friend of mine and I went to audition a DAC north of Sydney once on a system with a mega Wadia transport, fully tricked out, a superb DAC and some Axiom 80's (a few know whos this is). The amp ran unobtanium PX25s and a bunch of other stuff that doesn't seem to exist anywhere on the planet anymore but was assembled into a functioning system in this one home. It sounded amazing. When reviewing what it was we'd just heard, we were struck by just how unavailable most of it was. As in if some tripped, fell and destroyed a few valves in the home by mistake the experience of that system was not likely to be repeated. But it sounded amazing. How much of this was the system and how much was some sort of placebo associated with the sense of occasion around it... again, don't know. Can only tell you that good music deserves a sense of occasion. Pricks your ears up and all that.
  5. @Tasso, there are some gross oversimplifications here that assume half of sampling theory doesn't exist. Suggest you dig into why sampling happens at the Nyquist frequency or greater. Did you mean to write "An aim of time-discrete sampling is to convert a continuous analogue signal to a time-discretised, bandwidth-limited digital representation"? Because what you've written means quite differently. Try Nyquist theory. Seriously. You seem to be missing a lot in sampling theory. No, with vinyl you have mechanical hysteresis. Whilst small there is no possibility that noting is discarded. Vinyl mastering does not ignore or otherwise break known laws of physics around the forces required to cut a master, however small. Ha ha ha... is that the best you've got when shown up? 'I don't stink... you stink!'? Come off it mate, you're going to want to do better than that. Or maybe you don't, maybe your point here is just to stir the pot. You've managed to hijack a thread with some wonderfully inflexible, incorrect hyperbole, I'm keen to see where you go next .
  6. @Tasso - again - PCM is not a format, and what you've written makes no sense!
  7. Well... you can't do MQA within PDM formats nearly as easily, so you'd understand his beef - it's cutting into his market pretty decisively. Meanwhile vinyl types just press on. (Har har har).
  8. @Tasso I think Koch has a vested interest, isn't the only opinion going and that objectivity's a viable part of any discussion. Nor from a scientific perspective do I see anything particularly noteworthy in his presentation you've linked, and some of Koch's diatribes online leave much to be desired (suggestions that we can hear transient signals to 100kHz being one). If objectivity is lost then there's really no point having a discussion save the popcorn value. Which R2R purveyors? Hmmm? There are practically no R2R DACs and CD players left bar some specialists making their own resistor ladders. The DAC ICs are too expensive to make. You're welcome to trawl through modern DS DAC IC datasheets. Most since 2000 have some degree of multibit converter to deal with inherent distortion in a 1-bit approach. How else do you think dithering is really employed? It's a practical consideration not a mythical one. The format might be single-bit, that doesn't mean the complete decoding process needs to be (or should be). Nup. This notion of 'the PCM format' is getting tired - it's wrong and insisting it's not creates for a circular argument you seem to enjoy coming back to. PCM or pulse-code modulation is a method to represent analogue, continuous signals in a time-discrete, digital domain. It is a method and not a format. Redbook is a format that employs PCM; so's DxD. There's nothing in the video you've quoted that DxD can't do. DSD is a format based around pulse-density modulation (PDM), another method which traces its origins to the 50's. Both PCM and PDM effectively discretize a continuous, analogue signal and therefore possess inherent error. DSD was one of a number of formats developed to supersede Redbook, which ironically wouldn't have happened without the whole 14-to-16-bit late development path Redbook took and the proliferation of practical oversampling. The primary rationale for development of a PDM not PCM format was simply the cost-effectiveness of oversampling in implementation and the cost-prohibitive nature of continuing to develop multibit DAC ICs. There is no inherent scientific advantage, just a different set of inherent compromises to overcome. It's possible to make a PDM format that performs about as well as Redbook, it's possible to make a PCM format that sounds about as good as DSD. In practice implementation costs vary.
  9. Would go so far as to suggest that DSD is heavily reliant on dithering whilst at first blush being very much unsuitable for it (relative to PCM) before signal treatment. In practice this makes DSD converter design difficult, to the point that most aren't pure 1-bit designs. DSD and PCM attack the same problem from different approaches. Different compromises in either. Feed 'em both music at an acceptable sampling rate and they'll both do it justice, the rest is down to implementation. Can we all get back to vinyl now?
  10. Why? No, by it's very nature it's low-volume noise that works psychoacoustically. That's an interesting answer to a question no one's asked... what's a 'perfect' result? What provides it? PCM at any frequency? DSD? Vinyl? No, PCM gives ideal results above a noise floor and within filtering limits, just like any other type of ADC or DAC, and just like DSD. Try dithering that 1-bit signal - which is why (again) most modern DS DACs are multibit to some degree internally (PCM). Yup. Or to go count harmonics in a 10kHz square wave at a Koch seminar or whatever.
  11. @Tasso The first video goes into BS mode at 2:30. According to the presenter: 'We only hear up to 22,000 Hertz' (we don't). He believes bit depth is more important than sample rate (nup) and that bit depth is 'the number of levels of volume' in final output (it's not). He thinks that and the end of a fadeout owing to low bit depth 'you get effectively square waves' (wrong). As to the second, Kock's initial line of 'DSD is very analogue' is BS. He then goes into the harmonics of PCM encoding/decoding at low-ish frequencies against square wave reconstruction - do we listen to 10kHz square waves? Really? What's remotely analogue 10kHz square waves analogue? If a 10kHz square wave is analogue and something we really want to listen to, then by all means let's run DSD or DxD. Most DACs are DS not because of technical difficulties of achieving outcomes in PCM but simply owning to manufacturing costs. And yet even the most popular DS DACs are no longer purely DS, they have some degree of PCM within them (e.g. AKM uses 5-bit PCM internally). Just because dithering applies random noise doesn't make it an inexact science. Dithering is a science based on how our ears work. What it's employed to address (low-level noise behaviours) is challenging for any format. There are reasons to exceed 16/44 but there's nothing here but common misconceptions. Nor is there any 'prediction'. FWIW I'd be reluctant to conflate all things digital or PCM with Redbook. Redbook is nearing 40 years old and was designed within (and in some cases beyond) limits of the day. If this was a discussion about filtering needed to make Redbook work effectively and the effects of this I think we'd have half a discussion - half as in there are ways around as much, vinyl has it's own inherent filtering too, and this starts to go some ways towards explaining differences.
  12. Yup. Just an engineer that uses DSP a lot. Started out using it in auto-related work... now (years later) use it in energy for data disaggregation (i.e. working out what appliances are what in a time history of your energy consumption) among other stuff. DSP turns up lots in engineering... it's useful and of course common to digital audio. I'm somewhat getting into my first turntable and the sound is just lovely (and mine's not supposed to be particularly so) and the sense of occasion around vinyl even more so - it really puts appreciation of what's being played on quite another level compared to the convenience of digital. The article's got some pretty relevant points IMHO and I'm slightly ashamed to admit that whilst I've never poured a glass of anything to listen to my digital rig, it's becoming a habit with vinyl, one I share with a few good friends. And TBH I was fairly disdainful of the deck with it first arrived, I literally had near zero idea what to do with it. But this stuff about digital being unable to recreate a sampled waveform accurately with or without 'prediction' is incorrect... there's nothing to predict. Nor is vinyl without effective filtering limits, they're just mechanical in nature.
  13. Sure. I work in DSP, and please listen to Dave. This notion of 'prediction' is incorrect.
  14. @mondie the aero generally won't hurt overtaking prospects that much, there's just too much disparity in the cars' performance right now. They can scrap when they're within a light year of each other, which right now is a maybe-best-of-rest game. The top two teams are too far ahead and the budget disparity is too much for all except Red Bull (and maybe that McLaren-Honda hookup is terminal). It's pretty miserable when Sauber celebrates 25 years by racing with a year-old engine and a pay driver. Surprised at the rate of retirement. But yeah. Boring.
  15. @Soundwise I'll happily hear it if you're hosting.