Jump to content

Torpedo

High Rollers
  • Posts

    10,546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Torpedo

  1. Not very sure the data part of the SPDIF signal is square waves, that's initially what the pits and dots engraved on the shiny discs produce, but once those changes in the level are integrated to form the eye pattern wave and are later mixed with the clock data, it's not that simple. It's an AC signal looking pretty analogue. I have no authority mate, just some experience fiddling with gear, that's all. IMO there's nothing like true sound quality and musical results scaling with expense. I've used many different transports, from pro ones into CD recorders to vintage Theta laserdisc readers, going through boutique ones, inexpensive DVD-V players and midrange universal players. All I've learned is that generalizations cannot be made, and largely depend on the DAC you're using and the link between the transport and DAC. I've found really good transports that have excellent error correction and won't skip reading the worst condition CDs, that don't manage to really make music, just good sounds. Some others are very finicky about the discs quality, and won't read poorly pressed commercial CDs, but manage to sound really natural and fluent depending on the digital link you use. If any, the only conclusion I can take from that experience is that optical link mostly sucks music-wise. There are differences, that's sure, but to find them, and deciding if they're worth the cost, you first need the gear to put them in evidence, then using the recordings and music that may benefit from those differences.
  2. I know, and to that I replied. The electrical signal isn't digital, it's not pulses or anything really "digital" it's an electrical signal showing volt vs time variation. Replying to the if I have A/Bd them, yes, I have A/Bed transports many times and they don't sound the same. There are differences even depending on the DAC used.
  3. Hahaha, completely wrong mate, the electric signal coming out from a transport is entirely analogue, which is not to say that the information is analogue. Different things if you think about it carefully.
  4. Aerius, you need to get some CCa tubes, either Siemens or Telefunken. Be patient and spot them from a reliable seller. They might get that bass right while keeping the midrange rightness you're loving so much. You might also be surprised for the improved detail over the Mullards/russian tubes and the dynamic slam. IMO that player deserves those tubes. If you cannot find them, then try Siemens or Teles E88CC istead. If you still cannot spot any, then JJ goldpins or Jan Philips can be a decent quite complete alternative. Thanks for the review
  5. ha, no that's "grave como el orto" aka "grave de mierda" > bass like the ass or bass like shit
  6. LOL Oh well, in Spanish it's even worse since it's written "ortodin
  7. I couldn't tell the difference between 24/96 and 24/88 either, but in between 24/88 and 20/96 it was slightly noticeable favoring 24/88. However I must admit that at that point we were really tired of comparing samples
  8. Where just that then explain to me how we found the 24/88 recording more similar to the vinyl than the 16/44. Of course it's on the mix, but also the way you record onto digital and how you convert back into analog make a difference. Only good transfers from vinyl into CD can sound as good as the vinyl.
  9. Not really more, but some parts of the information, specially the space related ones such as stage depth, performers layering, etc, in which vinyl is quite superior in general terms to digital, are much better portrayed on a well setup speakers system than by most phones. Maybe if you had had the chance to use the K1000 or R10 you'd have noticed some differences. Or not, the more I learn about audio the more convinced I am that everyone has his own ears and his own way to listen.
  10. Looks sensible to me that they keep their plans secret until they've recovered all they invested into the HD800 R+D.
  11. And what system were you using to listen? I mean that the system capabilities are very important to notice those differences. I'm sure we hadn't noticed them on most phones, and we needed a speaker setup to really be sure they existed.
  12. Ha, if I'm producing 1000+ units of my new statement product, but I'm planning to use that technology offering 80% of the performance at half the price, I'd also be saying that I have no plans to do so until those 1000+ units are sold hehehe.
  13. ^ Sure, the question is if Sennheiser is reserving the whole "first wave" of their run for the USA market or if they're accounting they're selling cans Worldwide, and will try to get some units for every country into their distribution network. IMHO they'll have some units everywhere, and nothing will ship until they know they can give every single distributor a couple of units in the worst case.
  14. Grawk, you may well be right, I still prefer my DAC/transport doing plain RBCD than any "high definition" digital format I've listened to. In any case it's a good thing that inexpensively recorded and reproduced 24/88 files can sound that close to analog. You need some serious money and effort to get that from RBCD.
  15. I said more than 200 since the pic of the unit at CES displayed a 2xx, but we can speculate they've already produced 300 or 500, who knows! My guess, and as such should be understood, considering Sennheiser's history, is that the first units will be available at more or less the same time everywhere and only from selected vendors. They take much care of their distributors and I'm sure they won't damage some of them for having others offering the product earlier. They know this product would create expectation and that there would be a peak demand at launch, so it will take place only when they're sure they can supply that initial demand. If that's higher than they expected, then the actual release will be later.
  16. Theoretically you're absolutely right and there's no rational advantage in using a higher sampling rate. However you'd have to agree that having twice the points to reconstruct the analog signal should make it kind of "smoother" at any frequency in the audible range. That which is just an intuitive observation and which may be wrong, IME makes an audible difference, and I'm not a bat either. Maybe the maths used to reconstruct a 10KHz wave from 4 sampled points aren't as perfected as they are to reconstruct that same wave using 8 samples. In any case I insist that the bigger difference I noticed for making the digital recording closer to the vinyl used, was by increasing the bit depth more than the sampling rate, despite it was noticeable, IMO wasn't as evident.
  17. And you didn't notice any difference from having recorded the very same signal at 16/44 than at 24/88? Surprising, that doesn't match my experience at all.
  18. Just try it yourself man, there's a clear difference. Make your own recording from a pure analogue source and use different sample rates and bit depths, then listen with no downconversion.
  19. I didn't mean otherwise. Just saying that when you are using as your source a standard RB shinny disc, any bit depth or higher sampling rate used during the recording stage, won't come back no matter how much upsampling and upconverting you use in the process of conversion to analog. OTOH if we had the chance to reproduce 24/88.1 files which were recorded originally that way directly, sound would be much better than RB, even if the DAC used isn't top notch. IMHO post processing of a 16/44.1 file can't do miracles, just "sound shaping".
  20. I don't think these Germans have left anything to random. When the first units hit the street, I'm quite convinced they'll have the stock to supply their estimated demand. Otherwise if they have already produced more than 200 units, why not making them available right now when expectation is at its highest point?
  21. Not just that. Try recording a vinyl or straight with a microphone into the computer or a decent pro recorder, using different sample rates and bit depths, and reproduce them in a good system from the own recording device to avoid conversion down to 16/44.1 IME more important than sampling rate is bit depth. Just 20/44.1 is a nice improvement over standard RB, and to my ears, the difference from RB to 24/44.1 is way more interesting and noticeable than going to 16/96. The problem I see on those upsampling and upconverting DACs is that they cannot invent information that's lacking, so they may be good to use filters off the audible range, but not sure that's really an interesting addition to the sound obtained using "normal" DACs
  22. Did you know that in Argentina the "orto" is the asshole? I can't help smiling every time I read that "ortho" thing
  23. I will listen for the third time today this little gem: Anne Sophie Mutter - Bach Violin concertos, Gubaidulina "in tempus presens" I attended a few weeks ago a recital of her performing the Brahms violin sonatas, with her regular accompanying pianist Lambert Orkins. I think this lady has learned how to play with a soul, and this disc is a prove of it.
  24. You'd better use it, the mustache and also sun glasses. You won't like any significant other recognizing you.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.