I received an email from audiogon about a musical sampler to test
equipment.
From the email:
At Audiogon, our goal is not only to provide a safe marketplace for
your evolving system, itÂ’s also to give you the tools to elevate the
hobby. This Wake Up Your Ears!!! sampler contains hand-selected
Me, I wait for the mono release...or is the stereo proper stereo, not
the Beatles stereo with bass and handclap in one speaker and the rest in
the other?
Zombie's Profile:
cliveb wrote:
That isn't how placebos work. You don't get to consciously choose
whether you're going to give them a chance. They operate at a deep,
subconscious level in the mind. And to suggest that the placebo effect
works everywhere *except* audio is just silly.
+1 that is exactly why we
In general my working assumption is that different resolution releases
are mastered (perhaps slightly) differently until I have concrete
information.
Darren
darrenyeats's Profile:
In real life we have natural ultrasonic frequencies ... they do no
harm; we can't hear them.
In audio life (!) we have equipment like power amps and transducers that
distort in various ways that are not natural at all, one being
intermodulation distortion. However, IM distortion from ultrasonic
darrenyeats wrote:
In real life we have natural ultrasonic frequencies ... they do no
harm; we can't hear them.
In audio life (!) we have equipment like power amps and transducers that
distort in various ways that are not natural at all, one being
intermodulation distortion. However, IM
What complicates things is that there might have been a situation where
paying more (for example a CD player in the 80s) could make a
significant audible difference but this has ceased being the case in the
2010s (for decently engineered digital sources). However, people carry
over the logic from
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
Here is my take on this - if we consider ourselves as part of the
scientific/objective community - a) If we are 100% sure that power
cables, interconnects, speaker cables and usb cables etc do not make a
difference and that audiophiles are deluding themselves. We just
P Nelson wrote:
It is $5 and is available from HDTracks. I was thinking about getting
it to try some of these high sample rate tracks
Well, it is at least an affordable way to try out the binaural
recordings - not everybody's cup of tea. As for trying out high sample
rate, the problem is
heisenberg wrote:
Same can be done with electricity, no? Using power conditioners? Or is
it the case of 'once the shit hits the fan, there's not enough water in
the river Ganges that could wash it off'? And if so, how so?
Well, in my student days we were toying around with the idea of
heisenberg wrote:
Interesting (and shocking, to me at least).
Would the same be true for ABX-ing red book vs. hi rez format of the
same track?
yes, assuming that both the redbook and hi rez versions are from the
same mastering.
darrenyeats wrote:
In audio life (!) we have equipment like power amps and transducers that
distort in various ways that are not natural at all, one being
intermodulation distortion. However, IM distortion from ultrasonic
frequencies can appear in the audible band. If the ultrasonic
garym wrote:
Archimago has done a lot of this quite nicely (option b). So have
others (plenty of threads at hydrogenaudio.org that discuss, provide
references to technical peer-reviewed papers, etc.). None of this
makes a bit of difference to the audiophools who refuse to believe.
They
darrenyeats wrote:
What complicates things is that there might have been a situation where
paying a lot (for example a CD player in the 80s) could make a
significant audible difference but this has ceased being the case in the
2010s (for decently engineered digital sources). However, people
Julf wrote:
Indeed. And it is no coincidence that most fanatic audiophiles grew up
in the 50's, 60's, 70's and perhaps 80's - while kids who grew up in the
digital era don't care. If they get into vinyl, it is because of the
novelty of the mechanics.
What about the novelty of the LP cover?
ralphpnj wrote:
What about the novelty of the LP cover? To me a stack of LPs with their
big, beautiful cover art is way cooler than a stack of cheap CD jewel
cases with their tiny, hard to read covers and booklets.
Well, yes, the fold-out poster from Queen's Jazz lost something in the
Julf wrote:
Well, yes, the fold-out poster from Queen's Jazz lost something in the
translation to CD... :)
Which is just one more reason why so many audiophiles prefer analog over
digital :)
Gotta love those bicycles!
darrenyeats wrote:
My working assumption is that different resolution releases are mastered
(perhaps slightly) differently until I have concrete information.
Darren
You could be right, Darren. Who knows other than the folks who worked
on this.
But one wonders though - why would they do
cliveb wrote:
That isn't how placebos work. You don't get to consciously choose
whether you're going to give them a chance. They operate at a deep,
subconscious level in the mind. And to suggest that the placebo effect
works everywhere *except* audio is just silly.
I agree, nice catch.
Julf wrote:
Well, in my student days we were toying around with the idea of selling
a power filter that would block the radioactive electrons from nuclear
power plants from entering your house. I am sure it could be repurposed
to produce purified audiophile electrons too.
Yeah, and that's
Mnyb wrote:
To keep Garym calm , I was properly cured from audiophilia before I for
example was doing any work on core recirculation pumps in nuclear
reactors .
thank goodness...I was starting to worry!
garym's
Mnyb wrote:
To keep Garym calm , I was properly cured from audiophilia before I for
example was doing any work on core recirculation pumps in nuclear
reactors .
I too have many years of experience with selecting pumps for various
mechanical systems and did you know that pumps with impellers
Archimago wrote:
I know... Conspiracy theories ;-)
Paul is dead and I am the walrus! Miss him, miss him, miss him
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread:
Since I'm considering purchasing some of the remastered Beatles LPs, I
was wondering if anyone had a chance to compare two or more of the same
LPs? What used to happen back in my old vinyl days is that each and
every LP, even the ones from the same manufacturer/same batch, used to
sound
SoftwireEngineer wrote:
First time, we have comparative datapoints
Have you checked out Hydrogen Audio?
Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050
View this thread:
Archimago wrote:
But one wonders though - why would they do that?
they just made the 24-bit version louder by 0.2dB's to show a
difference.
A 0.2 dB gain increase does two things - it makes the louder version
sound slightly better, but it also fills in any zero padding from a
You just described part of the inherit problems with vinyl it comes with
the territory .
If you want consistency ,get a digital version .
I do assume that the new vinyl album will be done from a digital master
and any vinyl transfer does far more damage than any kind of reasonable
digital
I doubt you'll find much help around here when it comes to vinyl. Some
folks around here still have vinyl rigs but I don't think you'll uncover
many vinyl aficionados (I have a connected turntable and thousands of
vinyl albums, but haven't bought any vinyl since 1987 or so). If you
really want to
heisenberg wrote:
Some slight differences in the way the LPs were pressed, or handled, or
packaged etc., contributed to the variation in the sound quality. I
guess the technology was immature back in the day, coupled with shoddy
quality assurance etc.
I wonder if the same consideration
Julf wrote:
fills in any zero padding from a 16-bit-to-24-bit conversion...
Let's say my standard assumption that this was a different master
doesn't apply ... then such a conversion would have been from 24 bit to
16 bit, I think.
Darren
darrenyeats wrote:
Let's say my standard assumption that this was a different master
doesn't apply; then such a conversion would have been from 24 bit to 16
bit, I think ... or, conspiracy theory!
Darren
That's why my suspicion is that they *purposely* did a decrease in
volume from 24-bit
Archimago wrote:
Modern mastering technique would have actually tried to push the peak up
to 0 so you would maximize the dynamic range of the 16-bit version.
I'd disagree. The modern fad of having the peaks at 0 dB has nothing to
do with maximizing dynamic range. It's simply to make the CD
32 matches
Mail list logo
