Manuel Delaflor Posted March 14, 2002 Share Posted March 14, 2002 I have been playing around for about a week with several DSP programs like WOW Thing, Enhancer, SOrient Virtual sound and RealReverb Convolution. All this are plugins for Winamp. The more I hear the more convinced I am about the digital manipulation of data. Now, Im aware that this is subject for lots of discussions. On one hand (speaking about music reproduction) we have the "purists" who think that everything added or substracted from the original signal is an artifact and goes agains ideal "accurate" reproduction. On the other hand we encounter people who are aware that an accurate musical reproduction is imposible with current technologies, and this people is experimenting with all kind of digital manipulations to modify a signal and make it "more realistic than the original recording". This sounds weird, perhaps, but if we think that a recording, basically, is "reducing to bits" an impressive array of information, then, if we can find a way to recostruct that array of info we are, in fact, making it more real. Psychoacoustics is a science that deal with this things (among other things, MP3 are a result of some research in this area). And, as I said before, Im more and more convinced about the amazing results that can be obtained. For example, most people thing that the Wow Thing only do some kind of equalization, enhancing highs and low bass. Far from it, it uses certain algorithms to fool our brain in to feel more space between and around the speakers. In fact, I feel one can obtain an effect very similar to that obtained by some speakers, which offer a good airy sensation because they irradiate sound both from the front and the rear, tricking our ears to hear more space. What do you all thing about all this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted March 14, 2002 Share Posted March 14, 2002 Well as far as MP3's go I think there are a untapped resource for quality sound source that most "audiophiles" shun as low quality sound. I myself think that a properly encoded MP3 can easily beat any red book CD in quality of reproduction and almost reach the plateau of Vinyl. I use a program called CD'n'Go suite to ripp my CD's at 224 bit rate using the Lame encoder to convert them to MP3. I than send them to either my Tube Amp(analog) or my AV receiver (digital) thru my Phillips Acoustic Edge soundcard. This setup is nothing short of Excellent . There are alot more options to clean up the sound even further. I plan to some day research this further. Just never seem to have the time. I think MP3's have received a bad wrap because so many people are getting there MP3's from various sources online and the quality is almost alway's less then optimal. If these same people would spend a little time doing there own CD's and use a top quality sound card they would start to see the light. Another Valid point for MP3's is they are a great CD backup tool. never again have to buy your favorite CD again because the kids used it for a frizbee LOL !!! Craig ------------------ HH Scott Tube FM Tuner LT-110B HH Scott Tube Amp 222C HH Scott Turn Table P-87 Sony DE-975 AV Receiver Sony NS-900P DVD Sony CD 5 DISC C315 Syenrgy SF-2 mains KSC-C1 Center Channel KSW-15 Sub SS-1 Surrounds Promedia 5.1 for the PC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Delaflor Posted March 14, 2002 Author Share Posted March 14, 2002 quote: Originally posted by NOS440: Well as far as MP3's go I think there are a untapped resource for quality sound source that most "audiophiles" shun as low quality sound. In fact, when you look at what is, exactly, the MP3 encoding and how it works, you understand that the way it compresses audio is NOT by reducing the quality! MP3 cuts what we can't hear, because the way our hearing works. For example, we can't hear a nail hitting the floor if, at the same time, we are near an airplane taking off. Knowing facts like this allows to remove all the information that is redundant or not audible for us. So, a well coded MP3 will sound EXACTLY as the original recording, to our ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Delaflor Posted March 14, 2002 Author Share Posted March 14, 2002 "The basic act (art?) of making music recordings destroys whatever was real in the event anyway, so therefore any method of re-translating that act into something that can simulate a real act, is useful." Can't agree more. "This is not possible because what is on a master tape is not what any human ears heard at the event, so any subsequent product of the master tape is at the outset a NEW PIECE OF ART unrelated to the actual event." Can't agree more ;-) "I hold that in not too many years, all music "reproduction" in home music systems will be computer and software controlled artifacts tuneable by the user to whatever they enjoy." And again here... "I expect to see some offerings soon that will have enough processing power and the right kinds of modelling for home music "PRODUCTION" - not reproduction." Well, I simply should say that I agree with you completly. And Im also looking forward to have this new devices soon! I will buy the "Wow Thing" and attach it to my main system. This should sound as an Heresy to most audiophiles, but hey... my speakers happen to be called Heresy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Delaflor Posted March 14, 2002 Author Share Posted March 14, 2002 quote: Originally posted by mdeneen: If what you all are saying is true about the sound quality, than all we need is a GIANT iPOD connected to the system. Well, that's what the creators of the technology said, not me. Anyway, I happen to have the Nomad Jukebox. 6GB of MP3 which I actually hear in my main system. Someday I will run a head to head comparo of MP3 against the original CD, just to see if I really can't tell the difference. By the way, so far to my ears, a well coded 192bits MP3 is just as good as the CD. I stress... so far! That's why I will do careful tests, some day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted March 14, 2002 Share Posted March 14, 2002 I realize that my sound system is by no means "Top of the line" compared to allot of the rigs some of you folks have around here so maybe mine doesn't show the flaws that maybe in the MP3's I listen too. I wish a few of the people here that have real top of the line setups try this and see what they hear. But just like are Amps , CD players and Turn Tables you have to have a descent soundcard in your PC to get the kind of results I feel are available. I highly recommend the Phillips Acoustic Edge for music its really the sweetest sounding I've heard. It only cost a $60 to $100 depending where you buy it. Of coarse you will also need a few cables from Radio Shack to give it a try. In case you didn't notice I'm not a High Dollar wire guy Craig ------------------ HH Scott Tube FM Tuner LT-110B HH Scott Tube Amp 222C HH Scott Turn Table P-87 Sony DE-975 AV Receiver Sony NS-900P DVD Sony CD 5 DISC C315 Syenrgy SF-2 mains KSC-C1 Center Channel KSW-15 Sub SS-1 Surrounds Promedia 5.1 for the PC This message has been edited by NOS440 on 03-15-2002 at 10:14 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted March 14, 2002 Share Posted March 14, 2002 I think there are a couple of issues here. One is that there seem to be data reduction algorithms which can discard data which our ear/brain can't hear. From what I read soft sounds before or after a loud sound are inaudable, and can be discarded. Assuming that is true, the DSP will just give us the original signal, best as we hear. Let's assume that is a valid assumption. I.e., we have a good channel of storage and communication. The second is the extent to which any good signal source is pleasant to listen to. Can it be "improved" through DSP or analog processing, or by moving the speakers around. It is probably fair to say that raw distortion is tough to remove through DSP. On the other hand, if an initial recording is lacking in bass or treble, DSP could aid things, just as one can twist the knobs for bass or treble or loudness in analog amps. Technology aside, one problem is that a recording engineer will adjust levels for what is good on his system. Your system is not the same as his, perhaps. You can't know the anti function, and you might have different taste in sound than the engineer. Again, a purist may say, it is bad to mess around with the sound. But in truth, the sound was already messed around with, very much. In the end, I believe that if you find settings which sound good for you, that is okay and probably the most you can do. Gil This message has been edited by William F. Gil McDermott on 03-14-2002 at 10:18 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.