Great article/site.

[dblue]

I just read a somewhat enlightening article on Hi-Fi. This guy really knows his beans, and re-enforces ideas I have been harboring for years. Oh yeah, and notice the brand of speaker he recommends in his ideal Hi-Fi system... hehehe

Commentary:

http://www.anycities.com/andyhifi/audiocomment.htm#CommentTurntables

Site menu:

http://www.anycities.com/andyhifi/menu.htm

Let's hear some opinions on this read.

------------------

"May your mind be like water and mold to many things." -Bruce Lee

[dblue]

Oh, yeah, the commentary link starts at the turntable section. Do yourself a favor and scroll to the top. The beginning is always the best place to start.

------------------

"May your mind be like water and mold to many things." -Bruce Lee

[mobile homeless]

Jesus... there is just enough RIGHT in that mess to make you gloss over the tons of WRONG. The man is a master of the fallacy with arguing from the absurd to plain out and out gibberish. Sadly, more than a few here will champion this piece regardless.

I count it as perhaps the biggest troll I have seen here in the last three months. Of course, others will champion it as an uncovering of THE TRUTH since there is a grain here and there...But the Here is not there and the there is not here....

Hail to the horror of this thread.

kh

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 09-03-2002 at 03:22 PM

[dblue]

Well, I asked for opinions, and that's what I got (an opinion). What exactly did you think was complete garbage. I must admit that I only read the secions that were of interest to me (all CD Player sections, turntables, The best is not the Most Expensive, and a few others). Just curious as to whether or not I may have missed something. I'm always open to more than one source of input on new info.

------------------

"May your mind be like water and mold to many things." -Bruce Lee

[Mallette]

As there is enough in that article to thoroughly outrage those who believe in magic copper, etc., I'll just toss one thing out there:

"CD Players

All CD players do exactly the same thing. They "read" the data from the disk, consisting of bits signifying "1"s and "0"s, and send that data to the buffer. From the buffer the data goes to the Digital to Analogue Conversion chips. The DAC chips convert that data according it's own clock. Vibration isolation, belt drives, special weights, disk covers, "anti-jitter" cables, power isolation circuits, and all that nonsensical psuedo-science junk that unnecessarily raises the prices of CD players has absolutely no affect on the sound. The $25 CD-Rom drive in your computer does not do anything any differently than the $33,000 Bermester or Mark Levinson or other overpriced CD "transport." What does effect the sound quality are the quality and sophistication of the DAC chips."

He is dead on here. DAC is everything, the transport nothing. If I took all the digital words off a CD, printed it and OCR'd it back to digital...it would SOUND THE SAME. The data is either there or not.

For my trip to Jeff's the other day, I transfered back to HDD a couple of my own location recordings. Instead of the DAT master, I just used a burned CD. Identical, as I knew it had to be.

I've never really pooh-pooh the pricey cable folks and such, as I do not in fact believe I have any answers for those things. I know that I personally do not hear any difference, but that certainly doesn't mean someone else might. It would be metaphysically absurd for me to claim to know what another person hears.

OTOH, this one thing is self-evident. The data is either transferred or it is not. If you can load an OS with a CD rom drive, you can read an audio CD perfectly. The quality of CD/digital music begins at the DAC, period.

Dave

------------------

David A. Mallett

Come taste muh'

[mobile homeless]

The transport is NOTHING? This is what I am talking about. If it makes you feel better about your computer drive when discussing the transport as having absolutely nothing to do with sonics, then power to you.

Even engineers in digital talk of this now to the point where it's almost a given. Just when you think the bits is bits thing is dead, here it pops up in the Klipsch Forum, albeit in another form.

Although the transport difference can be subtle, I have heard it several times, both in my system and others. Indeed, even the transport within CD players makes a difference in the sonics.

One question. What transports and dacs have you heard that were out of the norm? Have you heard the difference between a Yamaha generic CD player digital out vs the Rega Planet used as a transport? Have you heard a dedicated transport vs a generic CD player's digital out? I think the Rega Planet makes a damn good transport but when I a/b it against a Wadia unit, this when I was purchasing my first Rega, I was rather taken back. Even though the Planet is a good unit, it was trounced by the Wadia. The Planet only uses an RCA output. When I switched to the AES out, the sound improved even more making me realize that RCAs are inferior when carrying the signal. I ended up buying the Planet but the comparison was not lost on me (btw, both the digital outs were being fed into a Levinson DAC - the Wadia DAC was there but I wanted to use different manufacturer). I have since heard this comparison several times in various systems, with the Planet coming out on top, although not to the level of the Wadia to Planet ratio.

This forum is filled with people that, when faced with something they have not encountered, place absolutes on the lack of existance.

kh

This message has been edited by mobile homeless on 09-03-2002 at 06:15 PM

[dougdrake]

I'm fond of Ben Franklin's practice of prefacing his statements with "I believe" and "Might it be possible" and so forth, so that I am less mortified when I turn out to be wrong.

On that note, I guess I'd have to believe that transport is "something," rather than nothing, in this audio environment. The big difference between PCs reading/processing bitstreams off CDs and audio DACs processing bitstreams from CD players is that in the PC world we have error detection/correction and other things to assure us that what is read is what was written/sent. I don't believe that environment exists in our audio world, where there is no time/tolerance for bits being dropped or delayed, as there is no error correction to make up for it (except as might be done by a DAC where it "interpolates" a missed segment and fills it in as best it can).

But, that's just my own musings...

DD

------------------

My System

[ShapeShifter]

"Analogue reproduction of music recorded on vinyl records is the most musical of hifi. Analogue mediums such as vinyl records and cassettes are copies while digital mediums are digital approximations." f>s>

I can at least agree with that! Much of the rest bordered on being ridiculously unreasonable.

------------------

KLIPSCH IS MUSICf>

My Systems f>s>c>

[dougdrake]

mdeneen - Glad I used my Ben Franklin escape clause!! So, this error correction you're talking about is in the transport, right? I guess I'm thinking about the correction that might need to take place between a transport and a DAC, which may be in separate units connected by various types of patch cables.

Doug

------------------

My System

[dougdrake]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdeneen:

Anyway, what I know about all this would fit in a thimble.

mdeneen

---

...and mine on the head of pin!! LOL

------------------

My System

[Mallette]

"The transport is NOTHING? This is what I am talking about. If it makes you feel better about your computer drive when discussing the transport as having absolutely nothing to do with sonics, then power to you.

Even engineers in digital talk of this now to the point where it's almost a given. Just when you think the bits is bits thing is dead, here it pops up in the Klipsch Forum, albeit in another form.

Although the transport difference can be subtle, I have heard it several times, both in my system and others. Indeed, even the transport within CD players makes a difference in the sonics."

Gosh, MH, like I said, there is no way I can either dispute or understand what YOU hear. I am simply suggesting that I hear something else. In my 20's, my hearing extended well into the 20khz region. I was an audio engineer, and dealt with a lot of issues. I was involved in music from the 5th grade, and in choir until leaving college for the Army in my early 20's. Since then, I've had season tickets to the DSO at the Meyerson for years, as well as attending endless organ, choir, chamber music, damn near anything concerts. Further, I do location recording of anything of quality for prices rangeing from zero to market rates, depending upon the ability of the person to pay.

All that is not to impress, but simply to suggest I am not deaf.

Let me state again: rips of my master recordings from CD's on a 19.00 cd transport sound identical to the master DAT both on my own system and at least on Jeff's, which is much more up your alley. All you can do to dispute this is to tell me I cannot hear properly. There is no technical language that will work. Further, I'll even grant that maybe I don't hear properly. Thank the Lord! It saves me money and worry.

Remember what I suggested about printing out the digital words of a piece of music, then dumping them back? Do you REALLY think it would sound different because it had been in print?

Stick to analog...it's a lot more ambiguous.

Not really trying to piss you or anyone off here, just had a couple of beers and a bunch of good music...

Cheers,

Dave

[justin_tx_16]

oi must read this article... night everyone

------------------

-justin

SoundWise

promediatech@Klipsch.com /1-888-554-5665 - RA# 800-554-7724 ext 5s>

Email Me

[sunnysal]

I love the holy war aspect of audio..don't you? I had heard differences in transports demostrated to me in the past but did have any idea why...mdeneen just elightened me as to what could causes the differences in sound, I didn't realize all that was going on before the DAC...of course I may be nuts because I hear differences in cables too! enjoy! cheers! tony

[dblue]

To say that a CD contains no binary data is insane. All digital data is binary, by definition. Also, there is absolutely NO compression used on a CD. Stream of samples from the original analog source. 44 Khz means 44,000 samples of that analog source per second.

While I will say that a good transport will provide more accurate error correction, the DAC is the most important part in the sound reproduction. The laser reads the pits and flats, or 1's and 0's, sends them to a buffer, runs the necessary error correction algorithms, sends the data to another buffer, and on to the DAC. The laser reads blocks of data no differently than a CD-ROM drive. 44,000 pits and flats per second.

------------------

"May your mind be like water and mold to many things." -Bruce Lee

[Mallette]

Errors are either corrected or whatever the data is doesn't work. If you don't believe it, go into any dll or executable that will allow you to open in a binary editor, or use one of the drive utilities that allow you to edit files. Change just ONE word by ONE bit. It will not run.

Computer data is far more sensitive to errors than music or ears.

Here is a real world experiment that could be done.

1. Tranfer a piece of music to HDD via a cheap CD-ROM and the same piece from a 5,000 transport.

2. Print out the binary data from each.

3. Restore that data to a file and burn two redbook CD's.

4. Playback on identical high end systems and see if you can tell the difference.

There is no doubt in my mind what the result would be.

Further, how does one obtain a "high end" HDD? Many of the best music CD's are recorded direct to HDD. Again, the drive either accurately records and plays the data, or it doesn't work at all. Every computer user with any experience knows that when a several year old drive starts to blue screen that the end is near. Even then, mapping bad blocks may restore complete integrity for a short period.

I consider "transport" as applied to a CD drive the same as applied to a turntable. The transport function ends when a binary data stream is presented, just as the TT function ends when an analog electrical stream is presented.

Like I said, I'm perfectly content to give the benefit of the doubt to power line conditioners, kilobuck speaker cables and interconnects, etc. However, I'm not willing to defile my own sense of logic by accepting the idea that one digital data stream is somehow superior to another. Of course, when it gets to the DAC and the rest of the chain, all bets are off!

Dave

[mobile homeless]

With no doubt in your mind, there is much room for learning, eh?

Do a little reading on the Transport's jitter measurements at the digital output. UltraAnalog, a name you should recognize if you are into processors since they have been one of the leaders in processor design, developed a testing device for transports inorder to see which units had poor jitter related performance (ie, high jitter output). There were major differences here with poor units coming in at 500 picoseconds of broadband jitter. And excellent result is around 30ps or so (data courtesy of Robert Harley). IF you are confused about the role jitter plays in the sonics, do some reading (as the froot on that site needs to do). Jitter relates to the inaccuracy of the timing. High jitter amounts can lead to poor sound although certain processors do a better job of correcting tihs. On the other hand, certain transports do a much better job of lowering the problem before the next step.

There are so many variables that come into play. I have always noticed there are certain people that work from the assumption that differences are NOT there. In most things in nature, there are differences in EVERYTHING but we have not devised the tests nor sophistication to discern the more subtle ones. I have always found that with more knowledge, differences are revealed, whether it be in music, art, science, literature, philosophy etc. From far away, both physically and figuratively, many things look, sound, feel, and appear the same.

kh

[Ray Garrison]

There are measureable differences between CD transports, and between various cables and interfaces used to connect transports to converters.

Whether these measureable differences can be *HEARD* is another question. But it is impossible to deny that they exist - anyone with access to, for example, a Tektronix TDS7000 can measure the differences in jitter levels between various transports and cables.

Can you *HEAR* jitter? Different thread.

Are all CD transports and cables identical because they are transmitting 0's and 1's and, assuming error correction is working correctly, there can be no differences in the signal? Absolutely not.

For some discussions with solid engineering behind them, check out:

http://www.tagmclarenaudio.com/dev/white/wp11.asp

http://www.nvision1.com/Serv/RefLib/TheBook2/chapter2.asp (excellent pictures of eye patterns on scopes showing various high jitter levels)

http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/jitter.htm (great overview, with lots of links to other references)

That'll get you started.

It is undeniable that there are physical differences between transports, interfaces and digital cables, that these differences can be repeatably and accurately measured, and that there are solid, basic priciples of digital signal transmission that explain the source of these differences.

That still doesn't address the question of whether they will *SOUND* any different, but to claim that there are no measureable differences is simply, flatly, totally, completely and unassialably *WRONG*.

Ray Garrison

------------------

Music is art

Audio is engineering

Ray's Music System

[Mallette]

MH, you've probably never met a person more willing to change a position when proven wrong. However, when my ears and solid science team up, I've either got to go with it or go nuts.

I'll grant you that jitter is an issue with dedicated CD players (though just how audible it is is open to debate)...OTOH, rather than throw 1000's of bucks at high end CD players, I offer two fool-proof ways to eliminate this issue.

1. Extract (not DAE, but continuous file extraction) the CD to an HDD. Every bit will be transferred with less or equal to the quality of the best outboard jitter box.

2. Get a CDROM drive (Plextors are noted for this) that has circuitry to accurately address each block.

Jitter eliminated, either free or for 70.00 or so if you aren't sure your CDROM has the circuitry.

Ray: the above applies to your comments as well. Cables are not a digital issue for extracting from CD's since the data goes straight to the bus.

Dave

[Ray Garrison]

Mallet,

I agree, copying a CD (or MP3 or DAT or whatever) to hard disk, or burning it on a CDR, will eliminate the issues of jitter that apply to CD transports and interface cables. The point that I was arguing against was the position that the CD transports and cables *CANNOT* make any difference.

Note, however, that there are still timing issues. Whether you are reading off a hard disk, or off a CD-ROM drive, you still have to convert the discrete samples to an analog waveform, and the potential for jitter-induced non-linearities (distortion) exist in HDD and CD-ROM as well. There are fewer problems to deal with, and there are some benefits in the physical structure of CDR's that provide a more robust and less jitter prone signal than that on most CD's, but the problem doesn't entirely disappear.

Check this out:

http://www.stereophile.com/fullarchives.cgi?368

------------------

Music is art

Audio is engineering

Ray's Music System

[Mallette]

Don't really think it is necessary to assume ignorance on the part of others simply because you read the data differently.

I understand how CIRC works, and have great faith that it works almost perfectly, certainly beyond sensory level.

Now, as to the compression you speak of, you must bear in mind there is such a thing as trully lossless compression. Zip and the old Microsoft disc doubler scheme are examples of this.

Now for a question, because I really do not know the format of WAV and DAT files. What I DO know is that file sizes remain identical for these formats when transferred to redbook and back. Further, the sound quality does not change at all, at least to anyone I've ever exposed to them. Playback definitely varies on CD players, but the original quality always returns when transferred back to wav or DAT.

BTW, one good Plextor, the UtraPlex 40, reports the number of C2 errors to the software to insure precise output.

Like the Bible, science can be used to support almost anything. Is there ZERO jitter and absolutely not a single 1 or 0 lost in every rip to HDD? I can neither know that nor do I really care as long as it is near enough to be inaudible.

I've hear lots of difference in CD players, and in every case so far the quality of the DAC electronic circuitry was clearly the issue. Played back from an HDD through a Card Deluxe (or a Mark Levinson outboard DAC), the sound will be as good as the format is capable and the downstream components can produce.

Granted, the last paragraph is opinion, but I believe it to be informed opinion based on research.

Next DFW Audio Forum meeting, perhaps I can get more ears to work to see if others have the same experience. A/B/C's of the same files played blind from DAT, audio server, and high end CD player. I'm certainly game for it and, as I said early, always ready to stand corrected.

Dave