bhr1439;377475 Wrote:
opaqueice;377328 Wrote:
Highly unlikely. I have two cheap DVD-ROM drives in an old desktop, and
they both read unscratched CDs with zero errors, at about 5-10X real
time speed with zero error correction (other than what's built in to
the redbook standard) or
DCtoDaylight;377469 Wrote:
That's the reason that data CD's have an extra layer of data error
detection built in.
All CD discs (including audio discs .cda) use the cross-interleaved
Reed-Solomon code (CIRC). They all have a third of data more.
This allows CD player to read up to 2.5mm
bhr1439;377315 Wrote:
Hi, I'm the original poster on this thread. Thanks for the thoughtful
comments, everyone.
First off, I appreciate Phil Leigh's insights; he pointed out two
potential mechanisms that could potentially generate an audible
difference, reminding me that that both paths
bhr1439;377475 Wrote:
How do you know?
--Steve
As Themis says, accuraterip - a program that computes a checksum from
the file you ripped and compares it to the results that thousands of
others have gotten. The odds of an accidental match are essentially
zero.
By the way, what
Themis;377561 Wrote:
All CD discs (including audio discs .cda) use the cross-interleaved
Reed-Solomon code (CIRC). They all have a third of data more.
This allows CD player to read up to 2.5mm scratches without errors,
that is -without -using the in-built interpolation algorithm.
Correct,
DCtoDaylight;377727 Wrote:
As Opaqueice says, poorly made disc's are not an overwhelming problem,
I encounter fewer than he does, but they do exist. Also the problems
appear to be poor metalization or pressing, so have a much larger
defect area's than a 2.5 mm scratch. Tools like EAC and
JezA;376833 Wrote:
AND/OR that the Tact processor, despite the claims of it's manufacturer,
is incapable of remaining uninfluenced by that amount of jitter. So,
either the Tact or the Nakamichi, as I said, is either useless or
broken - or poorly designed or poorly manufactured if you prefer
opaqueice;376868 Wrote:
By usually in very small, very subtle ways you mean usually
completely inaudible ways, I take it? :)
erm..not exactly... depends on the connected equipment... sometimes yes
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what
darrenyeats;376516 Wrote:
Or, of course, use an on-board DAC like in the SB3, SBR or Transporter.
:^p
Darren
Yes Darren, but I was trying to avoid mentioning that :o)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call
Phil Leigh;377221 Wrote:
The TACT ASRC is sensitive to jitter. The source with the lowest jitter
will sound better. Therefore the SB has lower jitter than the NAK mech.
I really don't follow why you can't understand this!
I don't have any difficulty understanding you at all. But my
JezA;377233 Wrote:
I don't have any difficulty understanding you at all. But my conclusion
might be that the (extremely expensive) Tact is unacceptably sensitive
to jitter, especially as it claims not to be. So the difference that
the O/P hears, if it due to the cause you hypothesize,
Phil Leigh;377221 Wrote:
Next year I will be re-evaluating the Inguz-style solution...
My comment is OT, I know, but as an Inguz user I am wondering what this
menas...?
--
tonyptony
tonyptony's Profile:
Hi, I'm the original poster on this thread. Thanks for the thoughtful
comments, everyone.
First off, I appreciate Phil Leigh's insights; he pointed out two
potential mechanisms that could potentially generate an audible
difference, reminding me that that both paths start with the optical
disc.
bhr1439;377315 Wrote:
As a previous poster suggested, recording and comparing S/PDIF data
should be able to confirm or reject the hypothesis path B data being a
more reliable representation of the music. What I would expect to see
is rock solid repeatability in the S/PDIF stream
bhr1439;377315 Wrote:
.
So, no smoking gun yet that confirms or refute my impression, but at
least there's a plausible (to me) hypothesis on what's going on.
--Steve
Your hypothesis is that Path A suffers from incorrect and varying data,
where Path B does not, and that this causes
JezA;377339 Wrote:
As opauqueice says, it isn't a difficult job for an unbroken cd mech to
get the digits off an undamaged cd accurately and consistently.
I would extend this slightly, to undamaged, and well manufactured,
CD
I've had brand new, and pristine appearing CD's that EAC could not
opaqueice;377328 Wrote:
Highly unlikely. I have two cheap DVD-ROM drives in an old desktop, and
they both read unscratched CDs with zero errors, at about 5-10X real
time speed with zero error correction (other than what's built in to
the redbook standard) or re-reading.
How do you know?
I hate to mention the obvious, but try the following...
1) Disconnect all cables from the CD player except the power cable.
2) Make the room nice and quiet
3) Play a CD
Do you hear anything? Just because your CD player used to be dead
silent doesn't mean it still is--and if the CD player is
Phil Leigh;376353 Wrote:
Jez,
The difference that the OP is hearing is almost certainly down to the
fact that his Nakamichi CD Mech (+whatever spdif cable he is using) is
contributing more jitter than his SB setup.
AND/OR that the Tact processor, despite the claims of it's
manufacturer, is
Phil Leigh;376131 Wrote:
5) This is rather off-topic, but cables DO affect the sound of a system
because they are part of the system. They have a finite amount of
reactance, inductance and resistance just like any other component and
therefore it is entirely logical that they can affect
bhr1439;375769 Wrote:
I had read claims in Stereophile and (I think) The Absolute Sound that
music sourced from a hard drive sounds better than music sourced off a
CD player. I was skeptical of these claims, and am skeptical of my own
ears, which seems to confirm the fact.
As soon as
iPhone;376923 Wrote:
It is funny how Stereophile and TAS didn't start talking about better
until big name companies like McIntosh and Linn released streaming
media players. Sure there were good reviews of the Transporter and
Sonos, but if memory serves me, the word better did not come about
But there is indeed FIFO reclocking of the signal in both of the OPs
signal paths!
According to Marc Levinson, in the 360S DAC intelligent FIFO jitter
reduction is again employed to buffer and re-clock digital audio
signals for highest resolution
JezA;376343 Wrote:
But there is indeed FIFO reclocking of the signal in both of the OPs
signal paths!
According to Marc Levinson, in the 360S DAC intelligent FIFO jitter
reduction is again employed to buffer and re-clock digital audio
signals for highest resolution
Phil Leigh;376353 Wrote:
Clock-linking of DAC (master) to transport (slave) is the only
jitter-proof method that really, really works.
Or, of course, use an on-board DAC like in the SB3, SBR or Transporter.
:^p
Darren
--
darrenyeats
SB3 / Inguz - Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) - PMC AB-1
JezA;376343 Wrote:
But there is indeed FIFO reclocking of the signal in both of the OPs
signal paths!
According to Marc Levinson, in the 360S DAC intelligent FIFO jitter
reduction is again employed to buffer and re-clock digital audio
signals for highest resolution
bhr1439;375769 Wrote:
I had read claims in Stereophile and (I think) The Absolute Sound that
music sourced from a hard drive sounds better than music sourced off a
CD player. I was skeptical of these claims, and am skeptical of my own
ears, which seems to confirm the fact.
As soon as
But that explanation can't account for the differences heard by the O/P
since both signal paths between which he hears a difference are sourced
from an SPDIF stream going into the Tact processor and then the DAC.
--
JezA
JezA;375934 Wrote:
But that explanation can't account for the differences heard by the O/P
since both signal paths between which he hears a difference are sourced
from an SPDIF stream going into the Tact processor and then the DAC.
Absolutely it can. The SPDIF stream is different. Bear in
Well, I can't find out much about the O/Ps Tact 2.1. But the Tact 2.2
claims to have immeasurable distortion and noise when used with
digital inputs and outputs. They also claim that their sample rate
converters give extreme jitter attenuation and the input signal is
resampled (and therefore
JezA;376080 Wrote:
Well, I can't find out much about the O/Ps Tact 2.1. But the Tact 2.2
claims to have immeasurable distortion and noise when used with
digital inputs and outputs. They also claim that their sample rate
converters give extreme jitter attenuation and the input signal is
JezA wrote:
If those two signal paths genuinely sound discriminably different, then
doesn't it follow that at least one component in one of them is either
broken, or so badly designed as to be worthless.
Your statement here is harsh, alarmist, and incendiary. Things can be
different without
JezA;376080 Wrote:
I am not suggesting that in the O/Ps case, the Tact is causing the
differences he hears - I did in fact suggest he try listening to both
sources with out it - I am trying to raise the possibility that if you
buy Stereophiles claims that digits sourced from a hard disc
Phil's patient explanations are very good. I think the OP is assuming
that the DAC's dejitter circuitry is perfect. I dont think it is,
unless it so happens to have a FIFO memory based buffer for the input
data and reclocks it out. Also, please note, that it is also possible
to reduce jitter in
I had read claims in Stereophile and (I think) The Absolute Sound that
music sourced from a hard drive sounds better than music sourced off a
CD player. I was skeptical of these claims, and am skeptical of my own
ears, which seems to confirm the fact.
As soon as I started listening to music
There is a releated discussion here
http://www.meridianunplugged.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflatNumber=82988#Post82988
(See bullet #7) about A/B testing which claims it's extreamly difficult
because of how the brain works.
Later in thread he gives a great visual example of how your
If those two signal paths genuinely sound discriminably different, then
doesn't it follow that at least one component in one of them is either
broken, or so badly designed as to be worthless.
--
JezA
JezA's Profile:
What you need to do to figure out the difference is to use a SPDIF
recorder on the output of both the SB3 and the CD player. Then you can
compare them at the bit level to see if something funny is going on.
--
SuperQ
JezA;375778 Wrote:
If those two signal paths genuinely sound discriminably different, then
doesn't it follow that at least one component in one of them is either
broken, or so badly designed as to be worthless?
What happens when you take the Tact box out of both chains?
As someone once
In this particular case, a simple test between the two interfaces should
show whether there is a difference or not.
In case of a difference, then we can use various tests to determine
whether the difference is audible.
In any case, there's nothing unknown here: if there are differences,
they are
40 matches
Mail list logo
